Posts by Alex
10 posts • joined Friday 3rd August 2007 18:56 GMT
dear, dear.
The rot has been there for awhile.
@ John Richards: The old Science&Nature community moved to Science File (www.sciencefile.org) back in 2005 when they did changed the format and messed up the moderation of the S&N boards. And the new format is horrendous.
How about pwnd?
Vocal use of 'owned' in the gaming context in regular conversation is punishable by three options:
1. A Counterstrike match with the Queens English enforced over mic.
2. 100 lines of "Victory and the past possession of an object are not the same thing"
3. Death
Posted in Sun stock goes degenerate dwarf
Astrophysics
And there I was hoping for a science article....
Stern Gerlach
You've made one physicist laugh today :) miniaturised Stern-Gerlach apparatus indeed!
Mines the one with the Z-pinch in the pocket
Spectacular
Good stuff. Lets just hope more space-based telescopes make it worthwhile.
Oh my dear god
@Luther Blissett.
STFU and do a physics degree.
Oh my dear god
You are F**KING joking me! This is farce, and although I'd vote labour over tory any day, more than one head should roll for a whole load a systematic failures. ]
And if I wasn't finished a physics degree and to committed to care about having no more research future in the UK due to another effing gov balls-up, then i'd be tempted to sign up, and try and install a culture of common sense.
Re: John
We know that anyway. - try driving while chatting.
Science
How can you people be so blindingly stupid?
Approximations and such are used in these models, which is why it says 160+/- 20 million years. That's a very large error (12.5%) but it's good nevertheless.
Luke Wells: try studying a bit of classical mechanics. You mgiht be surprised what can be predicted / traced back through planetary motion.
Chris Morrison: Before you disbelieve, try doing it yourself / looking at the paper and also realise that there is a reason for the error stated.
Whether science actually takes anything for fact or whether all we know is a succession of better and better approximations is a bunch of philosophy i'm not going to go into.
Posted in Brian May going for astronomy PhD
Still relevant....
He did a three year undergrad physics at Imperial (BSc), and started his PhD before running away to play music.
His topic is still relevant, and I believe no one has done any new work in his specific area of zoadical dust clouds since he quit. I expect the theories he is working on have been refined, but since he can continue his PhD, they have not undergone any radical shift. I wouldn't know about wordprocessor disks, but I'm sure something could be found.
(Imperial undergrad physicist)
