What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
The camera starts rolling on Best Buy holiday campaign. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - A behind the scenes look at one employee's singing debut.
56 Comments
- hootpie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23I'll wait until black holes can dual boot OSX and XP before I buy one.
- dnder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Let me stop you right there, evolution is not just a *theory*, unlike black hole theories. It is indeed an observed FACT, like the theory of gravity. Although it is a fact that apples fall to the ground, gravity is also considered a *theory*, like evolution. So don't be so quick to dismiss evolution just because of your misunderstandings of the word "theory".
- thelsdj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7You do have a good point about the way scientists go about their work.
Basically they look at some effect and try to guess at a cause, and then on top of that guess they build more guesses, some of these they can actually test, but a TON of them they currently have no way of testing, but continue to build new guesses on top of them.
Not to say this is a bad thing, its better than just sitting around and waiting for a way to test things before they make new guesses.
But what it means is that a lot of advanced scientific disciplines that depend on these guesses are a house of cards. If one theory is proven incorrect, a whole ton may need to be scrapped.
The important thing is to keep scientists honest, if someone comes along with proof that an existing theory is wrong they need to easily give it up and move on, which sometimes doesn't work out very well.
As much as I get pissed off at scientists sometimes for their dogmatic beliefs, I love them for thinking up cool ***** like this, rock on all you scientists! - baaadbart, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"Ok. Hawking claims for 30 years that black holes destroy everything that comes into them... And suddenly he just changes his mind?"
Not quite. Hawking was the first scientist (that I know of) that stated that black holes give off radiation, meaning black holes aren't as 'black' as scientists thought. He said, however, that this radiation gave no information about what what gobbled up. Now, he has backtracked on this theory and now feels it may give information. It is not uncommon at all for scientists to back out of some of their theories when they are shown evidence that contradicts what they believe. - webgod61, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7nice, they finally found something capable of running Vista.
- EEBaum, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Nearly all the information that enters my mouth escapes via a variety of orifices. Perhaps I'll be a computer too?
I'm guessing that the information doesn't exactly make it through intact. - thelsdj, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8GARLAND, TX - 3D Realms Entertainment's highly anticipated Duke Nukem Forever, the follow-up to one of the all-time best-selling PC games, Duke Nukem 3D, will now be built around scientists highly praised Black Hole (tm) technology.
George Broussard, project leader for Duke Nukem Forever had this to say, "The switch to the Black Hole engine was simply a business decision, and it came down to what we wanted to do with Duke Nukem Forever and how best to achieve it."
"The game should not be significantly delayed", noted Broussard, "but it will take a little time to get up to speed with the new engine and learn how to exploit it. Fortunately, all of our game data will transfer very easily and we see being back to where we were within 2 to 3 epoch."
People who have seen the Duke Nukem Forever videos, or back room demo voiced concerns that some of the items they saw would be lost. "Not at all" says Broussard. "If anything, the demos showed what we could do with licensed technology and how we can extend it. We intend to apply the same ideas and efforts into the Black Hole engine and push it until it breaks. Fans can expect all the stuff they've seen to make the crossover to the Black Hole engine."
.....
I could continue but I think I was already beating the deceased equine enough. - ckpcw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Black holes are where God divided by zero.
- HeyThereTaylor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Not to discredit the source, but New Scientist isn't exactly the lead forum for scientific debate, they like to announce findings as if they're ground breaking when they may have little or no relevance in the field. I've always felt the need to take their articles with a grain of salt.
- trogdoor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4If there is an entangled particle inside the black hole interacting with one outside the black hole does that mean that a black hole is not truly a singularity or that the entangled particle is somehow isolated from the singularity?
- memoriesofgreen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"I bet black holes turn out to be just big, giant, un-reflective balls.", close, but their are alternative theories:
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18925423.600.html - felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If you're just commenting so you can link to your blog, please don't bother. Even if someone does click on your link, they'll just be annoyed that you were putting blog spam in the comments. I'm guessing that's not the kind of traffic you want.
- jackel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Hawking defines the black hole's temperature as T, for a Schwarzchild black hole, i.e. non-charged and non-rotating:
T = hbar/(8 pi k m)
This can be rewritten as:
T = (hbar c^3)/(8 pi G k m)
This represents a decrease in the black hole's energy, through an emision, this means that there is a net loss of mass. The following equations demonstrate complete black hole sublimation.
The Schwarzchild radius is r, for any black hole with a given mass m:
r = 2 G m/c^2
this equation yeild and area of A:
A = 4 pi r^2
A = 16 pi G^2 m^2/c^4
Hawking's radiation, as it is known, has a power proportional tot eh hole area and its temperature. e=1
P = sigma A T^4
P = (sigma hbar^4 c^8)/(256 pi^3 G^2 k^4 m^2)
restated:
P = K/m^2
where K == (sigma hbar^4 c^8)/(256 pi^3 G^2 k^4) = 3.563 x 1032 W kg^2
The Power of Hawking radiation is the rate of energy loss, obviously.
so:
P = -dE/dt
As Einstein so famously stated, energy is directly related to mass of a body:
E = m c^2
P = -dE/dt can be rewritten as:
P = -(d/dt) (m c^2)
P = -c^2 dm/dt
Setting this equal to our expression of power P = k / m^2:
-c^2 dm/dt = K/m^2
This may be seperated out using standard diferential techniques:
m^2 dm = -K/c^2 dt
Integrate over m from mu -> 0 (original mass to zero mass, or complete sublimation) and over t trom 0 -> tau:
tau = c2/(3 K) mu^3
So as we can see, black hole sublimation is proportional to its mass cubed.
Pretty simple, right? Stay in school. - RamMasterRay, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4This sounds like something a crazy hobo would yell at the bus stop. Black holes are computers yearghl wahh!
- darryl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Says black holes can be computers "if enormous theoretical and practical hurdles can first be overcome"... And pigs would fly if it wasn't for the "enormous theoretical and practical hurdles"... Any scientific article with a title that ends in a question mark should be looked at with skepticism.
- jschrab, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Some say "...space program?! Why do we spend a dime on it?!..." It seems to be just another way of saying "I have no idea how modern technology is developed or where it came from".
How about satellite communications? General electronics miniaturization efforts? How about a growing understanding of bone mass loss due to low-gravity environments and having that contribute to the understanding of osteoporosis?
For every failed probe on or around Mars, what it took to get it THAT far has contributed to science and engineering greatly. Saying that money spent on space programs is without value is ignorant. - jackel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3we should remember the major contributions to the world that have stemmed from space exploration and research. for example:
Disabled patient eye tracking software
Aircraft navigation intruments
Baby formula
modern skiboots
Cardiac Monitors
Night Vision Cameras
Scratch resistant lenses
air quality monitors
smoke detectors
fog-less goggles
quartz watches
and belive it or not:
dustbuster
sportsbra
I could go on but I think I made my point. There is more to it than just ants. - gamabunta, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Scientists have been following these theories like a bunch of dumb puppies."
But the fact that it is a theory does allow room for change, even if it is many years later. - iceberg299, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Scientists use precise language to describe the status of their work. A theory is by definition, dynamic. Please see http://wilstar.com/theories.htm for more info.
- trogdoor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Also what part of this theory suggests that any sort of computation can be done other than the fact that there is an input and an output?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1amazing!
- timewarrior, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I am not quite sure they have really detected a black hole yet.Agree that neutron stars exist but do they really not let anything out?Are these x-rays from materials outside the horizon or are they just radiations from these neutron stars?One thing they have not confirmed is the hawking radiation.The rest of the evidence is just a presence of high gravitation field.The current theory of cosmology is misguided.Pure astrophysics is our best tool to understand the universe.
- Chozabu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"The work suggests that black holes could one day be used as incredibly accurate quantum computers"
I think this is a bit implausable...
or rather, before then i expect we will have good cold fusion, and DNF will have been released - KidVicious, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I found it! I call it a Hawking Hole...
- jackel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The actual process involves a particle and antiparticle being created at the edge of the event horizon. The antiparticle falls back into the singularity, allowing the particle to escape. This was the thrust of Steven Hawkings research. The debate has been whether or not information is transferred during this process. Quantum theory does not allow for any quantum information to be lost. This has been a major sticking point for black hole physics.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Where should I 'plug in' the power cord?
- sstidman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Until we understand quantum gravity, we're not going to be running Linux on a black hole,""
Okay, but how about XGL? Can I run XGL on a black hole? - riskable, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I was going to say... Linux may not run on black holes NOW. Give a couple of hardware hackers a lot of free beer and stuff them into a dark room for a weekend and we'll at least get the kernel to boot. Who knows, maybe inside black holes there exists Gnomes and Daemons after all.
This new theory states that half a qubit is lost when a black hole emits it's quantum radiation. If that is true, we now know why Jesus Saves.
-Riskable
"I have a license to kill -9" - timewarrior, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://digg.com/science/Black_Holes_Don_t_Exist_
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Didn't the last digg article about black holes say that they didn't even exist?
- richiejp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The basic theory of evolution has been proven beyond reasonable doubt (not the specifics of how things evolve, just the basic notion of natural selection and mutations in DNA), thus it can be treated as fact. All theories, regardless of how solid they are, are contested from time to time, but evolution gets contested more often simply because it contradicts the bible.
Now what was the original subject again? Oh yes black holes. - rhawk301, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1+digg for cool science.
- Cglass, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Now all microsoft has to do is buy all the black holes, and have a monopoly on that market too. :P Just jokes, I love you bill.
- Grimmeh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Disabled patient eye tracking software"
I thought that was a military thing for the Apache helicopter? - fico, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree. I really wish sites like this would stop posting stuff from new scientist. I keep seeing these amazing headlines thinking that some huge hurdle has been overcome only to find it is an article from NS. The are tabloid science at best.
- LongLostStar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"The work suggests that black holes could one day be used as incredibly accurate quantum computers – if enormous theoretical and practical hurdles can first be overcome."
I think that the last part of this quote hits the spot right on. The practical hurdles, above all, are quite enormous indeed. Unfortunately, this voids the article of much interest; in a similar manner, one might state that we someday could build a computer that with absolute precision predicted anything in the universe - of course, if enormous theoretical and practical hurdles (such as, oh say, performing impossible tasks) can first be overcome. - slackerhobo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Someone was reading Stephan Baxter
- Ndiggnation, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I read a couple of science articles on the Internet once. I call BS!! No digg, lame..blah blah.
- theISABELfish, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1So how long until I can have one on my desk?
- bairy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"We still don't have a clue what actually happens with black holes or even what they are exactly, and yet everyone's pretending that they know."
No one is pretending they know. At least not in the sense you are suggesting.
Scientists form theories about things they don't understand based on whatever evidence they have at the time. If at some point that evidence is superceded by something else they can change their theory to something else. Refine a theory enough times and you'll get somewhere near the fact.
Scientists changing their minds is most definitely a good thing. You can't expect them to know everything on the first go. - barleymeister, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0same as indyfan, i read this in sciam about 7 months ago. kthxbye
- oxnyx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0sounds good but getting the output could be a problem.
Oh I'd perfer a GUI interface my self. ;) - indy500fan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I read this same exact thing in a magazine when I was in highschool. That means about a year ago, so old news...
- Grimmeh, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Jesus - this would wipe out overclockers in 24 hours!
"I'll just see if I can get a little more power..."
--CONTAINMENT FIELD FAILURE--
"Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrgh!"
--SQUISH-- - ErifNeerg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Doctor Who anyone?
- stacky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0""Let me stop you right there, evolution is not just a *theory*, unlike black hole theories. It is indeed an observed FACT, like the theory of gravity. Although it is a fact that apples fall to the ground, gravity is also considered a *theory*, like evolution. So don't be so quick to dismiss evolution just because of your misunderstandings of the word "theory".""
I think you'll fin there is a difference between the THEORY of evolution and the LAW of gravity. gravity is a law. evolution is a theory. there IS a big difference. - wickedsun, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0***** FALLS ON THE GROUND BECAUSE IT'S THE LAW.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3thats the stupidist thing i have read all day, why do we explore space really no answer me what have we got out of it. wow ants can live in space. kool we just spent 5 billoin on that and killed 7 people in the process. but hey maby one day we might use that info to breed super ants. if NASA lost all funding i would throw a party all diggers are invited. (i am aware that other countries have space programs i have not mentioned them as to the fact as i dont know there names)
- tominator1983, on 10/12/2007, -9/+7Ok. Hawking claims for 30 years that black holes destroy everything that comes into them... And suddenly he just changes his mind?
Scientists have been following these theories like a bunch of dumb puppies. We still don't have a clue what actually happens with black holes or even what they are exactly, and yet everyone's pretending that they know.
I bet black holes turn out to be just big, giant, un-reflective balls. Yeah. - jeffreym, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1But how would you get it on your desk?
http://celestial-reasoning.blogspot.com/ -
Show 51 - 56 of 56 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is