What is Digg?53 Comments
- saxreturns, on 07/02/2008, -0/+31I've been dreaming about fusion power becoming a reality ever since I first read about it at the age of nine. If it actually happens anytime soon, I may just spray medical nanobot power packs with excitement.
- db0255, on 07/02/2008, -0/+14Sperm powered nanobots...that's actually a pretty neat idea...
- Shogi, on 07/03/2008, -1/+14They've turned sperm into nanobots?
What's next, baby powered lawnmo- O_O
*runs to patent office* - BradOFarrell, on 07/03/2008, -1/+10Pfft, build a machine that I can ejaculate into and create enough energy to travel back in time and THEN we'll talk.
- wildfire, on 07/02/2008, -1/+8I was going to make a joke about lesbians, fists, and babies but I couldn't think of anything.
- Protean1, on 07/03/2008, -0/+6Focus Fusion? Really?
Come on now, couldn't they at least 'mention' Bussard's Polywell Fusion research?
What is it with science rags? They squeal and jump all over the latest quackery, when
there's Real Science going on, and it stands a damn good chance of paying off.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell - sonar1, on 07/03/2008, -1/+7you where in that parallel universe
- Velnich, on 07/03/2008, -0/+6No
- Shiftgood, on 07/02/2008, -0/+6There was an M-Theory and i wasn't notified?
- Chan815, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5so your telling me that my sperm have the power to heal blood clots...imagine the possibilities
- redneckblues, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5How are they going to manage the injections?
"Honey come here, it's time for your checkup!" - CrushThemTorg, on 07/03/2008, -0/+5So I tells this broad: I got something that'll clear out your blood clots.
- BradOFarrell, on 07/03/2008, -0/+4Sh--shut upppp. You're giving away my A+ "joke that can be applied to most articles that list things" material.
- Fordi, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3Relax. They're not talking about injecting ejaculate or genetic material; just utilizing the bio-mechanical metabolic chain that runs spermatozoa tails.
- Ramble, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3Tell me when we get plasmids.
- lineweight, on 07/03/2008, -1/+4Ummm....i think i would just feel really dirty after having that injected in me. ...Maybe that's just cause i grew up in the States and we're weird about anything related to sex/reproduction/boobs here.
- kipmartin, on 07/03/2008, -0/+32 dimensions of time? does that mean science has discovered Do-overs?!? !
- riskybeats, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3I don't think people get you are mixing all three ideas into one.
- Terr01, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3You forgot the sarcasm tag.
Next you'll post about that "water powered" car, right?
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments ...
http://mistersnitch.blogspot.com/2005/11/there-rea ...
Okay, so it's not nearly as bad as a perpetual motion machine, but basically they claim to have discovered a way to get energy out of dirt-common hydrogen by turning it into... uh... magical wimpified lower-energy hydrogen that requires new physics theories to even exist. - dcshiderly, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2Really. What specifically, in his theory of operation, makes you think so? The group of researchers he led at Texas A&M held the world record for "highest temperature" for a few years around the turn of the century, over 2.1 billion kelvin. It's in the operational range for p-B11 fusion, what's to say it doesn't work? Chile's university system is fronting money for research, certainly an enterprising physics student or professor could disprove Lerner's math.
- dwninjungleland, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3"Lerner claims he requires just $750,000 in funding and two years of work to prove his process generates more energy than it consumes."
-Suuuuch a lie. - tapeworm77, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2They keep coming, and coming, and coming.
- iamacyborg, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2There's no such thing as $60 a kilowatt... you mean $60 a kilowatt hour? So if I leave a 60-watt bulb on all day it cost me $30? So what I sell my kids to dog food company to make electric bill? Is that what you want scientists? Some new form of population control in disguise? Do you know how big of a carbon footprint my kids have?
- bruce1q, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2They must mean $60/MWh for the fusion reactor - $60/KWh will put you in the poor house pretty fast!
- thebassmaster, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2Nanobots vs Contracepticons!
- Wakkyweed, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2Just last night my wife was telling me that there would be very little significant change in our day to day lives in the next 40 years. I assured her there would be, and cited fusion power and nanotechnology, along with genetic engineering, as three things that will change our lives enormously.
She said,"I don't see how those things could change our lives."
There's nothing I can do but sigh. - Ugoff, on 07/03/2008, -2/+3Hey baby, I've got a fusion reactor in my pants.
- djholybolt, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1I don't know if you actually read the article or not, but it means that they can use the very small sperm for flying through blood streams with nanobots attatched to them, using them as the locomotive for treatment.
- kirk23, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1mirror, pl0x?
- filmbandit, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1mirror?
- Ramble, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1But we do have a lot of the other stuff, like computers playing humans at chess, satellites, Tvs in the seats of aircraft, etc.
- estacado, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1Moving an island.
- praetoriansword, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Yea...because the U.S. is the only country left that hasn't yet acclamated to its citizens being pumped full of sperm from anonymous donors for its healing capabilities. Bunch of damn puritans if you ask me.
- dwninjungleland, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2Your comment would probably be a lot more well received without all of the glaring errors.
- terencec, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1oh damn nanomachines with sperm... do they regulate soldier's emotions, and actions? since those who controls the battlefield, controls history
- Wakkyweed, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1I sighed because she was unable to comprehend how different our society would be if we had unlimited cheap power through fusion, the ability to make custom organisms that can do almost anything or become more than human through genetic engineering, and being able to build healing machines tiny enough to flow through our veins with nanotechnology. We may not know exactly where these technologies may take us, but the potential for societal change is massive.
- Ramble, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1What they've done is impossible, I hope you know that.
- materia7, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1sperm really does seem to capture the imagination of some
- Bfuertes, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2Now they just need to make nanobot contraceptives and we're golden.
- Ramble, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1But utilising the proteins in the tail of the sperm does make it sperm powered, sort of.
- donjacko, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1since when does using respiration to make ATP make it sperm powered?
that is the same process every cell in your body uses to release energy, and as for finding the right chain of enzymes, they could just isolate the mitachondria in the cells that carry out this process. - actual, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1You can see Lerner pitch his ideas here:
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1518007279479871760
Sounds pretty convincing. - Terr01, on 07/03/2008, -1/+1Why sigh? It's not like anybody really knows how they could change our lives either. At least she's honest :P
Let's see... 40 years ago would be 1968... Wow, what a coincidence, that's matches exactly what I was thinking of: Didn't you ever see 2001: A Space Odyssey?
What has, for example, spaceflight done for our lives? Was it anything like that? (No. Only satellite communications.) Do we have HAL-level AI? Nah. Human hibernation? Nope. - fdxfield, on 01/14/2009, -0/+0We should allow nature to ride its coarse. We are meddling in God's affairs. We will regret this.
- Rudegar, on 07/03/2008, -0/+0sperminator nanobots that goes "i'll be back"
- DutchGuilder, on 07/03/2008, -1/+1Meanwhile in the real world without government funding, pragmatists are producing results that match a simple physical model regardless of 90 years of mathematical dogma: http://www.blacklightpower.com
- Velnich, on 07/03/2008, -1/+1Fascinating, each idea even more than the one before.
- davidsf1, on 07/04/2008, -0/+0Time a period we use to record events. why dont physicists remove time from equations and replace time with just the recorded events instead.
- Dogdirt, on 07/22/2008, -0/+0Read his paper. It's crap. Check his references. They're crap. Notice how his paper's not peer reviewed? That's because... it's crap. Lerner may have been a scientist, but those days are long gone as he's pitching back of the envelope calculations and is definitely a crackpot. I hope Soto's group is fast realizing that they made a mistake with Lerner.
Folks, I know that people like Lerner might get your hopes up, but there really are no free lunches when it comes to plasma physics. After you've ready his terrible paper which clearly has not been scrutinized, go read papers in the field of DPF and you'll see for yourself that Lerner's just trying to get funding. - oveedrx, on 07/03/2008, -0/+0my mind was just blown.
good read -
Show 51 - 53 of 53 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is