Sci-Fi author Greg Egan, via John Baez: Save the New Scientist. Basically the British magazine New Scientist used to be very good - like Scientific American before they started cutting content for the sake of flashier visuals (basically trying to look more like Discover, though to be fair, Scientific American still has scientists do the actual writing, which is very nice). Over time, it's devolved to the point of being a conduit for press releases from the worst of the hype-spewers. The coup de grace that pushed Egan to write his plea was this COVER article, which conveniently neglects to point out that the gizmo in question would have to violate conservation of momentum if it works as described. Sad. A "science" magazine publishing, as a cover story, non-peer-reviewed junk that doesn't pass the laugh test.
(Not too much on cond-mat this week that seems good for the general blog reader - I'm sure more will come up soon.)
the gizmo in question would have to violate conservation of momentum if it works as described.
ReplyDeleteThere's prior art in the classic film Barbarella where a fan mounted on a sailboat provides pressure on the sails. What with the ingenious inventions like the Orgasmatron, it's no wonder that Barbarella is an M.I.T. Lecture Series Committee favorite!
Now hang on - wasn't the Orgasmatron from Sleeper?
ReplyDeleteBernie - the guy fails to account for the on-axis component of the force on the tapered walls. Instead he simple-mindedly worries only about the forces on the (different sized) ends of the cavity. Doh. Pretty basic.
ReplyDeleteAlso, regarding the above discussion with Alison, it looks like we're both right.
I always thought that Barbarella was an MIT fav because of Jane Fonda in tight-fitting clothing.
ReplyDelete