HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

danfickle

no profile record

Submissions

Was Charlie Chaplain prosecuted for being raped at gunpoint?

4 points·by danfickle·4 वर्ष पहले·0 comments

comments

danfickle
·3 वर्ष पहले·discuss
Thanks for making my day. That has to be the feel-good story of the year!
danfickle
·4 वर्ष पहले·discuss
My comment from duplicate post[3]:

So a scientific paper claims to have invalidated known physics. History tells us this will go one of two ways. Either, the authors will get a Nobel prize (eventually) or it will turn into a cold fusion level debacle.

I leave you with a quote from the lead researcher with commentary from Cosmos magazine[1].

“ We let our shape-changing object move on the simplest curved space, a sphere, to systematically study the motion in curved space,” says lead researcher Zeb Rocklin, assistant professor in the School of Physics at Georgia Tech. “We learned that the predicted effect, which was so counter-intuitive it was dismissed by some physicists, indeed occurred: as the robot changed its shape, it inched forward around the sphere in a way that could not be attributed to environmental interactions.”

To make sure that the effects induced by the curvature of the robot’s space dominated, the physicists had to isolate the system as much as possible from external forces. Only then could the team ensure minimal interaction or exchange of momentum with the environment.

The curved space was produced by placing a set of motors drive on curved tracks. The tracks were then attached to a rotating shaft to produce a spherical space.

Friction was curtailed using air bearings and bushings – low heat and low mess alternatives to ball bearings. Gravity was diminished by aligning the rotating shaft with Earth’s gravity.

——

Edit: There is some critical commentary in The Register’s comments section[2].

[1] https://cosmosmagazine.com/technology/curved-space-robot-def... [2] https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2022/08/11/curved_s... [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32409959
danfickle
·4 वर्ष पहले·discuss
So a scientific paper claims to have invalidated known physics. History tells us this will go one of two ways. Either, the authors will get a Nobel prize (eventually) or it will turn into a cold fusion level debacle.

I leave you with a quote from the lead researcher with commentary from Cosmos magazine[1].

“ We let our shape-changing object move on the simplest curved space, a sphere, to systematically study the motion in curved space,” says lead researcher Zeb Rocklin, assistant professor in the School of Physics at Georgia Tech. “We learned that the predicted effect, which was so counter-intuitive it was dismissed by some physicists, indeed occurred: as the robot changed its shape, it inched forward around the sphere in a way that could not be attributed to environmental interactions.”

To make sure that the effects induced by the curvature of the robot’s space dominated, the physicists had to isolate the system as much as possible from external forces. Only then could the team ensure minimal interaction or exchange of momentum with the environment.

The curved space was produced by placing a set of motors drive on curved tracks. The tracks were then attached to a rotating shaft to produce a spherical space.

Friction was curtailed using air bearings and bushings – low heat and low mess alternatives to ball bearings. Gravity was diminished by aligning the rotating shaft with Earth’s gravity.

——

Edit: There is some critical commentary in The Register’s comments section[2].

[1] https://cosmosmagazine.com/technology/curved-space-robot-def... [2] https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2022/08/11/curved_s...