MetaFilter posts tagged with ScientificAmerican

Ass, Backwards

Rumple — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 08:10:08 -0800

It became necessary, one day, at Willet's Point, to destroy a worthless mule, and the subject was made the occasion of giving instruction to the military class there stationed. The mule was placed in proper position before the camera and duly focused. Upon the animal's forehead a cotton bag was tied containing six ounces of dynamite.....

Instantaneous Photography, 1881 style. From Scientific American, September 24, 1881: (a) Text (b) Engravings: Before the Explosion; After the Explosion. (c) Photographs: The Explosion. images from stereoviews.com; link via things magazine.

The Traveler's Dilemma

empath — Wed, 30 May 2007 08:56:26 -0800

"He asks each of them to write down...any dollar integer between 2 and 100 without conferring together. If both write the same number...he will pay each of them that amount. But if they write different numbers, he will ... pay both of them the lower number along with a bonus and a penalty--the person who wrote the lower number will get $2 more...and the one who wrote the higher number will get $2 less.... For instance, if Lucy writes 46 and Pete writes 100, Lucy will get $48 and Pete will get $44."

What amount would you choose? And what does your answer tell us about the limits of Game Theory?

Scientific American digs deep on climate change

jacob hauser — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 10:33:07 -0800

Anyone interested in climate change or is still wondering about it's potential effects and possible solutions should check out this must-read Special Issue of Scientific American. Here is a freebie article they have posted online called A Climate Repair Manual.

Is Scientific American's Spell Checker Broken?

justkevin — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 08:41:44 -0800

Gbalf Xozmn Ram Rqzyk Wtacu Lkugc Aaxjx Owkyu Dkoxk Zamdg Bnuio Nmrxk Zmqyf Nqeog Ziqxf Gutxe Nkmxd Gzmqj Brqge Kxkfs Qqzui Nactg Djfnq Eenaa Xjnk

Not getting symbolism

Tlogmer — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 09:23:13 -0800

"Almost half the children committed one or more of these mistakes. They attempted with apparent seriousness to perform the same actions with the miniature items that they had with the large ones. Some sat down on the little chair: they walked up to it, turned around, bent their knees and lowered themselves onto it. Some simply perched on top, others sat down so hard that the chair skittered out from under them. Some children sat on the miniature slide and tried to ride down it, usually falling off in the process; others attempted to climb the steps, causing the slide to tip over. (With the chair and slide made of sturdy plastic and only about five inches tall, the toddlers faced no danger of hurting themselves.)"

Chaz has a posse!

mr.curmudgeon — Fri, 25 Mar 2005 18:58:06 -0800

Scientific American to stop reporting science, more creationism. There's no easy way to admit this. For years, helpful letter writers told us to stick to science. They pointed out that science and politics don't mix. They said we should be more balanced in our presentation of such issues as creationism, missile defense and global warming...But spring is in the air, and all of nature is turning over a new leaf, so there's no better time to say: you were right, and we were wrong.

Comments on Bomb Crap

mcgraw — Mon, 03 May 2004 06:56:17 -0800

Advanced methods of bomb detection and investigation. New equipment developed to scan cars and people, such as a parking lot device which quickly bathes the car's trunk in invisible neutrons, a procedure that makes materials inside the trunk emit gamma-rays that would indicate the presence of explosives. Also, a bomb disposal robot which take[s] fingerprints before blowing [a] package up.

Scientific American Should Know Better

antimony — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:34:42 -0800

Perpetuating a common misconcetion about the "Morning After" pill and RU-486 Avrum Bluming, determined that my mom should try an experimental treatment, mifepristone, a synthetic antiprogestin better known as RU-486, the "morning after" contraception drug. In a little throw-away line, Scientific American columnist Michael Shermer perpetuates the idea that RU-486 and the "Morning After" pill are the same thing. They are entirely different. In fact, mifepristone is not a contraceptive at all. Regardless of anyone's opinion about these two products, shouldn't Scientific American know better than to mistake the purpose of an FDA-aproved prescription drug?

Talk about Johnny One-Note

GreyWingnut — Wed, 10 Sep 2003 08:20:49 -0800

In space, you can hear a black hole sing (WaPo link). Using the Chandra X-Ray Observatory, astrophysicists have detected a supermassive black hole in the Perseus Cluster which has been "playing" a B-flat for 3 billion years.

Fascinating as this seemingly counterintuitive discovery (sound carrying through space) is, the real significance lies in that these "sound waves" may explain why the superhot gases in such regions aren't cooling down and forming more stars.

Parallel Universes

grahamwell — Mon, 12 May 2003 03:55:51 -0800

In an infinite universe there's a copy of you reading this post - in Latin. The Scientific American updates current cosmological thinking on Parallel Universes - The key question is not whether the multiverse exists but rather how many levels it has - and reaches some startling conclusions.

martk — Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:57:28 -0800

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense From Scientific American..."Opponents of evolution want to make a place for creationism by tearing down real science, but their arguments don't hold up. Besieged teachers and others may increasingly find themselves on the spot to defend evolution and refute creationism. The arguments that creationists use are typically specious and based on misunderstandings of (or outright lies about) evolution, but the number and diversity of the objections can put even well-informed people at a disadvantage. To help with answering them, the following list rebuts some of the most common "scientific" arguments raised against evolution. It also directs readers to further sources for information and explains why creation science has no place in the classroom." Creation "science?"

srboisvert — Tue, 21 May 2002 09:34:14 -0800

SEX DIFFERENCES IN THE BRAIN: Men and women display patterns of behavioral and cognitive differences that reflect varying hormonal influences on brain development Sugar and spice versus snips and snails and puppy dog tails. Or was it masculinizing androgens 'organizing' behaviour at critical periods? At least now there is a scientific explanation of why my girlfriend beats me while watching Pat spin the wheel.

peacay — Thu, 21 Mar 2002 07:44:11 -0800

Plagiarism anybody? Cute hyper-referenced spiel whose tech issues are more seriously discussed elsewhere - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/616339/posts?page=1 (which is itself probably a plagiarism)

taumeson — Wed, 16 Jan 2002 15:19:25 -0800

"We have entered the Century of the Environment, in which the immediate future is usefully conceived as a bottleneck: science and technology, combined with foresight and moral courage, must see us through it and out."

Or so says Edward O. Wilson in February's Scientific American. Consumption and production can NOT be infinite, no matter what "near-horizon timelines" predict. But will capitalism rise to the occasion and will the free market fix the wrongs it's committed?

davidchess — Wed, 27 Jun 2001 06:37:50 -0800

[Inneresting Scientific American article about Hypnosis] including video of a real-live scientific hypnosis session. Have you ever been hypnotized? Has your sister? If not, would you like to be? If so, was it cool? Did it help you control your insatiable craving for prawns?

jpoulos — Wed, 02 May 2001 06:44:40 -0800

The Semantic Web is Coming.... There's a new web coming...and this one will surf you. Smart agents will be all the rage, managing your appointments and finding showtimes for movies they know you'll like. What do you want the internet to be? [From Scientific American]

hmgovt — Thu, 26 Apr 2001 06:15:00 -0800

Underwater Warpdrives Some naval experts believe that supercavitating systems could alter the nature of undersea warfare, changing stealthy cat-and-mouse stalking contests between large submarines into something resembling aerial combat, featuring noisy high-speed dogfights among small, short-range "subfighters" shooting underwater bullets at one another after having been launched from giant "subcarriers."

Calebos — Wed, 31 May 2000 18:45:57 -0800

A Scourge of Small Arms "The root causes of ethnic, religious and sectarian conflicts around the world are of course complex and varied, typically involving historical grievances, economic deprivation, demagogic leadership and an absence of democratic process. Although small arms and light weapons are not themselves a cause of conflict, their ready accessibility and low cost can prolong combat, encourage a violent rather than a peaceful resolution of differences, and generate greater insecurity throughout society--which in turn leads to a spiraling demand for, and use of, such weapons."