Nothing like experiment to show that a great theory sucks: In Space No One Can Hear your Nitrocellulose Explode – Wired Science.
A video of tests illustrating why nitrocellulose is not suitable to blow open a rocket’s parachute container at high altitudes:
The Aeromobil is another entry in the roadable airplane “market” and is certainly one of the most beautiful: Aeromobil flying car prototype gets off the ground for the first time – gizmag.com
Hank Green talks about the history of the chemistry sets for young people and why they disappeared:
He also discusses attempts to resurrect chemistry sets such as the SPARK Competition contest at Science Play and Research Kit:
SPARK is a project of the Society for Science & the Public, in collaboration with the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation that will inspire adults, through the challenge of competition, to generate a new set of experiences and activities that capture children’s imagination in science, spark and fuel their interests, and foster persistent curiosity and creativity.
The top prize is $50k. The competition
challenges participants to reimagine the chemistry set for the 21st century and generate a new set of experiences and activities that encourage imagination and interest in science, recapturing the spirit of the chemistry set.
Citizen science programs like that at Galaxy Zoo are making, and have long made, significant contributions to many fields: Citizen science is the new black – Bbc
Although he would not have been familiar with the term, Charles Darwin built his theory of evolution by natural selection on the evidence supplied by hundreds of citizen scientists all over the world. Some 15,000 of the letters he sent or received survive at the Darwin Correspondence Project in the Cambridge University Library.
Associate director Alison Pearn says Darwin could never have compiled the astonishing wealth of evidence to support his theory without the enthusiastic support of amateur naturalists.
The following two items involve topics that you may not be fully understand (I sure don’t) but can still be fun if you have any interest in fundamental physics:
Nobel physicist Gerard ′t Hooft offers some interesting speculation on what sort of physics might lie beneath quantum mechanics: Does Some Deeper Level of Physics Underlie Quantum Mechanics? An Interview with Nobelist Gerard ’t Hooft – Critical Opalescence/Scientific American Blog Network
(‘t Hooft, by the way, is an enthusiastic supporter of the Mars One initiative: Prof. Dr. Gerard ‘t Hooft, ambassador of Mars One – Mars One.)
===
Joe Polchinsky gives a general overview of the black hole intersection of quantum mechanics and general relativity and the key questions that arise there:
Caption:
Speaker: Joe Polchinsky, Kavli Institute for Particle Physics, UC Santa Barbara
Abstract:
Thought experiments have played an important role in figuring out the laws of physics. For the unification of quantum mechanics and gravity, where the phenomena take place in extreme regimes, they are even more crucial. Hawking’s 1976 paper “Breakdown of Predictability in Gravitational Collapse” presented one of the great thought experiments in the history of physics, arguing that black holes destroy information in a way that requires a modification of the laws of quantum mechanics. Skeptics for years failed to poke holes in Hawking’s argument, but concluded that if quantum mechanics is to be saved then our understanding of spacetime must break down in a radical way.
Dr. Polchinsky will present some of the history of these ideas, what has already been learned from this puzzle, and the recent `firewall’ controversy, which argues that Einstein’s theory breaks down radically for an observer falling into a black hole.