The accident had happened three years earlier. Since then, surgeons had desperately tried to reconstruct the bony floor and push the eye back into position, first using material implants and then bone from the patient’s own rib. Both attempts had failed. Each time, infection set in after a few months, causing extreme pain. And now the doctors were out of ideas.
Thompson’s answer was to build the world’s first glass implant, moulded as a plate which slotted in under the patient’s eye into the collapsed orbital floor. The idea of using glass – a naturally brittle material – to repair something so delicate may seem counterintuitive.
But this was no ordinary glass.
“When you put bioglass in the body, it starts to dissolve and releases ions which kind of talk to the immune system and tell the cells what to do. This means the body doesn’t recognise it as foreign, and so it bonds to bone and soft tissue, creating a good feel and stimulating the production of new bone.”
“Bioglass actually works even better than the patient’s own bone,” Thompson says. “This is because we’ve found that it slowly leaches sodium ions as it dissolves, killing off bacteria in the local environment. So, quite by chance, you have this mild antibiotic effect which eliminates infections.”
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20170802-the-best-way-to-fix-broken-bones-might-be-with-glass
Friday, 4 August 2017
Solar freakin' roofs
Actually, it looks like a normal roof, which is a good thing.
The solar roof works out as cheaper than a new roof even before the energy savings brought by using the roof. When those are factored in, the roof starts to pay for itself.
Soon we shall have self-buying roofs...
These tiles are tough. They’re made of tempered glass, which makes them about three times stronger than slate or asphalt. On top of that, the tiles are capable of defrosting by using a similar method employed by anti-ice wires used in windshields. All this means the tiles are capable of working through extreme conditions.
Musk explained during the call that solar roof tile production should increase exponentially, in a similar fashion to Model 3 production. That means initial growth will be slow, followed by a sharp increase, and ending with a plateau, where Tesla produces a consistently high number of tiles per month. Even when production reaches its peak, though, it’s going to take a long time before every house has a solar roof.
“I think eventually almost all houses will have a solar roof,” Musk said during a May TED conference in Vancouver. “The thing to consider the timescale to be probably on the order of 40 for 50 years. On average, a roof is replaced every 20 to 25 years, but you don’t start replacing all roofs immediately, but eventually, if you were to fast forward to 15 years from now, it will be unusual to have a roof that doesn’t have solar.”
I suspect there's going to be strong regional variations in that average roof replacement time. 15 years will probably be closer to 50... though it will depend on just how quickly the roof is able to pay for itself.
https://www.inverse.com/article/35022-elon-musk-tesla-solar-roof-photos-amazing
The solar roof works out as cheaper than a new roof even before the energy savings brought by using the roof. When those are factored in, the roof starts to pay for itself.
Soon we shall have self-buying roofs...
These tiles are tough. They’re made of tempered glass, which makes them about three times stronger than slate or asphalt. On top of that, the tiles are capable of defrosting by using a similar method employed by anti-ice wires used in windshields. All this means the tiles are capable of working through extreme conditions.
Musk explained during the call that solar roof tile production should increase exponentially, in a similar fashion to Model 3 production. That means initial growth will be slow, followed by a sharp increase, and ending with a plateau, where Tesla produces a consistently high number of tiles per month. Even when production reaches its peak, though, it’s going to take a long time before every house has a solar roof.
“I think eventually almost all houses will have a solar roof,” Musk said during a May TED conference in Vancouver. “The thing to consider the timescale to be probably on the order of 40 for 50 years. On average, a roof is replaced every 20 to 25 years, but you don’t start replacing all roofs immediately, but eventually, if you were to fast forward to 15 years from now, it will be unusual to have a roof that doesn’t have solar.”
I suspect there's going to be strong regional variations in that average roof replacement time. 15 years will probably be closer to 50... though it will depend on just how quickly the roof is able to pay for itself.
https://www.inverse.com/article/35022-elon-musk-tesla-solar-roof-photos-amazing
New Horizons next target is a binary world
Based on these new occultation observations, team members say MU69 may not be not a lone spherical object, but suspect it could be an “extreme prolate spheroid” – think of a skinny football – or even a binary pair. The odd shape has scientists thinking two bodies may be orbiting very close together or even touching – what’s known as a close or contact binary – or perhaps they’re observing a single body with a large chunk taken out of it. The size of MU69 or its components also can be determined from these data. It appears to be no more than 20 miles (30 kilometers) long, or, if a binary, each about 9-12 miles (15-20 kilometers) in diameter.
Said Marc Buie, the New Horizons co-investigator who led the observation campaign, "These exciting and puzzling results have already been key for our mission planning, but also add to the mysteries surrounding this target leading into the New Horizons encounter with MU69, now less than 17 months away.”
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-horizons-next-target-just-got-a-lot-more-interesting
Said Marc Buie, the New Horizons co-investigator who led the observation campaign, "These exciting and puzzling results have already been key for our mission planning, but also add to the mysteries surrounding this target leading into the New Horizons encounter with MU69, now less than 17 months away.”
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-horizons-next-target-just-got-a-lot-more-interesting
The 21cm line but not as we know it
Anti-hydrogen spectral lines ! Cool !
Hydrogen has its own spectrum and, as the simplest and most abundant atom in the Universe, it holds a special place in physics. The properties of the hydrogen atom are known with high accuracy. The one looked at in this paper concerns the so-called hyperfine splitting, which in the case of hydrogen has been determined with a precision of one part in ten trillion. This transition is used these days in modern navigation and geo-positioning.
The team have made antihydrogen by replacing the proton nucleus of the ordinary atom by an antiproton, while the electron has been substituted by a positron. Last year, in ground-breaking work published in Nature, the team used UV light to detect the so-called 1S-2S transition between positron energy levels. Now, the team has used microwaves to flip the spin of the positron. This resulted not only in the first precise determination of the antihydrogen hyperfine splitting, but also the first antimatter transition line shape, a plot of the spin flip probability versus the microwave frequency. If there is a difference between matter and antimatter, it could be found in tiny differences between this line shape in hydrogen and antihydrogen.
http://www.swansea.ac.uk/media-centre/latest-research/firstobservationofthehyperfinesplittinginantihydrogen.php
Hydrogen has its own spectrum and, as the simplest and most abundant atom in the Universe, it holds a special place in physics. The properties of the hydrogen atom are known with high accuracy. The one looked at in this paper concerns the so-called hyperfine splitting, which in the case of hydrogen has been determined with a precision of one part in ten trillion. This transition is used these days in modern navigation and geo-positioning.
The team have made antihydrogen by replacing the proton nucleus of the ordinary atom by an antiproton, while the electron has been substituted by a positron. Last year, in ground-breaking work published in Nature, the team used UV light to detect the so-called 1S-2S transition between positron energy levels. Now, the team has used microwaves to flip the spin of the positron. This resulted not only in the first precise determination of the antihydrogen hyperfine splitting, but also the first antimatter transition line shape, a plot of the spin flip probability versus the microwave frequency. If there is a difference between matter and antimatter, it could be found in tiny differences between this line shape in hydrogen and antihydrogen.
http://www.swansea.ac.uk/media-centre/latest-research/firstobservationofthehyperfinesplittinginantihydrogen.php
Merely giving people more and more facts does not give them understanding
Yesterday I removed from a certain community's spam folder a post consisting of 94 slides about some sterotypical pseudoscience theory. The usual stuff : "Let us begin with E = mc^2..."
No. Let's not do that, because it's obvious that you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Lo and behold, it got rapidly worse, with some boiler-plate text praising God at the top of each slide. Aaaarrgggh. If you want to praise God, then fine, but do it in your own time, mate. Not in an internet-based slideshow you apparently expect people to read.
Total ignorance is indeed never damaging, providing one understands that one is totally ignorant and not put in a position where expertise might be required. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing as well. But a lot of knowledge without proper understanding is much, much worse.
Facebook says that actual facts are alternatives to alternative facts
Facebook is to step up its efforts to fight fake news by sending more suspected hoax stories to fact-checkers and publishing their findings online. It follows mounting criticism of the social media firm for not doing enough to root out fake news on its platform.
It has also just launched a new feature in four countries that will publish alternative news links beneath problematic articles. But several experts said the measures did not do go far enough. "Presenting audiences with context is helpful," said Tom Felle, a senior lecturer in digital journalism at City University. "But it does nothing to stop the spread of this material, or to stop traffic going to fake news peddlers who are making money out of creating this material."
On Thursday, however, the firm said it would start using "updated machine learning" to enhance detection. "If an article has been reviewed by fact checkers, we may show the fact-checking stories below the original post," added Sara Su, product manager of News Feed, in a blog. A spokesman later clarified that these stories would not be "direct responses" to fake articles, but factually accurate reports that offered an alternative.
HAH ! So the real facts have become themselves the alternatives. This sounds next to useless. I've a better idea. Whenever a story has been identified as potentially fake, present it along with a selection of actual proper factual articles (relating to the same subject) all displayed at the same font size, in a randomised order.
A future upgrade will present the user who clicks on the fake news story with an enormous, highly obnoxious pop-up full of gifs warning them that they're about to have their brain melted and that if they click this link they'll weaken their immune system and become less attractive to the opposite sex.
The next upgrade will replace the popup with a two hour video lecture on critical thinking and will include a randomised test at the end to ensure they actually watched it.
An additional upgrade will do exactly what it should be doing in the first place and take the damn things down.
I don't believe it's that hard to spot this stuff - at least, not the worst of it. Only excessive amounts of bullshitting has persuaded us that removing stories about Clinton being a murderer or the world being 6,000 years old is in some way a bad thing. It isn't. It's a wholly rational, sensible thing.
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40812697
It has also just launched a new feature in four countries that will publish alternative news links beneath problematic articles. But several experts said the measures did not do go far enough. "Presenting audiences with context is helpful," said Tom Felle, a senior lecturer in digital journalism at City University. "But it does nothing to stop the spread of this material, or to stop traffic going to fake news peddlers who are making money out of creating this material."
On Thursday, however, the firm said it would start using "updated machine learning" to enhance detection. "If an article has been reviewed by fact checkers, we may show the fact-checking stories below the original post," added Sara Su, product manager of News Feed, in a blog. A spokesman later clarified that these stories would not be "direct responses" to fake articles, but factually accurate reports that offered an alternative.
HAH ! So the real facts have become themselves the alternatives. This sounds next to useless. I've a better idea. Whenever a story has been identified as potentially fake, present it along with a selection of actual proper factual articles (relating to the same subject) all displayed at the same font size, in a randomised order.
A future upgrade will present the user who clicks on the fake news story with an enormous, highly obnoxious pop-up full of gifs warning them that they're about to have their brain melted and that if they click this link they'll weaken their immune system and become less attractive to the opposite sex.
The next upgrade will replace the popup with a two hour video lecture on critical thinking and will include a randomised test at the end to ensure they actually watched it.
An additional upgrade will do exactly what it should be doing in the first place and take the damn things down.
I don't believe it's that hard to spot this stuff - at least, not the worst of it. Only excessive amounts of bullshitting has persuaded us that removing stories about Clinton being a murderer or the world being 6,000 years old is in some way a bad thing. It isn't. It's a wholly rational, sensible thing.
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40812697
Thursday, 3 August 2017
The NSFs plans for Arecibo are simply stupid
Edited for brevity.
Dear Stakeholders,
The National Science Foundation (NSF) has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to assess the potential future use of Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico under the condition of reduced funding of the Observatory by NSF.
This Final EIS identifies and analyzes the potential consequences of five action Alternatives:
Alternative 1 (Agency-preferred Alternative) would involve collaboration with new stakeholder(s) who would use and maintain Arecibo Observatory for continued science-focused operations at reduced funding by NSF.
Alternative 2 would involve collaborating with outside entities to operate and maintain Arecibo Observatory as an education-focused operation.
Alternative 3 would involve mothballing (preservation of) essential buildings, telescopes, and other equipment, with periodic maintenance to keep them in working order.
Alternative 4 would involve the demolition of all above-grade structures, except the large concrete structures (that is, towers, tower and catwalk anchors, and rim wall infrastructure).
Alternative 5 would involve the demolition of all above-grade structures, including the large concrete structures (that is, towers, anchors, and rim wall infrastructure).
The Final EIS also proposes mitigation measures to minimize the adverse impacts from demolition or operation of the Alternatives where such impacts may occur. NSF also considered the No-Action Alternative. Under the No-Action Alternative, NSF would continue funding the Arecibo Observatory at current levels; none of the Alternatives would be implemented.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Pentecost
Dear the National Stupid Foundation,
You are stupid. Why are you so stupid ? Do you have brain parasites ? Did the stupid fairy hit you on the head with a toaster, like that bit in Scrooged with Bill Murray ? I can't think of a more credible explanation right now, anyway.
Your "preferred action alternative", as you so eloquently call it, is supposed to maintain science operations at Arecibo. Commendable. Except that it explicitly calls for the demolition of up to 26 buildings including all the ones where the science gets done. You want to cut the NSF's funding and replace it with some other institute. Since you seem to be chronically stupid, that's probably a good thing. But how's about you don't force the theoretical replacement institute to have to rebuild all the frickin' buildings they're gonna need to maintain science operations, eh ? Booby trap them if you must, but what manner of witchcraft and sourcery compels you to think that demolishing science buildings will have any kind of positive impact on science is beyond me. Perhaps that's the key word : impact. Someone once told you you should increase the "impact" on science and you've taken them literally, because of the stupid fairy.
The other "action alternatives" aren't much better. Increasing the amount of education and outreach at AO is a very sensible idea; refocusing it so that it does nothing but education and outreach is not. You specifically call for, in this scenario, the 305m telescope to be rendered inoperable but not demolished, but "retained for visual/historical interest". Well great, let's all just hack our legs off while we're at it. I can think of few sights more discouraging to future astronomers than a vast telescope slowly decaying in the jungle, a sweeping curve of metal and soaring towers consumed back into the wild - save that all those who see it will know that this didn't have to happen. Perhaps the only benefit from this absurd idea would be that it would stand as a monument to the folly of small-minded bureaucrats.
There is not much to be said for the other possibilities. Mothballing the facility is only marginally better than blasting the thing to smithereens, which would at least win you the internet for a few hours. For the sake of a paltry, yes, paltry financial saving, you would end a scientific facility to which there is no comparable alternative, nor is one planned or ever likely to be planned.
In conclusion, you suck, you are stupid, and I don't like you.
Good day.
https://www.nsf.gov/mps/ast/env_impact_reviews/arecibo/arecibo_feis.jsp
Dear Stakeholders,
The National Science Foundation (NSF) has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to assess the potential future use of Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico under the condition of reduced funding of the Observatory by NSF.
This Final EIS identifies and analyzes the potential consequences of five action Alternatives:
Alternative 1 (Agency-preferred Alternative) would involve collaboration with new stakeholder(s) who would use and maintain Arecibo Observatory for continued science-focused operations at reduced funding by NSF.
Alternative 2 would involve collaborating with outside entities to operate and maintain Arecibo Observatory as an education-focused operation.
Alternative 3 would involve mothballing (preservation of) essential buildings, telescopes, and other equipment, with periodic maintenance to keep them in working order.
Alternative 4 would involve the demolition of all above-grade structures, except the large concrete structures (that is, towers, tower and catwalk anchors, and rim wall infrastructure).
Alternative 5 would involve the demolition of all above-grade structures, including the large concrete structures (that is, towers, anchors, and rim wall infrastructure).
The Final EIS also proposes mitigation measures to minimize the adverse impacts from demolition or operation of the Alternatives where such impacts may occur. NSF also considered the No-Action Alternative. Under the No-Action Alternative, NSF would continue funding the Arecibo Observatory at current levels; none of the Alternatives would be implemented.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Pentecost
Dear the National Stupid Foundation,
You are stupid. Why are you so stupid ? Do you have brain parasites ? Did the stupid fairy hit you on the head with a toaster, like that bit in Scrooged with Bill Murray ? I can't think of a more credible explanation right now, anyway.
Your "preferred action alternative", as you so eloquently call it, is supposed to maintain science operations at Arecibo. Commendable. Except that it explicitly calls for the demolition of up to 26 buildings including all the ones where the science gets done. You want to cut the NSF's funding and replace it with some other institute. Since you seem to be chronically stupid, that's probably a good thing. But how's about you don't force the theoretical replacement institute to have to rebuild all the frickin' buildings they're gonna need to maintain science operations, eh ? Booby trap them if you must, but what manner of witchcraft and sourcery compels you to think that demolishing science buildings will have any kind of positive impact on science is beyond me. Perhaps that's the key word : impact. Someone once told you you should increase the "impact" on science and you've taken them literally, because of the stupid fairy.
The other "action alternatives" aren't much better. Increasing the amount of education and outreach at AO is a very sensible idea; refocusing it so that it does nothing but education and outreach is not. You specifically call for, in this scenario, the 305m telescope to be rendered inoperable but not demolished, but "retained for visual/historical interest". Well great, let's all just hack our legs off while we're at it. I can think of few sights more discouraging to future astronomers than a vast telescope slowly decaying in the jungle, a sweeping curve of metal and soaring towers consumed back into the wild - save that all those who see it will know that this didn't have to happen. Perhaps the only benefit from this absurd idea would be that it would stand as a monument to the folly of small-minded bureaucrats.
There is not much to be said for the other possibilities. Mothballing the facility is only marginally better than blasting the thing to smithereens, which would at least win you the internet for a few hours. For the sake of a paltry, yes, paltry financial saving, you would end a scientific facility to which there is no comparable alternative, nor is one planned or ever likely to be planned.
In conclusion, you suck, you are stupid, and I don't like you.
Good day.
https://www.nsf.gov/mps/ast/env_impact_reviews/arecibo/arecibo_feis.jsp
I still don't believe in the hyperloop
It's nice to see video footage. But I'm still unconvinced this will be practical on a large scale. Even if the cost per mile could be made cheaper than railways (and I don't see how it can), the infrastructure costs will still be enormous. If they weren't, HS2 wouldn't be costing us >£50 billion. I suppose it may work in a few cases where's there's nothing but flat, hard wasteland between widely separated cities, but everywhere else ? Nah.
http://www.bbc.com/news/av/technology-40811172/hyperloop-one-passenger-pod-tested-successfully
http://www.bbc.com/news/av/technology-40811172/hyperloop-one-passenger-pod-tested-successfully
Wednesday, 2 August 2017
Be careful what you wish for, morons
Honestly, there's stupid, and then there's Daily Fail stupid. Found on the internet.
Freedom of movement is good for workers
Freedom of movement of people reverses this proposition. It finally gives ordinary people rights – to organise for better conditions and better pay. No wonder Fox hates European free movement. It’s one of the only immigration systems in history where the ability to move is a human right, not a product of economic necessity, forcing people to meet the “needs” of business. While much could and should be said about the EU’s own barbaric immigration policy, the answer should not be to rescind these rights of ordinary people, but to extend them.
Exactly. Freedom of movement not only breaks down xenophobic barriers but forces local governments to ensure worker's rights are protected, otherwise workers can and do simply go elsewhere. The EU is not some tyrannical overlord that suppresses worker's rights, it's the exact opposite. Yes, it requires relinquishing some paltry powers of the sovereign nation state, but state control isn't a virtue in itself. It behoves a conservative-led state to reduce the individual's rights by denying them freedom of movement. The EU is a safeguard against overbearing states, not a sort of super-state that will swallow countries whole and somehow destroy their local traditions and cultures.
[Note also the EU legislation that foreign workers should be paid at the same level as equally skilled employees of their host nation, designed to make it less desirable to hire cheaper foreign labour.]
https://edition.independent.co.uk/editions/uk.co.independent.issue.020817/data/7871491/index.html
Exactly. Freedom of movement not only breaks down xenophobic barriers but forces local governments to ensure worker's rights are protected, otherwise workers can and do simply go elsewhere. The EU is not some tyrannical overlord that suppresses worker's rights, it's the exact opposite. Yes, it requires relinquishing some paltry powers of the sovereign nation state, but state control isn't a virtue in itself. It behoves a conservative-led state to reduce the individual's rights by denying them freedom of movement. The EU is a safeguard against overbearing states, not a sort of super-state that will swallow countries whole and somehow destroy their local traditions and cultures.
[Note also the EU legislation that foreign workers should be paid at the same level as equally skilled employees of their host nation, designed to make it less desirable to hire cheaper foreign labour.]
https://edition.independent.co.uk/editions/uk.co.independent.issue.020817/data/7871491/index.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)