Jump to content

Klaynos

Moderators
  • Posts

    8590
  • Joined

2 Followers

About Klaynos

Retained

  • Insert Witty Comment

Profile Information

  • College Major/Degree
    PhD Physics
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Quantum Physics
  • Occupation
    Researcher

Recent Profile Visitors

42237 profile views

Klaynos's Achievements

Genius

Genius (11/13)

745

Reputation

  1. The top row looks like it's for a remote sensor (the house with a little 2). The fact it's flashing tells me it's trying to demonstrate a fault. My guess is that the remote sensor isn't providing data for one of many reasons.
  2. A laser is not, and cannot be a conductor. "electron laser" is meaningless. This is also meaningless. Why are you putting random words together.
  3. ! Moderator Note Our rules require attached documents to be supportive only. You should be able to contribute to the thread without needing to go off-site or to download any additional documents. Please put your thoughts into a post for responses.
  4. Thanks. It holds together so could be a lot worse. Not terribly pretty though.
  5. My grandfather was a carpenter, my parents still have a few pieces be made. About a week ago I finished my first dovetail joint made out of an old spice rack. I've now started my second one. I don't have great ambitions at the moment. I'd like to get to a point where I can make a reasonable box.
  6. I don't think you can draw any single rule on whistle blowers. It'll always come down to a balance of what is for the public good and that is rarely an easy line to draw. The bulk release of illegally obtained information without review is likely to cross that line in most people's opinion. In the UK there are legal protections for public officials as long as they are acting in good faith. Which again will often be a difficult line to draw. To a certain extent you have to have confidence in the justice system.
  7. Hey, I was for a time employed as a software engineer and have since managed teams including software engineers and currently work along side several. Do you have any programming experience? C++ is not what I would suggest as a good starting point (there's a whole thread on good starting languages somewhere). Broadly languages fall into two camps, procedural (e.g. C) and object oriented (e.g. java). C++ is a bit of a messy mix of both which to me makes it a messy starting place. Lots of people start with python these days, not my cup of tea (who thought meaningful white space was a good idea?) but it's very versatile. C is pretty old fashioned but is still a mainstay for how powerful it can be. What kind of problems do you want to solve? That should help to find the right language. For the most part if you understand the principles you can then apply those to other languages, I frequently jump between 3 or 4 languages and whilst I need to look up some syntax sometimes I know what I'm looking for. And you learn the quirks (e.g. pointers in C or that for efficient R you should avoid loops).
  8. They will publish results in journals. Some of those are open access. A lot of journals these days require that you make your data accessible as do some funding sources and institutions. At least one of my academic partners the university requires open access journals. There are also preprint archives.
  9. To add to Markus. Peer review publication creates somewhat of a double check. The first is that when you submit an article it will be sent to some other scientists in the field, normally about 3, chosen by the journal (sometimes you can make suggestions to make it easier for the editors). They will review it in depth and provide feedback to the journal and the authors, often anonymously to the authors, sometimes this is all public. The second phase is if you pass they review then you get published. Then any other interested person with access to the journal can read your article. That allows them to do other experiments, repeat your experiments/analysis and then write their own paper in support or counter yours. During my PhD we discovered a new way to do something. Someone else showed something similar before us but their explanation didn't agree with our results so we published saying we thought they were wrong, here's some new results and a new explanation which agrees with both sets of results. They responded with a modified first explanation they fitted both. By then my successor had more results that again agreed with our explanation but showed their new explanation didn't work either. I've left the field so I'm not sure where it ended but there was a useful and constructive back and forth. I think you might benefit from reading generally about the scientific process. Certainly in physics you don't get big new ideas from nothing. They are generated on the foundations of those that went before (...shoulders of giants...). A new theory must encompass all the evidence that has gone before. Even something seismic like special relativity must have agreed with the electrodynamics and classical mechanics that came before it. Then the following experiments will build on the evidence and understanding, there is rarely a single experiment that goes "yep, Frank was right" and there will always be scientists that question and check. For relativity every GPS device is effectively constantly checking the consistency of the theory with reality.
  10. Whilst I don't disagree, Kelvin is not a degree scale like °C or °F. It's also not uncommon to find physics papers talking about °C. Although the closer you get to thermodynamics the less you use °C. In the UK, in general, older people are relatively happy with both but anyone below about 40 or 50 will be far more in the Centigrade camp, I need to look up what the freezing point of water is if I need it in °F. For almost all other measurements people are accepting of both imperial and metric. I walk in km but I drive in miles. For shorter distances I go mm, cm, inches, feet, meters. My weight is in stone but I would measure ingredients in grams.
  11. Yes, I think this is feasible. You'll obviously have to ensure that air can get in and out the battles as quickly as the water. You might also want to connect them together nearer the top to try and more easily deal with differing levels. What I'm going to call balancing will be critical, else you'll have one empty tank and start pumping some air on outflow and on inflow you'll have water pouring out the top of one before the others are near full. A better idea (to get around the balance problem) would be to have each one tapped individually. You would then fill and empty each one on its own avoiding the balancing problem. You could even automate that if you were so inclined. Oh and to answer the pressure question. 1 bar will raise water by 1 m. So to fill a 1 m high barrel which is 1 m off the ground you need more than 2 bar. In the UK domestic water pressure is around 10 bar which is enough to easily lift water into the loft spaces of most houses. Filling from the bottom with a pressure close to the minimum requirement would b come very very slow though. That's one of the reasons why cisterns in houses fill from the top even if though there is enough pressure to not.
  12. There are a few other public observatories in the UK. The Norman Lockyer one is the one I'm most familiar with. They do good public open evenings (pitched at the keen member of the public). Wotsallthis, the aerosol optical depth at the chilbolton observatory isn't particularly unusual at the moment (https://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/data_display_aod_v3?site=Chilbolton&nachal=0&year=2021&month=2&day=27&aero_water=0&level=1&if_day=0&if_err=0&place_code=10&year_or_month=0). I suspect you are suffering from local light pollution or not allowing hour night vision to adjust as much as previously. The human eye is an amazing thing with huge dynamic range but it can be slow and the ambient light matters massively.
  13. There was certainly a clear sky in the south west last night. And several towards the beginning of February whilst there was a bit of a blocking high over Norway ish.
  14. I wonder if part of this is how most funding works. To get your next lot of funding you need to show progress. That normally means you need to have shown positive results. If you have tried two different methods, one showed positive results and the other negative, both are valid and useful for the community. But you as a team only have the time or resource to write one paper, do you concentrate on the paper that will help you get funding or the one that won't, possibly with the intention that you'll write that one in the future?
  15. No, as has been explained to you, that is not how laser cooling works. Please review the posts in this thread.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.