blix

36 ms·

331.
by blix 7y ago
I think modern scientists are a lot less likely to call any empirical relationship a law. Theory is still pretty widely used, and not for things that could be called laws. You can say the "the theory of quantum chromodynamics," bu
332.
by blix 7y ago
There is a substantial difference in my opinion. Laws rarely put forward a mechanism or seek a complete understanding of a relationship, while theories often do. Ohm's law was a law long before the electron was discovered. It's an
333.
by blix 7y ago
EMF radiation can induce a current in any condutor. Try putting a piece of tin foil in a microwave. It's far from limited to DNA, but it's not hard to imagine why people care more about DNA than other conductive molecules.
334.
by blix 7y ago
Laws of Physics are in general not always applicable. Ohm's Law, for instance, is only applicable in a narrow range of conditions. "Laws" tend to be less rigorous and more narrowly applicable than "theories," though
335.
by blix 7y ago
No one's accusing of you anything... take a deep breath. Being angry on HN isn't going to solve anything. Our economy is ~really~ dependent on fossil fuels. Eneregy is only part of the problem, there's also transportation.
336.
by blix 7y ago
There is disagreement about the evolution of those fungi. It does not appear to be as cut and dry as often presented. https://www.pnas.org/content/113/9/2442 Evolution of new species may not be necessary to s
337.
by blix 7y ago
I didn't say they couldn't be thousands of years, but suggesting hundreds of millenia ignores many observed events that have taken place on a much, much shorter time scale. The numbers referenced in the wikipedia article aren&#x27
338.
by blix 7y ago
It's not a "wild accusation" or personal attack, it's a fundemental truth about the nature of modeling. You can do better against it if you start off by recognizing that it is there. Nothing is unbiased. The embarassment
339.
by blix 7y ago
For all your talk of the impacts of overpopulation... the reason for your belief system is that you have kids? It seems to me we can't afford to not think philosophically about it.
340.
by blix 7y ago
Your view seems to be deeply human-centric, while the views you criticize are not. I wonder if this mismatch is the source of your anger. Climate deniers/liars primarily disregard the enviroment in favor of human impacts, which is shar
341.
by blix 7y ago
Evolution is not slow and steady. If the conditions are right it can take hold very quickly. Most of evolutionary history is equilibirium with small bursts of rapid change when the environment shifts significantly. It didn't take us a
342.
by blix 7y ago
It sounds like you are more familiar with her beliefs and this subject material than me. Would you mind elaborating on your disagreements? Personally, I don't think any measurement is non-model-dependent. It's a question of which
343.
by blix 7y ago
I don't mean to minimize any atrocity. But it is interesting to note that some of the strongest opponents of Chinese behavior have done similar things in the past, and perhaps even through the current day.
344.
by blix 7y ago
> When there is not enough to eat, people starve to death. It is better to let half of the people die so that the other half can eat their fill. I think you are overattributing his stupidity here. Engineered famine is a fantastic way to
345.
by blix 7y ago
Or maybe it's just a Japanese-internment level atrocity.
346.
by blix 7y ago
It's kinda neat that one of her major complaints with physicist culture is pernicious groupthink, and that some of the primary arguments against her are prima facie dismissals for not subscribing to consensus.
347.
by blix 7y ago
It's a bit of a ramble, but it's hardly incoherent. What seem to like diverse topics to a physicist are actually not all that diverse when looking from a holistic perspective. It's not that scientists are sitting on huge pile
348.
by blix 7y ago
Many papers are source code in a way. In addition to communicating the results, you are communicating the process and details of analysis so that it can be replicated. This requires precision and often jargon. To borrow your joke, please tr
349.
by blix 7y ago
Nature papers are in general condensed and often imprecise, reflecting their wide audience. It's not uncommon for a more rigorous work to be published later or simultaneously in a less prestigous jornal alongside a Nature paper.
350.
by blix 7y ago
I am editing a paper now where I am removing a lot of non-jargon statements and replacing them with jargon. The reviewers were not pleased. As other commenters have noted, plain english is imprecise. When communicating with other scientists
351.
by blix 7y ago
That's a pretty strong absolute, which probably means it is not true. It is possible to oversimplify things from multiple angles. Recent work[1] has argued that microbal and fungal diversity did not play a significant role in the devel
352.
by blix 7y ago
I don't think you need to be so condescending. There's no need for any sort of "new process for long-term carbon sequestration". We just need to stop taking carbon that is in the process of being sequestered by natural c
353.
by blix 7y ago
That is not the only possible cycle. It could be stored and set on it's way to beoming a fossil fuel in the distant future; the carbon removed from the current short-term cycle. Perhaps not as profitable as the cycle you describe thoug
354.
by blix 7y ago
I dug a little deeper into the EIA reports and their non-hydro renewables category is almost 90% wind. Wind and hydro alone are almost even with coal in April, with the other contributions being quite small.
355.
by blix 7y ago
It takes carbon that was not in the air and puts it into the air. The marginal decision to burn a bunch of wood or coal for a unit of energy produces roughly the same effect. It would be better to keep that carbon out of the atmosphere. Esp
356.
by blix 7y ago
I would like to see how the renewable section breaks down in to carbon-intensive varieties vs others. Non-solar, non-hydro renewables make up the bulk of renewable energy, and with the notable exceptions of wind and geothermal, many of thes
357.
by blix 7y ago
I do believe there is work being done on this. That said, removing carbon from the oceans, burning it and releasing it back into the atmosphere feels a little bit counterproductive to me.
358.
by blix 7y ago
Seems to me that the degeredation they discuss here operates on a very short time scale, completed within a few hours. This result is unlikely to matter significantly for lifetime.
359.
by blix 7y ago
What you are describing here sounds more like binder jetting than SLS. Sintering often stuggles with porosity, even using traditional bulk techniques. There is space between powder particles, and some of it likely survives.
360.
by blix 7y ago
Collaborator to me, recently: "It doesn't matter what's in the paper, I am on the editorial board and it will get published. It's more important that we aren't scooped than that the result is accurate." I'

More ›