Topic: ¡Science! (Read 65229 times)

Classic · « **Reply #420 on:** May 24, 2011, 10:08:46 PM »

You're sailing over the edge of a flat paradigm there.

Brentai · « **Reply #421 on:** May 24, 2011, 10:45:54 PM »

So basically, taking shit = getting shit.

We're doing science here.

Büge · « **Reply #422 on:** May 26, 2011, 08:10:19 AM »

A new study shows that kids don't find violent cartoons entertaining.

Büge · « **Reply #423 on:** May 29, 2011, 07:11:37 AM »

Spiders... in SPAAAAAAAAAAACE

McDohl · « **Reply #424 on:** May 29, 2011, 08:04:35 AM »

...someone stop them.

The spiders are going to get in to Stephen Colbert's DNA!

Friday · « **Reply #425 on:** May 29, 2011, 10:06:37 AM »

adding "venomous" to the headline is just blatant sensationalism, but at least they got the distinction between "venomous" and "poisonous" right.

Mongrel · « **Reply #426 on:** May 29, 2011, 04:33:43 PM »

Spideys r cyute :3

Büge · « **Reply #427 on:** May 29, 2011, 04:43:09 PM »

My best friend used to own a tarantula with a pink spot on her abdomen named Rosy.

Lottel · « **Reply #428 on:** May 30, 2011, 08:43:42 AM »

Quote from: Friday on May 29, 2011, 10:06:37 AM

adding "venomous" to the headline is just blatant sensationalism, but at least they got the distinction between "venomous" and "poisonous" right.

This was my first thought.

Shortly followed by "WHO DECIDED IT WAS A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE KILLER SPIDERS JUST HANGING OUT WITH ASTRONAUTS IN SPACE?"

François · « **Reply #429 on:** May 30, 2011, 10:22:50 AM »

SNAKES ON A PLANE 2: SPIDERS ON A SHUTTLE

Mothra · « **Reply #430 on:** June 06, 2011, 06:36:56 AM »

The Alpha Experiment over at CERN managed to successfully trap antimatter (anti-hydrogen, specifically) for a whopping 1000 seconds!

Classic · « **Reply #431 on:** June 06, 2011, 06:45:22 AM »

My shit has been blown.

Well it annihilated by contact with anti-shit, but we're not brain surgeons here.

Mongrel · « **Reply #432 on:** June 06, 2011, 06:57:26 AM »

It's funny because back when they first did it for a few seconds, I was confused as hell, because I'd thought we'd already been saving antimatter for years. Mostly because of some really old article I'd read years ago (late 90's early 00's) describing "advanced forms of space propulsion that use current existing technology" an one of the options was some form of antimatter propulsion, saying we already stored small quantities gained from particle accelerators (I guess this turned out to be wrong!) and could accumulate enough in a decade or two to run such an engine.

This wasn't like, a Star Trek antimatter engine. Just a dirty one that could go a good bit faster than existing chemical-based rockets. Fast enough to make Saturn/Jupiter missions viable with a flight time of 5+ years.

Cthulhu-chan · « **Reply #433 on:** June 06, 2011, 08:04:38 AM »

Anti-atoms are the new thing, we've been spiting out anti-protons and positrons for quite some time. Not sure that we've contained them for all that long, though.

Mongrel · « **Reply #434 on:** June 09, 2011, 08:37:44 PM »

Dyson Air Multiplier

Okay, is this actually real, or some giant bullshit prank job?

Because if this is real *KeanuReevesWhoa*

Classic · « **Reply #435 on:** June 09, 2011, 09:04:08 PM »

The link eventually shows a video explaining how traditional bladed fans have downsides, exaggerates those downsides, and introduces their product.

They have a circular jet of air being fed against an airfoil meant to exacerbate the pressure difference. They claim that this causes nearby air to flow along with the slight amount of air that they're pumping.

Nothing weird there. The 15x claim is maybe a bit much.

What they neglect to mention is that the air they're channeling out is still just an intake vent that they've got some version of fan or turbine forcing air through.

Lottel · « **Reply #436 on:** June 09, 2011, 09:21:19 PM »

Are you just now seeing those, Mongrel?

They have them here and there. They are pretty fun to play with. Can't say for sure that they are really useful but pretty neat.

Mongrel · « **Reply #437 on:** June 10, 2011, 05:40:30 AM »

Still photography may finally be obsolete, at least at the highest levels

Note that I am not saying that still images are obsolete. That would be stupid. Just that the process for obtaining the highest-quality still images may have just become infinitely easier. This isn't really THAT dramatic - we've been moving towards this for some time. But it's interesting to see that it's finally here.

Supplemental article

Royal☭ · « **Reply #438 on:** June 13, 2011, 08:16:09 AM »

Eh, that photographer Clayton Cubitt - also known as Siege - has been saying that traditional still photography will transition to a video based one soon enough. As soon as the Canon 5D Mark II was released (which shot full-frame HD 1080p video), he began pioneering the Long Portrait, or portraits of people taken with video rather than just stills. Then he began saying about how the future of photography was filming something, then locating the exact moment for a still.

Last year, even, photographer Greg Williamsdid the same thing with Megan Fox for Esquire

It looks pretty cool, and the RED is really, really high-def. It's also like $50,000 so I don't see it being the future of photography just yet.

Büge · « **Reply #439 on:** June 13, 2011, 12:38:30 PM »

A woman is planning to have her womb transplanted into her daughter.

News:

Author Topic: ¡Science! (Read 65229 times)