chefmayhem writes: I have generally used Chrome as my web browser of choice for the last few years. I need to use several java-based websites for my work. I recently realized that there IS NO Java 7.x available for Chrome on OSX. Does this mean it is permanently unsafe to use Chrome for my work until Chrome gets updated to 64-bit so it can use the latest Java? What should the tech savvy Mac/Chrome user do?
Of course it is a stunt. You're only reading about it because the main goal of the MINERvA experiment, measuring neutrino cross-sections, wouldn't make slashdot. Let's enjoy the impractical communications stuff. Meanwhile, you can be sure the actual physics research continues, unreported in the "popular" channels.
Neutrinos can collide with other neutrinos. Thing is, it's just really rare. The probability for a neutrino to interact with normal matter is small. The probability for it to interact with other neutrinos is smaller still. But it is non-zero. The only time when you're likely to be able to measure this kind of interaction is during a supernova, when the dying star makes an incredible number of neutrinos all at once.
jjp9999 writes "Anyone who remembers Eye of the Beholder should be glad to know a group of developers is trying to bring back the first person dungeon crawl genre while holding true to the classic style. Legend of Grimrock is still in its pre-alpha state, but could breathe new life into a genre that many a geek still remembers fondly. The game gives players control of four characters as they try to escape a prison labyrinth. The graphics and lighting are what you'd expect from a modern game, but early videos show it doesn't stray too far from everything that was done right by Eye of the Beholder."
http://www.kickstarter.com/help/guidelines They don't allow you to use kickstarter for charity. It's only for creative projects.
chefmayhem writes: I'm one of a number of volunteer alumni trying to revive a high school summer science enrichment program, PGSS, cut unceremoniously by Pennsylvania in 2009 due to budget issues. Our alumni association has become a 501(c)3 non-profit and we're raising money through donations (over $100K from over 300 donors so far) to try to fund the program in 2012. The idea is that running the program this summer will give us momentum, and something to show off to potential corporate, philanthropic, and other funding sources. Trouble is, some potential donors are concerned that we won't raise enough to run the program this coming summer, and are hesitant to donate, even though the money will (one way or another) go to science education, even if we can't restore the program. Is there a web-based fundraising service, like kickstarter.com, but for charities, which will take pledges (and deal with credit card info, etc) but only charge donors if the goal is reached? It would also be important that non-donor sources (like some support from the state) can also count towards our fundraising goals. This could be a powerful tool for us, as well as other non-profits looking to make a dream come true.
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
This is a really interesting story to think about, and I don't want to completely dismiss this as rubbish, but there are several red flags. For one, consider the headlining scientist. The professor whose photo appears in the article is Peter Sturrock. If you read his wikipedia page, you will find it is mostly dedicated to his work on pushing for UFO study to be mainstreamed. Interesting. He actually has a reputation for looking for patterns in old data. He has done this to the Homestake neutrino data and also the Super-Kamiokande neutrino data. He did not work on either experiment. The biggest red flag is that no hypothesis was tested. This is not science. If you find a pattern in old data, you should design a new experiment, with a hypothesis to test, and see if it holds. If you look through the mountains of old data, you will find patterns in it. You can find patterns in anything if you look hard enough. See, for example, predictions from the Bible. Until someone designs an experiment to test this hypothesis that increased neutrino flux changes decay rates, predicts how it will happen, and looks for and finds it, don't get too excited.
They used to use warning sirens for that sort of thing. Far more low tech, but quite cheap, and a single siren can be heard for quite a distance. Just put them near the shore. Now, it's not nearly as cool as the satellite, but it would work if people are indoors and not looking out the window.
Exactly. CDF and D0 are separate collaborations at Fermilab using the same proton beam. Because they do not share a detector, and they independently do their own analyses, it is an excellent check against incorrect results.
I am tremendously frustrated by this. Pennsylvania is doing a similar thing for high school students. What this amounts to is a redistribution of education funds, and there will inevitably be cuts to programs that need the money. Pennsylvania cut the Governor's Schools of Excellence program, which cost a tiny fraction of the laptop program, along with others. I sincerely hope that students and parents in South Carolina will be extremely vocal to save the programs which are important, because politicians tend not to vote against giving computers to kids, since it looks popular.
I realize it isn't for everyone, but ROOT is my calculator. http://root.cern.ch/ It's an open source object oriented data analysis program. Runs right in the terminal, quite fast, does arithmetic just like C++. It's definitely overkill for most people, and the really useful features of ROOT take a while to learn. But I need to use it for my research anyway, so...there you go!
I find that I enjoy games more when they surprise me. They can surprise me in terms of story (Metal Gear Anything, I played MGS3 with intentionally avoiding spoilers, it was well worth it, I didn't do that for MGS2), or in terms of fun gameplay mechanics (Mario Galaxy, Katamari Damacy), or just by being a better game than I expected (Zack and Wiki, Okami, World of Goo). The surprises are in different ways, so having them spoiled comes in different ways. For a very story heavy game, like a Final Fantasy or Metal Gear, the plot twists are what you should hide. Gameplay mechanics, I'm fine with. For a game where you're supposed to be constantly impressed by the gameplay mechanics (say...Zelda), you shouldn't spoil everything you can do in the game. It should suffice in the review to say that the reviewer was impressed with what mechanics are available. For a puzzle game, obviously, don't spoil the puzzles. And for any game, don't hype it beyond what it is. Sometimes I'll play a game after hearing a tremendous amount of hype about it, and I'll be disappointed, not because it was a bad game, but because the pleasant surprise of how good the game is is ruined. As a general rule to the reviewer, consider what about the game you enjoyed because it surprised you. If this occurs more than a few hours into the game, and it isn't critical in making a decision to purchase the game, leave it out of the review. Let the player be pleasantly surprised. If you want to say something like "Mario saves the princess", that's ok. We knew that was coming anyway.
New Scientist has a piece about Comet Machholz 1, whose uncommon molecular composition suggests, but does not prove, that it may be an interloper from another star system. "Comet Machholz 1 isn't like other comets. David Schleicher of the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona, measured the chemical makeup of 150 comets, and found that they all had similar levels of the chemical cyanogen (CN) except for Machholz 1, which has less than 1.5% of the normal level. Along with some other comets, it is also low on the molecules carbon-2 and carbon-3."