Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

+ - Broken glass changes how we look at climate change->

advertisehere writes:

Clues to future climate may be found in the way an ordinary drinking glass shatters. Results of a study published this week in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences find that microscopic particles of dust can break apart in patterns that are similar to the fragment patterns of broken glass and other brittle objects. The research, by National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) scientist Jasper Kok, suggests there are several times more dust particles in the atmosphere than previously believed, since shattered dust appears to produce an unexpectedly high number of large fragments. The finding has implications for understanding future climate change because dust plays a significant role in controlling the amount of solar energy in the atmosphere. Depending on their size and other characteristics, some dust particles reflect solar energy and cool the planet, while others trap energy as heat. "As small as they are, conglomerates of dust particles in soils behave the same way on impact as a glass dropped on a kitchen floor," Kok says. "Knowing this pattern can help us put together a clearer picture of what our future climate will look like." The study may also improve the accuracy of weather forecasting, especially in dust-prone regions. Dust particles affect clouds and precipitation, as well as temperature. "This research provides valuable new information on the nature and distribution of dust aerosols in the atmosphere," says Sarah Ruth, program director in the National Science Foundation (NSF)'s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences, which funds NCAR. "The results may lead to improvements in our ability to model and predict both weather and climate."


Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:problem is not that they were communists or not (Score 1) 200 200

And so can a socialized version of it, just like efforts to privatize social security, medicare, and education.

It would also be really difficult to gain support and implement the elimination of an entire industry. I support the idea in principle, but I don't think it's the most practical solution. The only reason the UK has it is because they had a golden opportunity after WWII.

Comment: Re:problem is not that they were communists or not (Score 1) 200 200

It doesn't really need to be socialist though, just well regulated. Only a few countries have truly socialized medicine, the rest just have a heavily regulated insurance industry.

Although I agree that socialism is demonized for some pretty bad reasons.

Comment: Re:Administration (Score 2, Insightful) 753 753

Raising taxes to spend more money to spur the economy is a losing game, since the biggest waste of money is the administration of the programs that tax and spend. Every dollar spent on administration is a loss to the GDP.

This is only true when the government doesn't spend the money wisely and taxes those who need it the most, or the consumers, since rich people get rich by saving money, which doesn't stimulate the economy...

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Working...