teetering on the edge of chaos
[Originally posted at our new home at Scientific American.] It's Chemistry Day at the Scientific American blog network, and while casting about for a relevant …
[Originally posted at our new home at Scientific American.] It's Chemistry Day at the Scientific American blog network, and while casting about for a relevant …
[Note: The following is adapted/updated from a 2006 blog post — because Jell-O never goes out of style.] One of my favorite scenes in the …
In the pantheon of the greatest sci-fi movies of all time, Demolition Man isn't likely to rate very highly. But I enjoyed the rampant silliness …
Jen-Luc Piqunt stumbled across an intriguing science news story this morning: it seems that engineers at Ohio State University "have invented a new kind of …
So, last night the Time Lord and I participated in the San Diego Science Festival with a conversation about "Exploring Your Inner Geek." We organized …
UPS used to run commercials bragging that they kept their planes immaculately clean because a clean plane has less drag and saves energy. They didn't …
Quick: what’s the difference between an ‘amu’ (atomic mass unit) and a ‘Da’ (Dalton)? Answer: Nothing. They both represent one-twelfth of the rest mass of an unbound carbon-12 atom in its nuclear and electronic ground state, a.k.a 1.66×10−27 kg. This is very slightly less than the mass of a proton or a neutron (approximately 1.67×10-27 kg). When first invented, the Dalton was intended to be a fundamental unit such that one hydrogen atom had a mass of one Dalton. Helium would be two Daltons, lithium would be three Daltons, etc. Of course, then we realized that every atom had different numbers of protons, neutrons and electrons, which mean that there was no simple universal mass. It would be so much easier to memorize if everything on the periodic table was a simple multiple of a fundamental quantity.
Some words are just so much fun to say. My father claimed that, as a child, I was inordinately amused by long Latin words from his legal texts.
But you must admit that viscoelasticity is just a cool word. Like most words, you can break it down into its component parts: viscous and elastic. And like most things in physics, it’s almost always “beyond the scope of the course”. You can talk in a limited way about elasticity (spring constants) and sometimes you’ll learn a little about viscosity, but viscoelasticity consistently fails to make it into most introductory physics books. That’s too bad because it’s not only a fun concept, it is a useful concept.
Ah, innovation! What would we do without this driver of new technology and new consumer markets? Science is the breeding ground for said technological creativity, …
Earlier this week, Rice University's Smalley Institute quietly unveiled commissioned portraits of the late Richard E. Smalley (for whom the institute is named) and Robert …