951–960 of 1001 posts
Disclaimer, I have not vetted this at all, but if anyone is up for speculative excitement, this is the video to watch: https://m.douyin.com/share/video/7263715495256378659
Disclaimer, I have not vetted this at all, but if anyone is up for speculative excitement, this is the video to watch: https://m.douyin.com/share/video/7263715495256378659
I know nothing about any of this but even I can tell that's on a spring. It's not supposed to twang back into position like that.
(Don't get me wrong, I think there's a significant chance that it's fake, but I've been told that if it is in fact a superconductor this is very much how it would move)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Things also tend to be invented at about the same time at different places. I wonder if there are other people who were this close to invent it but just couldn't get it right.
Last year I read The Double Helix and The Code Breaker within a few months of each other, and what really stood out to me is that while we celebrate the first person who discovers something, in reality there were several teams all racing to the finish line, and were sometimes days or only even hours behind in presenting their findings. Yet only one team gets the accolades and their names in textbooks, the others are…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The sensible thing would be to bet against it - as shown by xkcd Did that site predate https://xkcd.com/955/ or was it inspired by it?
The author of that comic did not invent prediction markets.
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Magnetic force scales as 1/r^3, not 1/r^2 like gravity The magnetic force and gravity are two of the four fundamental forces, no? The others being the strong and weak nuclear force? At what rate do those two scale at?
Yes, in that model, it's not called the magnetic force but the electromagnetic force (combining both types of interactions into one mechanism.) This one has a table that summarizes the answer to your question https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction
Is that a mistake?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a quite biased view. As a non-Chinese scientist, I can attest that there is intense pressure to publish as many papers as possible pretty much everywhere , and this leads to a problem of bad research across the world. China may be among the worst offenders in this respect, but the particular thing the OP is asking about doesn't strike me as a Chinese-specific thing at all. I see non-Chinese scientists rushing…
It's not biased, it's a fact. I see it all the time as PC/AC/reviwer/etc. There is deluge of terrible papers from China that are just a mess, below any imaginable standard. Ones that labs in the EU/US/Russia/Japan/etc. don't put out. Yes, everyone has to publish, and there are bad papers out there, but the volume and low quality from China is unmatched.
Disclaimer, I have not vetted this at all, but if anyone is up for speculative excitement, this is the video to watch: https://m.douyin.com/share/video/7263715495256378659
I know nothing about any of this but even I can tell that's on a spring. It's not supposed to twang back into position like that.
Notice how much force needs to be applied to move a real superconductor into a new pinned state
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a reason why room temperature (ambient pressure) superconductors have been one of the holy grails of physics for such a long time: the implications are profound. I used to be a particle physicist, and some of the more complex systems were just those used to cool the superconducting magnets down to cold enough that they become superconducting. If you can do that at ambient temp, you don't have to bother with…
Completely unrelated, but how does one un-become a particle physicist?