[science and technology] second quiz

1. What does Cytology study?

2. Absolute zero, in Fahrenheit, is how many degrees below?

3. What is an eolic power station?

4. What is an Ishihara test used for?

5. What is panphobia?

Answers

The structure, function and life of cells, -459.7ºF, wind powered, to test for colour blindness, fear of everything

[country quiz] five to test your geography

1. It is long and thin and near the coast. It actually elected a communist leader years ago and is next door to a country whose colours are light blue and white. It might sound cold but in fact it crosses many climactic regions from warm to cool.

2. This country is constantly living in danger – a geological fault line runs north south across its middle. It has spectacular mountains and hot springs and its capital is known for its white architecture and the multi-coloured roofs of its houses. It spends half the year under wet snow.

3. This country has many engineers, especially automotive, and likes causing wars which it doesn’t win. For centuries it was not even a country – it was a series of dukedoms, under one loose banner. In the south is a beautiful forest and it has many beautiful castles.

4. This country is long and sprawls across many islands, as well as half of another big island it disputes with its large southern neighbour. Bombings there have tarnished its image of exotic South East Asia. The wife of its former corrupt President was known for her thousands of pairs of shoes.

5. This country is hot and has an aging leader whom most of the world thinks is a madman who sponsors terrorists. It was the scene of huge battles in the Second World War, mainly between the British, Australians and Germans. From its desert you could sail across the large sea to Europe.

Answers

Chile, Iceland, Germany, The Philippines, Libya

[dark matter] and the limits of science

Electromagnetic radiation is often optical - the visible light you see with your eyes. But this is just one type of light energy. Electromagnetic radiation comes in many wavelengths: radio waves (the longest), infrared, optical, ultraviolet, X-rays and short gamma rays (the shortest, and also the highest form of energy. Galaxies, nebulae, stars, trees, microscopic bugs and anything else that can be observed glows with energy at one of these wavelengths.

In recent decades, researchers have become increasingly convinced that there is a vast amount of material in the universe that does not glow at all. This mysterious "dark matter" is believed by most scientists to be the most common stuff in the universe, perhaps making up 90 percent or more of the total mass. Researchers say the Coma Cluster of galaxies shows effects of gravity that can only be explained by the presence of some unseen dark matter.

Dark matter does not emit enough energy to be directly detected. But indirectly, researchers note its presence. Anything that has a mass exerts the force that we call gravity. Dark matter - or something that we have yet to find - exerts a gravitational pull on objects in and around distant galaxies, and even on light emitted by those objects, say scientists at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center.

By measuring these mysterious effects of gravity, researchers determine how much "extra" gravity is present, and hence how much extra mass, or dark matter, must exist. In large clusters of galaxies, for example, scientists say that five to 10 times more material exists than can be accounted for by the stars and gas they find.

What is dark matter made of?

Normal matter - you, your computer and the air you breathe - is made of atoms, composed of protons, neutrons and electrons - "baryonic" matter. They suspect some dark matter is of the normal, baryonic variety. This might include brown dwarf stars and other objects that are simply too small, or too dim, to be seen from great distances.

But most dark matter is thought to be non-baryonic.

Glossary of wavelengths of light

Radio: Wavelengths longer than infrared and very low energy.
Infrared: Wavelengths longer than the red end of visible light and shorter than microwaves (roughly between 1 and 100 microns). Little infrared radiation reaches Earth's surface, but some can be observed by high-altitude aircraft or telescopes on tall mountains.
Optical/Visible: Electromagnetic radiation at wavelengths visible to the human eye. We perceive this radiation as colors ranging from red (longer wavelengths about 700 nanometers) to violet (shorter wavelengths about 400 nanometers).
Ultraviolet: Wavelengths shorter than the violet end of visible light. Earth's atmosphere blocks most ultraviolet light.
X-rays: Very short wavelengths and very high-energy; X-rays have shorter wavelengths than ultraviolet light but longer wavelengths than gamma rays.
Gamma rays: The highest energy, shortest wavelength electromagnetic radiation. Usually, they are thought of as any photons having energies greater than about 100 keV (kiloelectron volts).

[Robert Roy Britt, Understanding Dark Matter and Light Energy, 05 January 2001]

Science is the observation and explanation of the observable and recordable. The hegemony of science in most people’s minds is a desire to replace the eternal verities of the Judaeo-Christian tradition with that of another eternal verity – Science.

The ‘dial-in’ mentality, so beloved of the middle-aged male, especially one involved in the technology field, has inherent flaws if it does not take into account the dark matter, the metaphysical, the non-observable and unrecordable.

Someone said to me recently that if you don’t argue from within the laws of physics, you can argue anything you like without having to support it.

Well yes, that is so. If 90% or so of the matter in the universe is dark, then why can’t 90% or so of what actually exists out there, including G-d and Heaven, also be so? Why can’t it?

Our technophile rails against that because he finds terminology like ‘G-d’, ‘the heavenly host’ and ‘the holy spirit’ so unscientific that it has to, ipso facto, be:

WRONG.

By what logical process is something wrong if it is couched in distasteful terminology? If DK, for example, couches his arguments in an ocean of swearing, does that make them any less valid?

So, all power to the ‘giant lizards’ and ‘shape-shifters’, I say. The notion that the deity Science is omnipotent is now being so seriously eroded [see climate change and evolution] that even its most ardent supporters are being forced onto the back foot.

In an age where science and technology are attempting to stamp out the last vestiges of ‘superstition’, which they like to lump under one all-inclusive header ‘religion’, a pejorative term for verities and idiocies all thrown together on one funeral pyre, unfortunately for the technophiles, questions unexplainable by Science are appearing more and more.

This is the basis for Armageddon, as it was for Hesse’s war between men and machines in Steppenwolf. The technophile disciple of the indifferent god Science, the one who feels he is the most rational of all creatures, blindly denies the existence and influence of the metaphysical in the universe.

If he was a true scientist, he’d try to take it into account in his modelling of the cosmos, instead of spitting out the word ‘religion’ as some sort of logical end to all speculation over that which we cannot understand. Where does the Logos fit into his model, for example?

Man is not G-d – he’s just a very clever bunny, that’s all, with distinct physical and mental limitations, who’s learning all the time. Technological advances are wonderful, especially in the solution of problems in medicine, transport, provision of resources and so on. No argument there. But to provide a solution without taking into account disagreeable phenomena – that is a recipe for the ultimate failure of that solution.

[housekeeping] comment moderation until monday

On the weekend, I do not have access to the internet and thus any posts are on 'scheduled'. Knowing this, an unprincipled person has apparently popped up again. He left a comment on this blog some days ago but fortunately the failsafe caught him out and it was deleted.

He knew that my failsafe was not going to work this weekend and so left a comment, not so long ago, accusing me of all sorts of things, basing them on hearsay and innuendo. Naturally, these statements are actionable, which he seems to be hoping I'll initiate but I have no intention of having anything whatsoever to do with him.

Unfortunately for this person, a friend of mine saw the comment, contacted me and has had to alter his own weekend plans to allow me to come up here and deal with the problem. I now have another failsafe in place which will only operate from Monday during business hours but until then, I'm sorry, dear readers but I've had to switch on moderation.

There are many bloggers of some years standing who know exactly who this person is and yes - he doesn't seem to be able to leave matters alone, does he? Perhaps his former friends could ask him to desist.

For now, for the readers who nothing about any of this, sorry for this temporary inconvenience.

[wolfram alfa] sounds good for bloggers

‘Wolfram Alpha‘.

As a technophile [:)], I'm going for it.

UPDATES

Here

Here

[english] laying the groundrules

How well do you know your own language? Give the correct variant in each case:


1. He laid/lay down on the bed to take a nap.

2. Having laid/lain in bed all day, she got up to eat.

3. Lie/lay the baby down on the bed and have a rest!

4. She laid/lay the baby on the bed while she took a nap.

5. The chickens laid/layed the eggs and then took a nap.


Oblique, simplistic answers

Lay – laid – laid - laying is ‘to place something down’.
Lie – lay – lain - lying is ‘to place yourself down’.
Lie – lied – lied – lying is ‘to tell an untruth’.
Layed is a misspelling and does not exist. Use laid instead.