Science and Technology MEGA THREAD

[7H4_D00D3]

And here I thought the speed of light was 670 million miles per hour.  My entire world has come crumbling down.  I just don't know what to believe in anymore!

392830[/snapback]

Just believe in the power of love

xDxDxDxDxDxDxDxDxDxDxDxD

[Rocket Punch]

Crazy dancing cellphone.

[7H4_D00D3]

Another finding (also on PM, so I won't post any link )

Bacteria a-la-carte: Now scientists can make "bacterial detectors" these are genetically modified bacteria that react to specific substances and turn into specific colors when exposed to a certain quantity of an agent. This could be used to look for dangerous substances/biomaterials. The bacteria colonies look like a bullseye when working

Also, I was watching in Tom's Hardware Guide that some scientists were able to produce Li ion batteries using viruses. Apparently, they modified the genetic structure of viruses to produce layers of electronic components instead of their regular ones. These batteries have 3x charge/weight ratio Vs standard ones

Oh!!! and a looooooooooong time ago I read something about chicken computers

This is, using the base of their feathers to replace the pcb (or the material that mobos are made) or silicon. The fethers were processed and transformed into little spheres of material, then they were pressed (¿?) to make a flat layer in which the circuit was printed

Finally, Thermal detautomerization (don't know if I wrote it right, the article was in spanish....) it consisted on using a LOT of chemical processes to obtain CH compounds out of any C based structure. They used turkey wastes (blood, fat, skin, feathers and other nasty stuff) to produce:

a) Carboxilic oil

b) Ink

c) Kerosene/Gas (just a liiiiiiiiiiiiittle bit, but is something)

d) Fertilizer

e) another oil

Think about it! if you fell in that machine you'd die horribly...but for the good of mankind (or 3vil enterprises who want to pwn your soul for the eternity)

Again, sorry about the lack of links, hope that you found it interesting

[Rocket Punch]

I can't find any this stuff on pouplarmechanics.com! Stop making stuff up!

[7H4_D00D3]

I can't find any this stuff on pouplarmechanics.com!  Stop making stuff up!

392871[/snapback]

Im not making it up, I swear, you probably don't find them there because:

All but the bacterias were from old numbers 1-2 years ago, and the other ones.....I can only get the spanish edition --I live in a place that I'm almost ashamed to say.... hence I won't--so that's probably why you can't find them

Think of this for just a sec, why would I come to a forum to say stupid things with no sense? You could probably say "just because"...if you want to believe that, then be my guest, but I'll tell you that it's not my intention to do.

I also apologize for using this space on the thread to say this stuff, but I needed to make a reply just to let you know and probably and PM (p message, not mechanich's lol) wouldn't get noticed....

About the virus, here's a link to a related topic http://www.sciencentral.com/articles/view....le_id=218392647

That's no tthe one I said, but it's close

ANd more here

http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/07/mit-res...tiny-batteries/

http://slaphog.com/hogblog/?p=160 (this one here is....odd....)

[Rocket Punch]

LOL

Dude kick back, I was just kidding!

[Rocket Punch]

Cosmology and particle physics

What can the matter B?

Apr 20th 2006

From The Economist print edition

A new result bearing on the question of why the universe is made of matter

THAT people exist is more than a marvel explained by evolution. The presence of stars and planets vital to life—the very being of matter itself—is a wonder. For, at the moment at which the universe was created, matter and antimatter, being equal and opposite, should have been produced in equal and opposite amounts. Since, as every schoolboy knows, when matter and antimatter meet, they annihilate each other in a burst of energy, the equal amounts of matter and antimatter should have annihilated each other long ago and the universe should now be filled with energy and little else, which is evidently not the case. So what happened?

The key is that matter and antimatter are not, in fact, perfectly equal and opposite. In other words, they are not symmetrical—and that asymmetry favours matter. A few sources of asymmetry have already been found, but not enough to account for all the matter around. So physicists are eagerly seeking more, and two groups working at Fermilab, a particle-physics laboratory near Chicago, think they have found a candidate.

Their experiments involve a group of particles called B-mesons. Quantum mechanics allows B-mesons to turn into their antimatter counterparts and back again, a process known as mixing. This mixing is described by some deft but complicated mathematics, and is crucial to the question of asymmetry. The frequency at which it happens is related to a small but significant difference between the mass of the particle and its antiparticle.

The two experiments at Fermilab, each of which employed around 700 scientists from all over the world, have quantified the mixing process for a type of B-meson called Bs. The difference in mass between this particle and its antiparticle is greater than for other B-mesons studied to date, and so the frequency with which it oscillates is higher. The experiments found that Bs-mesons switch between being matter and antimatter some three trillion times a second.

Zippy though this undoubtedly is, it is slower than some predicted, ruling out some of the more exotic theories of particle physics. But the measurement does confirm there is more asymmetry around than had previously been detected. So, while it cannot fully explain the imbalance between matter and antimatter, it is a step in the right direction.

[7H4_D00D3]

Hey! guess what! I found the thermal detautomerization article!!!

It's from Discovery Magazine! xD sorry I made you look on PM

It's the "Discovery en Español" June 2003

If you can't find it let me know and I'll scan it and upload it to you somehow

Well....now to clean this room I made a MESS while searching for the mag and tomorrow have physics exam (Im sooooooo dead...)

[Guest Bromgrev]

This baby would be worth it just for the name:

The CRUSHER![/b[

[JKeats]

Korean Androids

Uh, yeah. We're all gonna die.

[Limbo]

This baby would be worth it just for the name:

The CRUSHER![/b[

396279[/snapback]

That thing looks like Batman's Tumbler

[myk]

Just read this article regarding the possibility of FTL travel in the May issue of Popular Science:

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviationspace...ecbccdrcrd.html

Edited May 5, 2006 by myk

[7H4_D00D3]

Interesting solution to the impossibility of lightspeed travelling

As the object's speed reaches the speed of light it's mass increases:

M = Me/ sqrt (1 - v/c)

Where M = mass

Me= mass in equilibrium

v= object's speed

c= speed of light

When the object is nearing the lightspeed it's mass increases, therefore, it will need more power to keep accelerating, but then again, it will gain mass. This loop will repeat until it won't gain any more speed because the acceleration produced by the object's drive reaches it's peak and the system will stabilize, keeping constant speed as long as the drive keep functioning @ that level ( f = ma, if a = 0 then f = 0, this means that either a) the object is not moving or b) it's in a straight-line uniform kind of movement [constant speed])

Altough the whole "negative energy" stuff isn't very convincing

I'll look for a Discover Mag (yes, Im sure it's a discover) to post the date, where some physicist proposed that there are ultra thin threads in the universe that travel across it, where mass is incredibly high, therefore warping space-time, apparently increasing the speed of light, allowing a vessel to gain an enormous speed.

[myk]

Sounds good-just get me off of this fraking planet already...

[NERV]

http://ebaumsworld.com/2006/05/robotmule2.wmv

I dunno about you, but the way that thing moves freaks me the hell out. If i saw that thing coming at me i'd be quite nervous. Otherwise, a very awesome machine.

[EXO]

Merged to the "We're all gonna die" thread.

I know it isn't but it looks like two really skinny guys facing each other. I actually thought it was f'd up for a second when the guy kicked it.

[Twoducks]

Wonderful machine but it's reeeeeeeally disturbing, not only because of the freaky way it moves but also due to that horrible noise it makes.

We're all gonna die... at the hands ..er.. stilts of the spawn of that thing.

This is old but I don't remember seeing it here (and the search engine is MIA for the moment):

Exoskeleton shown in the 2005 Aichi Expo

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18624945.800

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&cl...18117525696R131

As we can see in the photo, that thin looking Japanese woman has such mass that you need an exoskeleton to lift her (but that is another story).

In the video I saw the guy was lifting heavy looking cement sacks.

Edited May 12, 2006 by Twoducks

[Zentrandude]

Another Scaled model of the next gen naval ship in my backyard

Streaming Vid link

Link to couple pics, scroll to the bottom

The cool thing they can have wargames if they want seeing they already have a scale model of the Virginia (SSN-774) in there.

Edited May 17, 2006 by Zentrandude

[Knight26]

I guess in 2010 I will be able to fly into the office:

http://www.terrafugia.com/vehicle.htm#images

Bigget problem I see with it is the lack of adequate rearward visibility, especially in car mode.

Edited May 17, 2006 by Knight26

[7H4_D00D3]

I guess in 2010 I will be able to fly into the office:

http://www.terrafugia.com/vehicle.htm#images

400123[/snapback]

What? It can't transform into a battloid??? what a rip off

Now, seriously, interesting, I wonder why they decided to use an old school engine instead of a jet one. Perhaps to make it cheaper...

Thinking about that, nope, you don't need a jet engine to get to work

Is there anything about teleport out there? The closest thing I've seen to teleport is quantum tunelling, but I doubt it works on non-quantum scales

Links about Qtunels and applications:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunneling

http://www.altair.org/Qtunnel.html

http://www.fizyka.umk.pl/~jkob/physnews98/node202.html

[Hiriyu]

Space elevator? well.....for the cost I think rocketing it's easier, Imagine the ENORMOUS

amounts of materials needed for build that (it can be beaten), the extraordinary depth of the constructionn pit (for foundations, beatable as well) and if a 9.0 richter earthquake hits that bye bye (unless is built by japanese engineers, in that case only a 10+ quake could possibly do something)

392792[/snapback]

You're thinking in terms of a terrestrially constructed elevator (Earth-based, with an orbital terminus). Most orbital elevator ideas I've read about explain the proposition the other way around: Orbitally based, with an interface/terminus on the Earth end.

To build it, you'd just drop weighted carbon line (alright, a LOT of line ) from a geosynchronous satellite. Once you've "tied it off" on Earth, you use autonomous elevator "cars" to slowly climb their payload up the "rope" to orbit. No need to worry about foundations, earthquakes, or any of that nonsense.

[7H4_D00D3]

Space elevator? well.....for the cost I think rocketing it's easier, Imagine the ENORMOUS

amounts of materials needed for build that (it can be beaten), the extraordinary depth of the constructionn pit (for foundations, beatable as well) and if a 9.0 richter earthquake hits that bye bye (unless is built by japanese engineers, in that case only a 10+ quake could possibly do something)

392792[/snapback]

You're thinking in terms of a terrestrially constructed elevator (Earth-based, with an orbital terminus). Most orbital elevator ideas I've read about explain the proposition the other way around: Orbitally based, with an interface/terminus on the Earth end.

To build it, you'd just drop weighted carbon line (alright, a LOT of line ) from a geosynchronous satellite. Once you've "tied it off" on Earth, you use autonomous elevator "cars" to slowly climb their payload up the "rope" to orbit. No need to worry about foundations, earthquakes, or any of that nonsense.

401340[/snapback]

That's what I'm saying, in fact, the only space elevator model I've ever saw eas satellite based, but when the carbon tube reaches earth it will need a foundation, because if not, what would prevent it from collapsing due to gravity, winds and stuff?

You could make an extremely wide tube, so all forces are sustained by itself but that would require an excessive amount of resources (hence, rocketing rules!xD)

Changing subjects, what other stuff about capacitors is there? Recently I had to do a small job for college about them and came to the conclusion that to reach the capacity of 1F with a plain parallel face kind of capacitor (the faces are 5cm apart from each other), the faces will need an area of 5467 square kilometers (!!!) because:

C = K*S*Eo/d

assuming that it's in the void (k=1)

C = S*Eo/d

1F*0.05m/[8.854 × 10^-12(F/m)] = s

s= 5.467x10^9 m^2

s= 5.467*10^3 Km^2

The same capacitance could be reached with 10000 capacitors (100microfarads each) in parallel and would fit in a 28 sqare meters surface (approx)

Is there a way to concentrate energy @ ultra-high levels? (1F in 28sqm it's still too much )

[Zentrandude]

Space elevator? well.....for the cost I think rocketing it's easier, Imagine the ENORMOUS

amounts of materials needed for build that (it can be beaten), the extraordinary depth of the constructionn pit (for foundations, beatable as well) and if a 9.0 richter earthquake hits that bye bye (unless is built by japanese engineers, in that case only a 10+ quake could possibly do something)

392792[/snapback]

You're thinking in terms of a terrestrially constructed elevator (Earth-based, with an orbital terminus). Most orbital elevator ideas I've read about explain the proposition the other way around: Orbitally based, with an interface/terminus on the Earth end.

To build it, you'd just drop weighted carbon line (alright, a LOT of line ) from a geosynchronous satellite. Once you've "tied it off" on Earth, you use autonomous elevator "cars" to slowly climb their payload up the "rope" to orbit. No need to worry about foundations, earthquakes, or any of that nonsense.

401340[/snapback]

That's what I'm saying, in fact, the only space elevator model I've ever saw eas satellite based, but when the carbon tube reaches earth it will need a foundation, because if not, what would prevent it from collapsing due to gravity, winds and stuff?

You could make an extremely wide tube, so all forces are sustained by itself but that would require an excessive amount of resources (hence, rocketing rules!xD)

Changing subjects, what other stuff about capacitors is there? Recently I had to do a small job for college about them and came to the conclusion that to reach the capacity of 1F with a plain parallel face kind of capacitor (the faces are 5cm apart from each other), the faces will need an area of 5467 square kilometers (!!!) because:

C = K*S*Eo/d

assuming that it's in the void (k=1)

C = S*Eo/d

1F*0.05m/[8.854 × 10^-12(F/m)] = s

s= 5.467x10^9 m^2

s= 5.467*10^3 Km^2

The same capacitance could be reached with 10000 capacitors (100microfarads each) in parallel and would fit in a 28 sqare meters surface (approx)

Is there a way to concentrate energy @ ultra-high levels? (1F in 28sqm it's still too much )

401344[/snapback]

Be hard to say in theory. Nasa has to try a test run of running a cheap spool of cord from the shuttle in orbit and see what happens.

[Amped]

Further proof the GI Joe toys of the 80s presage 'current' weapons tech: http://www.coolest-gadgets.com/20060531/es...l-flying-wings/

[Jemstone]

The Jack PC Edited June 3, 2006 by Jemstone

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

That robot mule is scary. The way it autoadjust as the guy kicked it was cool. And here I thought all robots needed to have chunky feet for balance.

They need to make a variation that runs more like a dog at full speed. (ie hind legs spring it forward, front legs land while hind legs swing forward and hit the ground...and the cycle repeats to cover a great distance)

Does anyone get reminded of the AT-AT from star wars?

Edited June 3, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Gabe Q]

Further proof the GI Joe toys of the 80s presage 'current' weapons tech: http://www.coolest-gadgets.com/20060531/es...l-flying-wings/

404847[/snapback]

Here's another article...

Special forces to use strap-on 'stealth wings'

That looks pretty sweet.

[azrael]

This is a good read:

http://sciencentral.com/articles/view.php3...le_id=218392807

[myk]

That is a great read. I hope they're successful with that program...

[Zentrandude]

I remember somebody talking about this here a long time ago. Nice pictures.

[eugimon]

This is a good read:

http://sciencentral.com/articles/view.php3...le_id=218392807

408420[/snapback]

here's a vid clip about this subject:

http://www.break.com/index/newarmor23.html

[wolfx]

Should this be here? The diet coke and menthos experiment....i just found out about it today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7ln_pr7cvo...0coke%20menthos

[Lindem Herz]

That's what I'm saying, in fact, the only space elevator model I've ever saw eas satellite based, but when the carbon tube reaches earth it will need a foundation, because if not, what would prevent it from collapsing due to gravity, winds and stuff?

You could make an extremely wide tube, so all forces are sustained by itself but that would require an excessive amount of resources (hence, rocketing rules!xD)

You don't need a foundation. The tube will be pulled upwards by the centrifugal force of the anchoring satellite orbiting around the Earth. Think of it as a string tied to a rock you swing around, only thing you need is a little attachment point (like a ship or a modified oil rig like it's proposed) to prevent it from going around the place.

The biggest problem is the tube being strong enough to support it's own (and the cargo's) weight, being flexible enough to survive the wind currents and getting it out of way of planes and space debris.

And the Diet Coke+Menthos stuff. Damn nice trick for a party once everyone is drunk enough. But will ONLY work with Diet Coke. Pepsi won't cut it. And never, NEVER, try to do it in your mouth. That one isn't a nice show.

[Zentrandude]

You don't need a foundation. The tube will be pulled upwards by the centrifugal force of the anchoring satellite orbiting around the Earth. Think of it as a string tied to a rock you swing around, only thing you need is a little attachment point (like a ship or a modified oil rig like it's proposed) to prevent it from going around the place.

The biggest problem is the tube being strong enough to support it's own (and the cargo's) weight, being flexible enough to survive the wind currents and getting it out of way of planes and space debris.

And the Diet Coke+Menthos stuff. Damn nice trick for a party once everyone is drunk enough. But will ONLY work with Diet Coke. Pepsi won't cut it. And never, NEVER, try to do it in your mouth. That one isn't a nice show.

You seen that guy in youtube? That was nuts almost like you died and gone to taco bell hell.

[7H4_D00D3]

You don't need a foundation. The tube will be pulled upwards by the centrifugal force of the anchoring satellite orbiting around the Earth. Think of it as a string tied to a rock you swing around, only thing you need is a little attachment point (like a ship or a modified oil rig like it's proposed) to prevent it from going around the place.

The biggest problem is the tube being strong enough to support it's own (and the cargo's) weight, being flexible enough to survive the wind currents and getting it out of way of planes and space debris.

And the Diet Coke+Menthos stuff. Damn nice trick for a party once everyone is drunk enough. But will ONLY work with Diet Coke. Pepsi won't cut it. And never, NEVER, try to do it in your mouth. That one isn't a nice show.

I thooght of it, but I rejected the idea because without a foundation it would be too unstable, depending only on the anchoring satellite.... if someone even FARTS on the damn stuff it will move the satellite just enough to make a variable orbit (of course, the variation would be incredibly small, so long-term effects will take long to appear)

In fact, I did a small project for Physics I to calculate the trajectory of any given body set @ a desired distance of the Earth's centre, taking into account the effects of the moon was a pain in the arse because I got too few time to solve it, but it would have been pretty nifty ^^

In other news, http://www.twinkiesproject.com/ , there, check what those guys tried with twinkies xD