and the science books change again

very cool:) When do we get Vibranium and Adamantium, though?
 
Not that exciting. I was confused for a second because I thought they were saying there was a new element and I couldn't see how that was possible at the atomic level. (Not counting any new element formed in an accelerator and that has a half life of a nanosecond.)

But this is just a new mineral. A new combination of two known elements. I'm sure that suggests some interesting things but still....

Gregg
 
Well, that's the whole idea of science. Continue to collect data until the data falls into groups and can be analyzed in relation to previous knowledge. This story is about one fact, not particularly spectacular: items that come from off-Earth are inherently interesting, but this one doesn't change our understanding of the nature of matter.
 
"Armchair scientists" are not scientists. Abusum non tollit usum: Abuse does not disqualify proper use.

After all, some people claim to know for a fact that some things exist for which we only have smoke, but they feel this proves there's a fire. It only suggests it.
 
I think it is interesting to know of a new crystal structure. I wonder if we can reproduce it. If it was larger, would it be clear? Is it stronger than glass and less brittle? Can we make blades from it?
 
Fiddleback said:
I think it is interesting to know of a new crystal structure. I wonder if we can reproduce it. If it was larger, would it be clear? Is it stronger than glass and less brittle? Can we make blades from it?
Click to expand...

Maybe a knife from it would look like this

Crysknife.jpg
 
"some people claim to know for a fact that some things exist for which we only have smoke"

Actually, claiming that "we have only smoke" is exactly what I am talking about.
 
proto-crysknife?

kindjal.jpg

ancient fremen knife from 23000 bmd, planet of origin is purported to be an insignificant water planet known as 'terra'
 
DannyinJapan said:
It demonstrates quite clearly that we do NOT know everything.
Click to expand...

I'll go a step further and say the ONLY thing we DO know for sure is that we DON'T know everything:)! I applaud science and its practitioners, but SOME create hypotheses and call them law, until they are eventually proven nothing more than an educated opinion. We should study and embrace nature in all its forms, but we tend to get “too big for our britches” and complacent in our wondrous knowledge. I believe nature will continue to demonstrate our lack of understanding just as “hurricane proof” piers continue to be torn from the shore. That doesn’t mean to not embrace the study, just keep an open mind and be humble about our tiny existence in an endless universe. The goal of science should not be about building walls of absolutes, but the tearing down of any previously built walls! Take care and God bless.
 
DannyinJapan said:
Nobody has ever made a correct crysknife. It's perfectly described in the book. I just don't get it.
Click to expand...

I have the experience in shaping stone and making knives and believe I can make an exact replica. I just need some input from people like yourself as to what the Crysknife should look like, length, width, shape etc
 
DannyinJapan said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience...lionyearoldantarcticmeteoriteyieldsnewmineral
Click to expand...

It's more of a problem that the science books -- the ones used in public schools -- don't change often enough to reflect modern science. Most of the material is fifty to one hundred years old, and the presentation tends to be simplistic at best.

This provides fuel to the critics of scientific ideas. Public school science is like a straw man, easily attacked because it doesn't deal with the complexities, subtleties and gray areas that real science wrestles with all the time.

One of the differences between scientific inquiry and other modes of thought is that real scientists typically welcome new discoveries, while subjecting them to the same intensive scrutiny as the more established body of knowledge and theory. Of course if a new discovery contradicts established science it has to be tested, and often something is learned in the process, even from mistakes. Sometimes it is found that older theories are valid up to a certain point, but fail at the subatomic or astronomical scales. Science is all about extending boundaries, both observationally and conceptually.

The most prominent recent example is an experiment done by physicists that seems to show neutrinos traveling faster than the speed of light. If true, this would affect the underpinnings of much of modern physics. The response of the scientific community, including the physicists who did the experiment, is skepticism. They are redoing the experiment, searching for possible sources of error. Other labs are trying to replicate the results (only a few in the world have the equipment to make the attempt). Nobody has been burned at the stake, and even the most skeptical physicists will study the evidence carefully as it emerges.

Perhaps a hundred years from now, some of this material will make its way into public school science books.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps we should bug Cold Steel to mold some "Crysknives" out of one of their plastics. After all, the 50th anniversary of its publication is coming up in 2015...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top