Comment Re: Fortran as a systems language (Score 2) 177
Oops, sorry. I just Googled and confirmed that Fortran 66 had logical-ifs, e.g.,
IF (X
I thought it only had the arithmetic kind.
Oops, sorry. I just Googled and confirmed that Fortran 66 had logical-ifs, e.g.,
IF (X
I thought it only had the arithmetic kind.
In the early days it was Fortran 66 (e.g. arithmetic-if but no if-then-else)
FTFY
Math is THE science. Everything is about provability and reproducibility.
No.
Math, for all of its beauty and power, is not a science. Why? Because it does not rely on experimental observations to arrive at conclusions. Instead, it relies on axioms extended by logical reasoning.
We don't need independent verification and reproducibility anymore. The science is settled because we have consensus.
Independent verification happens as part of the common practices of science. Not by reproducing studies, but by extending them. Such extension requires some repetition of previous steps, thus providing verification. If something was wrong with a previous result, those who try to extend it can uncover the error.
And let's be careful about the loaded word consensus. Scientists don't arrive at a consensus through some kind of vote. They arrive at it by examining experimental evidence and sharing insights on that evidence.
Yes, I realize that's a bit of cherry-picking examples but all too often logical fallacies are used to justify when these things happen. I'd suggest it's an ethics crisis rather than a science crisis.
I think the media is largely to blame.
Mod parent funny!
In other news, water turns out to be wet.
And its wetness increases, the more you dilute it!
Wait...
Homeopathy's Law of Infinitesimals: the fewer studies there are of Homeopathy, the better it works.
TFA and summary are correct: they did not modify the genetic code in the DNA. However, they did methylate the adenine and cytosine nucleotides. Presumably this changed the behavior of the DNA, but it did not change the base-pair sequences.
N e v e r g o n n a g i v e y o u u p
FTFY.
Why RGB? I thought everything non-digital used CYMK?
Light-projection is additive, so RGB. Printing on paper is subtractive, so CMYK. More details here.
Polyester-based film stock specifically, with an optical soundtrack printed right on it. Dead simple to view or engineer a playback device for, from scratch if necessary. I believe it is what the Library of Congress is using these days.
http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/07078/preserve.html
Good post. However I must point out that the LoC is not the same as a time capsule. The latter does not have the advantage of active monitoring and maintenance of the health and environment of the archive. You need a medium that can survive for 50 to 100 years undisturbed (i.e., neglected) in an uncontrolled environment.
That is not what TFA said
You're right. Thanks for the correction.
Mod parent up. Too many posts here assume that it's the heat of the tire that is being converted to electricity. In fact, it's the flexing of the tires that is being converted, flexing that would otherwise show up as heat. I'm not sure whether it will work effectively, but let's wait and see.
TFAs don't say that the heat of the tire is captured to create electricity. Rather, the energy from the flexing of the tire (that would otherwise produce heat) is instead harvested to create electricity.
I remain a bit skeptical, but let's wait and see where Goodyear goes with this.
If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some.
