221–230 of 316 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What isn't true? Is both the average and the variance of IQ in men/women identically equal? Why would we even expect it to be? Is the likelihood of risk taking behaviour identically equal between men/women? Why would we even expect it to be? Is the likelihood that a man/women will be identically equally interested in a career in the hard sciences? Why would we even expect it to be?
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or buy car batteries while they're still affordable. Lead is less abundant in the Earth's crust than cobalt or neodymium, or even lanthanum.
Now maybe we can finally get members to pitch in raking the copper and lead filled backstop at the local shooting range.. :)
I have a PhD in material science and worked with superconductors, here are two things that is often misunderstood: 1) it takes a undergrad to make and measure a superconductor but a Nobel laureate to explain it. 2) in theory if you understand the mechanism of something you can improve it. In material science however almost always all you need is a trial and error approach to end up with a good result. Conclusion: the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I might have to go collect all the ones I've thrown in the ocean over the years
I presume you're joking else you probably should - as an act of propitiation for your sins. 'Toxic effects of lead exposure on bioaccumulation, oxidative stress, neurotoxicity, and immune responses in fish: a review' https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30884452/ and numerous other studies.
it felt bad to type that.
In this version, in figure 6a and b the new log scale of the IV curve looks quite linear and increasing in the range of 150 to 250 mA. I thought that it should be flat if it was a superconductor (no resistance). Can anyone explain how that behavior still supports it being a superconductor?
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV14p4y1V7kS/ Latest update: the diamagnetism has been confirmed from a tiny LK-99 replica sample. The Author posted: > Under the guidance of Professor Haixin Chang, postdoctor Hao Wu and PhD student Li Yang from the School of Materials Science and Technology of Huazhong University of Science and Technology successfully for the first time verified the LK-99 crystal that can be magnetica…
How anyone can see anything in the video is beyond me. Just dozens of comments literally flying across the video.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the wetter sciences, the answer is somewhere in between. We usually have somewhat of an understanding of the prior theory. We then throw a lot of stuff at the wall…. Oh, this sticks? Eh, why? And then usually some more clever person will come up with reasons for why X works beyond what we already knew. A few years later, the field reaches some sort of consensus around one of the hypothesis.
The “oh this sticks” part is only ever interesting precisely because it doesn’t conform to the pre existing theory. You cannot even make an observation without theories baked in: - Normally these things do X - My senses or instruments are detecting reality accurately - This thing I’m measuring will result in something interesting etc
It's not true for Discovery in general. New phenomenon can be created and observed without any theory for why they occur, either before or after observation
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does this mean for synthesis? You just have to try a ton of times and get lucky? Is there some way to influence site substitution?
I'm guessing the diamagnetic property will make it easy to separate the successful bits from the unsuccessful ones at scale.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything that uses electricity would use less electricity because you aren’t wasting it as heat. So in theory you could have a ridiculous computer that runs 1000GW of power through it without heating up. Or a flying car. Or power cables that lose nothing during travel. Naturally that’s why it doesn’t make sense. It’s too game-breaking to be possible in normal conditions. Glitching something out by making it basically…
> computer that runs 1000GW of power through it without heating up It doesn't work like that. Non-reversible computations necessarily produce heat. The superconducting wires will not heat, but the CPU will.