4 ms·
If this is as important as it seems, why is it taking so much time from publication for journals like Scientific American to pick up on it? The paper authors, B
by earthscienceman 5y ago
If this is as important as it seems, why is it taking so much time from publication for journals like Scientific American to pick up on it? The paper authors, Birnir et al, seem to have done a very good job of summarizing their results in a clear and succinct way for a review paper in a letters journal. Kudos to them.
- gumby 5y agoThey are popular journals, not scientific ones and fluid dynamics is apparently not sexy (though planes are — go figure!) I’m pretty stoked by these results. (Sorry about the pun)
- tomcam 5y agoDeep cut but I’ll allow it
- golemotron 5y agoSciam is dealing with a lot of race and gender issues right now, so topics like this are on hold.
- galangalalgol 5y agoAmd why are there still only 7 comments on this? Wasn't this one of the major unsolved problems of physics? If they had used a recurrent learning model to figure it out people would care...
- eyegor 5y agoIt isn't that important, the website just tries to make it seem that way. It's useful, but there were already models to estimate boundary layer turbulence. This is just a better approximation.
- colechristensen 5y agoIt isn’t that important. It is an incremental, but perhaps significant improvement for describing flow in a certain situation. It is nothing like a general purpose “solution” to turbulence. Scientific American kind of sucks.
- willis936 5y agoI mean, the certain situation is the exact problem where fusion reactors are most leaky. Decades of effort has been put into more efficiently computationally modeling plasma turbulence at the boundary. Yeah Scientific American sucks ass but this is an important area of research and it's ripe for a (or many) breakthroughs.