backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 59 comment(s) - last by noblesville.. on May 2 at 11:29 PM
Princeton scientists create a new type of conductive matter.

The Hall effect is a well-known and understood material phenomenon. Passing a magnetic field through a conductor -- perpendicular to the flow of current -- forces the electrons to migrate to one side of the material rather than taking a typical straight line through it. This creates a surplus charge on one edge of the conductor, perpendicular to the direction of the current, while leaving the opposite edge empty. Sensors created to measure Hall effect are used by many electronic devices, from flow sensors to motion sensors to electric motor controls.

Delving into the atomic world, scientists found that by forcing electrons to move along a two-dimensional plane and subjecting them to powerful magnetic fields, the Hall effect became staggered, increasing in increments rather than steadily. This led to further work using superconducting materials where the scientists discovered that the electrons locked together in these conditions, creating a “quantum fluid.”

Working based on a model proposed by Duncan Haldane of Princeton, Charles Kane and his group of researchers at the University of Pennsylvania predicted that a material could exist or be created which displayed the quantum Hall effect without the use of an external magnetic field. Accelerated electrons in these materials would generate their own magnetic field thanks to the laws of relativity.

Princeton scientists have managed to create such a material. The group, led by Zahid Hasan used modern imaging techniques to observe the quantum Hall effect in their lab-grown bismuth-antimony crystal. Synchrotron photo-electron spectroscopy, which uses X-ray photons, was used to create an image of the electrons moving along the surface of the crystal.

While the Princeton group's work won't directly benefit electronics, the discovery of a material that exhibits the quantum Hall effect without external stimulus opens the doors to new ideas which might directly influence work in things like quantum computers as well as much more basic applications as seen in the myriad uses for Hall effect sensors today.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
If it sounds good, it is
By cyyc009 on 5/1/08, Rating: 0
RE: If it sounds good, it is
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 5/1/2008 9:42:41 AM , Rating: 4
The deteriorating economy is overblown. Otherwise R&D and the Tech markets are pushing ahead full steam.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By emarston on 5/1/2008 10:08:24 AM , Rating: 5
Amen to that... gotta love the press trying to create or sensationalize news rather than report it these days.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/1/2008 10:43:07 AM , Rating: 1
I disagree.

The economy is in fact deteriorating and getting worse in some areas. Why don't you try telling your idea to people that have perfect credit, stellar payment history, excellent liquidity and have just had their bank pull their line of credit (which was unused) out from under their feet overnight. It is happening more and more every day.

Home Equity loans fueled our economy for the last 5 - 6 years, and now they are gone. Disposable income has decreased through inflation in food (Thanks Ethanol! We love you for this one!), oil, and various consumer goods (as a direct result of oil rising in price creating higher shipping costs), raw materials etc. etc. With wages decreasing for most of Americans rather than increasing (though this has turned around slightly in recent months, with wages increasing ever so slightly), how do you explain off people being able to afford their daily costs going up while their income basically staying the same now, but was decreasing?

No, I think we're in this for the long haul. The news does sensationalize - most of the people on TV have no clue what is really happening. They aren't, however, far off base.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By porkpie on 5/1/2008 11:00:37 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Home Equity loans fueled our economy for the last 5 - 6 years, and now they are gone
Funny, I just got one less than 3 weeks ago. Those loans are gone for the people who bought $700K houses on a $60K salary. They should never have been given in the first place.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By BBeltrami on 5/1/2008 11:29:07 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
They should never have been given in the first place.

Agreed. The lack of business ethics on the part of Real Estate and Mortgage Brokers in this whole fiasco is staggering.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/1/2008 2:08:26 PM , Rating: 1
You're darned right they shouldn't have been given out to people like that.

However, my example refers to people making in excess of 6 figures, live in a modest home, never had any credit, payment, or other issues at all.

The bank just called up one day and was like - hey, that line of credit you have and don't use? Well guess what, it is gone because we have decided that home prices in your area have fallen (without ever doing an appraisal).

That is an eye opener. Sterling credit people are even being effected due to this disaster. The unscrupulous mortgage and real estate industry is indeed due for some regulation.

BUT - the blame doesn't go completely to them, it also goes to the buyer whom was naive and did not do the due diligence necessary to decide weather it was a financially sound decision or not. 3 parties all guilty. Something needs to be done.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 2:14:16 PM , Rating: 4
> "That is an eye opener."

Err, why? It doesn't matter what your income and credit history is -- a home equity line of credit requires equity .

If your home has decreased in value, and you don't have that equity, you don't have the credit.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/1/2008 2:21:44 PM , Rating: 2
That is the key, and I agree :)

If you read further in my post, you will see they revoked it without ever doing an appraisal.... Appraisals are generally the acceptable means of figuring out a homes worth.

They instead just decided that home prices had dropped in the area via gut instinct. This is where the problem lies and alludes to the banks being scared.

They had no factual backing to suggest that THIS particular home had dropped.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 3:06:11 PM , Rating: 2
Appraisals are based on the average home price in the area. If the bank knows for a fact that average has dropped, they don't need "feet on the ground" at the actual home to document anything.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/1/2008 3:16:37 PM , Rating: 2
If that were the case then why do banks hire an appraiser when you apply for a mortgage to appraise the home?

How do you know what the average home price is in an area and back that up with factual evidence without appraisals? Go to Zillow.com? Domania? MLS/FMLS listings? (now there's a REAL winner given anyone can list their home for whatever price they like without any data to back it up - the banks would be making fortunes - or losing them, if everyone took the listing prices as the REAL value of the home).

Are you saying there is a double standard? (perhaps alluding to my point in the first place)

I'm not a lender, but I have done many mortgages for clients as a side to what I really do for them. Every single one requires a physical appraisal WITHOUT exception.

Owner-done appraisals do not count. It is only the lenders appraisal which is valid.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 4:11:38 PM , Rating: 2
> "If that were the case then why do banks hire an appraiser when you apply for a mortgage to appraise the home?"

Two reasons. a) to prevent fraud, and b) to document the basic features of the house, so they know what "similar homes" in the area to which to compare it.

However, once they have that documentation, additional reappraisals do not in general need additional site visits.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/1/2008 4:42:05 PM , Rating: 2
Ahh, but what if the owner has made substantial improvements to their property?

Added new bathrooms, bedrooms, done expansions on the home?

I would argue that the homeowner could contest with the bank that an appraisal would have to be done to validate the true position of the home.

You can't just make a blanket statement that they can get by with nearby property as we've both just pointed out.

This is what is wrong with the lending industry - too much assumption. It has gone on for far too long and now we are suffering as a result of this assumption, structured products and quants that think they can statistically work themselves out of any jam.

I believe we will see far less assumption in the future and more requirements for hard fact. In this case, the bank never asked the homeowner if they had made improvements on their property, they just assumed the status quo. Do you not see the danger in this?


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 11:44:09 PM , Rating: 2
> "Ahh, but what if the owner has made substantial improvements to their property? Added new bathrooms, bedrooms, done expansions on the home?"

You're crawling far out on that hypothetical limb now. First of all, very few homeowners ever perform major construction on their homes that boosts property values by more than 20%...and home equity lines usually require at least a 20% margin in equity over the credit line.

Secondly, if they do very large imrovements, they usually finance them off an equity loan, rather than paying cash. And if they do that, their total equity doesn't increase, no matter how much the market value increases.

Third of all-- is any of this even relevant? So someone got their home equity line cancelled? If they truly have a a stellar credit rating and a pile of equity in their home, they can get another one. In about 15 minutes, in fact. None of this is hardly proof of serious economic trouble.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/2/2008 11:19:52 AM , Rating: 2
You really don't get it, do you?

I happen to work around this stuff all day, I've seen loan pool schedules, I've seen tranches, I've seen default schedules, I've seen up to the minute data on what is really going on.

The banks are grasping at straws here. The larger banks ARE going to be o.k. (as long as there is not a panic which there should not be), the smaller banks are hurting. Many have either gone out of business already, or were largely headed that way until the Federal Reserve opened wide their doors, and even then many of them may be bought out or acquired.

The banks are desperately trying to increase liquidity on the inside. The auction rate preferred mess has not helped things at all, the bond market has dropped a great deal - heck you can get an insured bond with a HIGHER yield than an uninsured one right now.

No, it is not the end of the world, no, we aren't going into a depression, but I fail to see how you can even imagine there is not an economic slowdown (hence deterioration). I gather you work in some other industry than the financial industry.

The fact is, the banks are squeezed and they are continuing to follow the path of guess here, guess there without feasible data. To another poster: no, it was not my home but someone elses. Banks are upping the bar considerably to get a mortgage right now versus what they were doing (which is good in the long-term, but bad for the housing market currently).

You're right, most people DO finance improvements with an equity loan, but there happens to be many people out there that are cash-rich who don't need to do that.

What I pointed out in my example of the line of credit is a symptom of what is really going on. It is clear as day as to what we face. You can nitpick and try to argue little details but you are missing the big picture.

The banks need scruitiny, the lenders need scrutiny and regulation, as well as the real estate business. At the minimum, they need to begin to enroach upon SEC or NASD-level scruitiny. It was a veritable free-for-all for so long and now we are all paying for it.

We're also paying for the rediculous subsidies that went towards ethanol through our food bills rather than them doing something logical in our government - which would be to revive Nuclear Power.

The bulk of the mess is the housing market, and with equity lines drying up, it will further hinder things in the near term. This is reality and fact.

I could go on but apparently you need to read more and perhaps spend ever day of the week in the middle of economics to understand what really is the crux of everything.

In the end, America will get out of this just fine, it will just take time to sort it all out. The Federal Reserve has taken significant measures to free up the money supply. For the meantime, I wouldn't go racking up credit card bills or spending your money like nothing is wrong at all. Cash is king right now.

Since you're so convinced we aren't in a downturn nor having any problems, why don't you do us all a favor and list all the supporting facts and data which show us that in fact, America is fine and all of this is completely made up.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By eman7613 on 5/1/2008 5:26:39 PM , Rating: 2
example: Harlem, the value of property there is skyrocketing, this is almost unquestionable. The bank does not need to spend time and money to send someone out, to confirm something they are 95% sure of, and 95% of the time that will save them money. The economy has CHANGED, dosen't mean its been shot in the knee cap and is utterly crippled.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/1/2008 5:45:08 PM , Rating: 2
Saving money and screwing a loyal customer are two different things.

The banks have been doing both and now it is finally biting everyone in the behind. You can maintain the status quo and allow the mess to continue or acknowledge there is a problem with lending practices and make corrections.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By TheBaker on 5/2/2008 1:47:31 AM , Rating: 2
The economy is not in trouble, it is the lenders that are having problems. So much so that your "loyal customers" who have spotless credit and always pay on time and don't rack up interest charges are not profitable. They're not screwing loyal customers, they're trying to stay afloat as they attempt to unload the billions of dollars worth of real estate that they now own. As to your home being reappraised without someone coming there:

"They instead just decided that home prices had dropped in the area via gut instinct. This is where the problem lies and alludes to the banks being scared.

They had no factual backing to suggest that THIS particular home had dropped."

You have no way of knowing what factual backing they had. If your bank just made loans to ten other people in the neighborhood and oversaw the sale of those homes, they have a very accurate picture of what the real estate in that area is worth. If the homes around you are selling for 200K, then your house is worth 200k as far as the bank is concerned. If you have made substantial improvements to it on your own dime, then yes, you CAN in fact request an on-site reappraisal. They will ask you why you want one, and if your answer is "I paid 250 for it five years ago, it should still be worth at least that" then they'll laugh at you. But if your house now has 1000 more square feet due to the two rooms you added on, they will be out there that week to re-appraise.

Stop feeling bitter about your bank dropping you and look at the big picture. These banks have to make money off someone. people with perfect credit aren't profitable in the short term, only the long term. As far in the hole as these guys are, they are having to reel in the lines and try to stay afloat long enough for the low-risk customers to actually be profitable, since the high-risk customers have now burned them.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By noblesville on 5/2/2008 11:29:23 PM , Rating: 2
You dont use the listing price alone. Most of the time you use the sold/pending price to determine the value of a home. Just as you said you can list your home for what ever price you want, but that doesn't mean it will sell.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 11:36:52 AM , Rating: 3
> "The economy is in fact deteriorating "

We're not even in a recession at present, much less a mild depression-- GDP is still growing, albeit slowly. The unemployment rate is at 5.1%, much lower than it was five years ago, and the decline in the dollar means US exports are booming at an unprecedented pace.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/1/2008 2:05:05 PM , Rating: 2
You don't have to have a recession (negative GDP) to have a deteriorating economy. Our GDP growth has slowed to a crawl comparative to what we were at. Our unemployment is low, yes, US exports are booming, but you can't deny the fact that the average citizen is hurting.

GDP growth slowing, rather than accelerating, is deterioration.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 2:12:39 PM , Rating: 1
> "GDP growth has slowed to a crawl comparative to what we were at. "

GDP growth has averaged just over 1% the past year. That's a higher rate than we saw in late 2001 and most of 2002, double what we saw in mid-2000, and far and away better than the negative growth we saw in late 1990/early 1991.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/1/2008 2:22:29 PM , Rating: 2
But is in fact less than we were seeing a couple of years ago.

The latest GDP figure was between .6 and .8. Below 1%. Deterioration man.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 11:56:25 PM , Rating: 2
I think the proper word for your position is "rationalization", not "deterioration".


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By dever on 5/2/2008 2:39:26 PM , Rating: 2
I would call deterioration (slowing) of growth, just that. The problem is when you claim deterioration (slowing) of the economy, when in fact it is growing (albeit at a slower rate). Words mean things.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 5/1/08, Rating: 0
RE: If it sounds good, it is
By snownpaint on 5/1/2008 1:32:03 PM , Rating: 2
5 - 12 years.. ha.. Things happen much faster now, then 8 years ago; a common statement from then. Quarterly statements cause finicky shareholders drop hammers when shares drop. 8 years ago, companies were sold for hundreds of millions, now all you see is tens of Billions. Why do you think? Also, the quickest way to sure up spending in a company is to cut divisions/workers. They are easy to hire back if needed and it makes the quarterly reports bounce back.

These large cooperations have more infulence and power over American's Economics, then the Executive branch (the top corporations spend more on advertising to you, then what is spent by the Gov't in this poorly directed war) . But I can tell you, War usually helps a falling economy, however, this war, is hitting the gas prices which we have been over reliant on then previous wars. Then someone had the great idea to tie food into these fuel cost increases. (A green idea that had more environmental political appeasement, then true effect)

What I can see in the future, is we can't run the same race, which we have done for too long.. The 100 meter is over, 1st USA.. time to look at the 400 meter, USA is currently 5th, and losing steam around the turn.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 5/1/2008 4:12:14 PM , Rating: 2
News moves much faster yes, but it still takes a long time to create, vote in, implement, and see the results from the implementation of any law. Example again, Clinton lower the standards for mortgage companies to give out loans...We are now see the results of this action - high foreclosures.
Change still changes at the same speed as before. People tend to over react more today therefore the change can seem more extreme.
I agree Corporation has a huge impact on our economy....That is why we need to lower the Corporate tax rates, of course we would be assuming the corporate executive would pass along the saving in the form of more and better jobs, and not their personal pocket book.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By dunno99 on 5/1/2008 8:36:23 PM , Rating: 2
Yes. So you're admitting to the fact that for the past 8 years, the Bush administration did absolutely NOTHING to prevent the bubble in the first place. Your example of Clinton lowering the standards and causing the housing bubble is like blaming the Second Amendment for gun violence. (and please don't give me the "the road to hell is paved by good intentions")

Last I recall, housing prices were still low back when Clinton was in office. So what's wrong with giving mortgage to people who can barely afford their houses? Are they the cause of the defaults? Hardly. Last I recall, it's a game of buy low, sell high. When Clinton's laws went into effect, these very same people bought houses. Then their houses INCREASED in value. What does that NOT mean? Their mortgages did NOT go up. They still paid the same mortgages (it wouldn't matter if it's 5/1 ARM or whatever...that's still 3 years of buffer before the bursting of the bubble). So these people are most likely not the ones to blame. In fact, they're probably the ones whose equity has doubled or tripled.

You know who're the ones to blame? It's the speculative buyers in the game and the lax lending rules that the banks followed. Let's ignore the speculative buyers for now (since it's just human history repeating itself). You know what? Banks don't have to lend out money! Furthermore, banks could've stepped out of the credit swaps as well! And that's what Goldman Sachs did - they stepped out and didn't get smacked across the face like Bear Stearns/E*Trade/JP Morgan/Merrill Lynch/Citibank/BOA/etc.... That and the fact that the government didn't react fast enough to tighten the loose lending practices. The whole point is that the government needs to be agile, not this lag-by-8-years attitude.

So why do you want to lower taxes for the corporations? If their taxes were so high, as you seem to be suggesting, I highly doubt there would've been bull run of 2006 and 2007, as well as the respective economic growth during that time. And last I recall, trickle-down economics is what's bringing on what Kenichi Ohmae coined "M-shape Society".

Of course, if you're on the "right" leg of that M, I guess your posts are just furthering your own agenda.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 11:54:31 PM , Rating: 2
> "So you're admitting to the fact that for the past 8 years, the Bush administration did absolutely NOTHING to prevent the bubble in the first place"

I can't even imagine the media firestorm which would have occurred, had Bush tried to reign in low-interest loans for low-income home buyers. How the accusations would have flown.

In any case, the President can only enforce laws already on the books. Additional legislation to regulate the banking industry -- if any such is even needed -- must be written by Congress.

The nice thing about such speculation bubbles is that they're self-correcting. In fact, had the government not begun meddling by underwriting most of the risk for these loans in the first place, the bubble would have grown much slower, and popped sooner.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/1/2008 2:19:32 PM , Rating: 2
I really don't want this to devolve into politics, but, as much as I hate Bush (and I voted for him), despite the fact that he is economically challenged, THIS economic mess we are in, this very one, is not his doing.

You are correct to point out that America did fall into a recession under Clinton's watch. You also should point out that Al Quaeda was allowed to rise in power under their watch and utter failure to do anything to prevent it (that one tomahawk missile event was NOT a retalitory action, it was a very well disguised attempt to divert attention away from the Lewinsky scandal at the time.. just look at the timing, I remember watching it on the news when it happened).

However, none of these (with the exception to mortgage changes) tax rebates, scandals, or our War in the Iraq (which Bush started to much chagrin), have caused our economic mess.

It is simply Poor Lending Practices with over-aggressive banks and lending institutions (sometimes predatory, alt-a no doc mortgages, creative income reporting etc. etc.), abuse of the system by Real Estate Agents that pretend to be financial experts (they aren't), and naive people whom decided that hey!, with an adjustable rate mortgage which is fixed for the next 3 years and is only interest only, we, with our 550 credit score can afford a 300,000.00 house instead of the 150,000.00 house we might have a slight chance in a billion to qualify for with a 30-year fixed mortgage.

No, we don't need to increase taxes at all, nor do we need to revoke the qualified-dividend tax as to some people (will only effect the rich), is innacurate due to the multitude of retiree's that will be living off of dividends, we need some oversight in the riskiest investment anyone can ever make...

It isn't a stock... oh no, it is buying a home. We also need the fed to lay off rate cuts and give our dollar a chance. Mortgages are backed by LIBOR primarily anyways, not the fed funds rate.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 5/1/2008 4:18:40 PM , Rating: 2
The Fed laying off the rate cuts will not effect our economy as much as, stopping allowing or encouraging corporations to move their headquaters to other countries and getting them to bring the work back to the USA.
Yes, I know some businesses are done much better overseas but we have gone way overboard.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By MrBlastman on 5/1/2008 4:44:49 PM , Rating: 2
With our dollar continuing to weaken, it might eventually become more cost effective once again to hire American workers over their foreign counterparts. ;)

I think at this time you will see an influx back into our country. Free Market rules all.

It has picked up some lost ground in recent days, but even people such as Warren Buffet still feel that our dollar will continue to weaken over the long term.


By Seemonkeyscanfly on 5/1/2008 5:04:42 PM , Rating: 2
true, labor will become cheaper here if dollar continues to drop so maybe your plan will work... Hate to have a weaker dollars just to bring work back here. However, need to get rid of all the tax breaks that are given out to companies that but large office or manufacturing plants in other countries.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By masher2 (blog) on 5/2/2008 12:00:26 AM , Rating: 3
> "even people such as Warren Buffet still feel that our dollar will continue to weaken over the long term. "

Of course, because for decades the dollar had been held artificially high. Dozens of nations and tens of millions of people overseas wanted dollars -- not to buy American goods with -- but simply for a stable, standard currency.

Now that other nations are developing more confidence in their own currency, the dollar's value is declining to a more natural level. That makes imported goods more expensive...but its a godsend for American business.


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By lompocus on 5/1/2008 9:33:30 PM , Rating: 2
At least everyone else's economy ends up going straight downhill whenever the US one does!

It isn't THAT horrid. As long as most electronics businessmen aren't the smartest people on the block and price components with the same number value (but a VASTLY different real price between europe, canada, aussie-land, and the US) I'm happy!

I aint the australian paying what's now essentially $100 USD for a standard GTA4 or any other game, am I? :D


RE: If it sounds good, it is
By TimberJon on 5/2/2008 11:37:18 AM , Rating: 2
Well thanks alot Sherlock Holmes for letting me know! I had no idea we were in it for the long haul. I thought I could just hit "Pause" and to get a snack any time I wanted. Maybe I could have just changed the channel and it would all go away.

Detective Obvious, as long as we draw breath we will be either knee deep or up to our eyebrows in crap for the rest of our lives. BTW FYI, the entire world is getting worse in all areas. Have there been any improvements? In anything?


It's cool...
By cscpianoman on 5/1/2008 10:00:08 AM , Rating: 2
It's cool to be sure. Mind-boggling, but cool, but as the article stated, however, they don't know what good they can use it for, if anything at all.

I like to think we are on the brink of the next major discovery that is going to change the world. This may be energy, health, computers or whatever! We are seeing advances in energy usage/creation, gene therapy is around the corner and computers are becoming even more powerful, yes, even to eventually play Crysis at full settings. (Seriously, that joke is getting really, really old.)

It first started with fire, then to language, the engine and most recently computers. Something is bound to happen in the next ten years that will change how we do things.




RE: It's cool...
By joex444 on 5/1/2008 10:21:04 AM , Rating: 2
The link the article has offers a use for such an effect, though. They said it could be used in quantum computing or spintronic devices. My understanding of spintronics (from "spin electronics") is that they work by "conducting" with spins rather than charge. I could be missing a part there, though, namely because CMR (colossal magnetoresistance) materials change resistance in magnetic fields and are applicable in spintronics. Change the B-field, and you change how strongly the spins align. Perhaps aligned spins are a lower resistance state, but that's just my guess.


RE: It's cool...
By MozeeToby on 5/1/2008 10:30:36 AM , Rating: 2
Well if you believe in the technological singularity we're on the brink of more than just one leap forward, more like about a hundred. Basically, the gap between major breakthroughs gets smaller as we use the old breakthroughs to make the new ones. Eventually, the gap will go to essentially null (theororized to be when we have truly intelligent computers that can design better versions of themselves).

If that were to ever happen, well, who knows? We might be zooming around Star Trek style in less than 100 years if people like Ray Kurzweil are right.


RE: It's cool...
By HVAC on 5/1/2008 1:34:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
... truly intelligent computers that can design better versions of themselves ...


A technological singularity is not going to occur in a vacuum from a sociological and/or religious singularity/crisis. We have a hard enough time now trying to adapt our society to the present pace of technological change.


RE: It's cool...
By Murst on 5/1/2008 12:07:09 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
It first started with fire, then to language, the engine and most recently computers. Something is bound to happen in the next ten years that will change how we do things.

The bible is pretty clear that He didn't start w/ fire.

In the beginning there was nothing. God said, 'Let there be light!' And there was light. There was still nothing, but you could see it a whole lot better.


Usage?
By MatthiasF on 5/1/2008 10:42:47 AM , Rating: 2
Long distance, high-volume electrical power-lines.

A significant portion, perhaps more than 60%, of all electrical power generated for delivery to homes and business is lost from electron leakage.

Research into room-temperature superconductors was the only hope to reduce this major inefficiency, but if they can create a material that can compact the electrons, spin them in some sort of sub-atomic rifling to produce a gravimagnetic field to create the Hall effect and send them at a higher speed through the lines, less electrons will be lost while also attaining higher throughput.

It would be a huge win-win for electrical distribution, significantly negating Joule's law.

I can't think of a way for this to be applied to computers, though.




RE: Usage?
By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 11:25:34 AM , Rating: 3
> "A significant portion, perhaps more than 60%, of all electrical power generated for delivery to homes and business is lost from electron leakage"

I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'electron leakage', but transmission line losses in the US account for about 7% of total power generated, not 60%.


RE: Usage?
By MatthiasF on 5/1/2008 2:42:06 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, mixed numbers. Hard to stay focused while at work.

Meant to say more than 60% of all electricity run over high voltage lines which have high losses. In some areas, the cost of losses outweighs the cost of production. The 7.2% you mention is from 1995, before energy deregulation. Now that electricity is traveling farther as companies seek markets with higher commodity prices, transmission losses are thought to have broken 20%.

Wikipedia had a graph showing the difference from 1992-2004 in two year increments, but it seems to be gone now from the Electrical Power Transmission article. I'm pulling numbers from an email I sent that referenced it, but the link doesn't work anymore. I'll see if I still have a copy of the chart at home.


--> d'_'b -->
By jlips6 on 5/1/2008 11:43:19 AM , Rating: 2
Quantum fluid? hella cool.
I am not an expert in quantum physics, so could someone explain to me how relativity could make electrons create their own magnetic field? I know how relativity works, and how electrons work, but together they elude my comprehension.




RE: --> d'_'b -->
By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 12:27:46 PM , Rating: 3
That statement is a bit of a misnomer. Both QED (quantum electrodynamics) and classical mechanics predict an electron (or any spinning charged particle) will carry a magnetic moment. QED, however, predicts the value much closer....it is, in fact, the most accurately predicted quantity in all of scientific history, and one of the reasons we have so much faith in the theory.


RE: --> d'_'b -->
By jlips6 on 5/1/2008 7:19:40 PM , Rating: 2
i had no idea.
</gir>


By novacthall on 5/1/2008 10:44:09 AM , Rating: 6
From the book of "Futurama", chapter 3, verse 4:

Racetrack PA announcer: And the winner is number three, in a quantum finish.
Professor Farnsworth: No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!




electrons can never be imaged!
By HilbertSpace on 5/1/2008 12:07:07 PM , Rating: 2
It is incorrect to say that electrons are imaged. You can NEVER image electrons as they are essentially point particles (for all we know).




RE: electrons can never be imaged!
By bobsmith1492 on 5/1/2008 8:02:48 PM , Rating: 2
They have mass, though, so they must have some volume or else wouldn't they would be infinitely dense? It seems that would be a problem but then I don't think subatomic structures are completely understood yet, either...


By masher2 (blog) on 5/1/2008 11:49:42 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, QM tells us that electrons (and all other subatomic particles) aren't point objects. but rather wave functions...a cloud of probabilities that covers some finite (or in the case of an unbound particle, infinite) region.

When a particle is "observed" (interacts in any manner) the wave function collapses, and the particle interacts at a specific location...but even then, its not a zero-dimensional point, else the momentum of the particle would be infinite (by the uncertainty principle).


By maxcue on 5/1/2008 11:03:06 AM , Rating: 2
It is my fondest hope that this fabulous discovery of what sounds like a truly-fundamental effect will be developed in time to produce an effective Republican Disintegrator Field quickly enough to assure the much-needed result in the fall elections. Think of the irony! Republicans melted into a glowing pool of Bose-Einstein condensate (they all act as one anyway, lol) by the power of Science, a concept they have consistently denied the existence of a fought against the entire previous seven, miserable years. Knowledge is power! Onward Progress!




By darkpaw on 5/1/2008 11:26:46 AM , Rating: 2
Change that from "Republicans" to "professional politicians" and it sounds like a good start.


By aftlizard on 5/1/2008 2:09:51 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah because destroying all thought processes different from your own is always the best way to advance. I mean look at how advanced Nazi Germany became when they did it right?


By Jimbo1234 on 5/1/2008 2:20:38 PM , Rating: 2
It's nice to see that some of the research done at our facility is making headlines. We just provide the light and instrumentation. They bring the brains and do the research.

For those who would like some more information about synchrotron light, you can go to www.src.wisc.edu.

Sebastian




YES!!!
By nvalhalla on 5/1/08, Rating: 0
Yaaaaaaa. That's all good but will it
By PAPutzback on 5/1/08, Rating: -1
"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki