Edison's medicine

#NikolaTesla #ThomasEdison #GeorgeWestinghouse #rock #video #Tesla

From Rasl #5 by Jeff Smith
Until Nikola Tesla's invention of a workable A.C. electrical power system (which was in direct competition with Thomas Edison's D.C. power system), the ability to generate, transmit, and use electricity as we do today was impossible.
George Westinghouse, Westinghouse Corporation

The modular robot

by @ulaulaman about #MIT #robot #technology #modular
Starting from a famous speech by Richard Feynman (pdf), it was born nanotechnology. One day in future we'll probably have nano-chip, nano-computer, nano-bot, but for now we must content ourselves with the robots with wheels and legs that explore the remote corners of the Earth, and also arriving on Mars in the past years.
A possible evolution of robots is described in science fiction: for example in Alan Moore's Tom Strong, one of the enemy of the hero is the Modular Man, an electronic entity consistuted by many memory modules, separated but which together realized one of the most advanced and deadliest artificial intelligence in the world. Using the Modular Man, Moore brings back a classic of the genre: the revolt of the technology against mankind. A variation of this idea is proposed by Frank Schatzing in The Swarm, but in this last case the superintelligent entity is constituted by a lot of single-celled organisms that are separately very simple, but together extremely complex. In some sense also the swarms of insects could be understood like a single entity.
Let us suppose now that every single part of similar entity is electronic, and, for some reason, that the experiment is beyond the control of the toy factory that developed it: the consequence is a catastrofic novel, The Reproductive System (a.k.a. Mechasm)(1), written with a lot of humor by John Sladek, in which the writer describes some mechanism that are just a bit more advanced version of the Molecule, a self-assemble modular robot developed by Keith Kotay and Daniela Rus at MIT:

On impact factor

We recommend that the term "impact factor" be abolished and that this measure be renamed in keeping with its actual role, that merely of a time-specific "citation rate index" and nothing more. What is currently called the "impact factor" should not be misused to evaluate journals or to validate the scientific relevance of a particular researcher or research program, especially in decisions regarding employment, funding, and tenure.
(from The journal "impact factor": a misnamed, misleading, misused measure by Hecht F, et al.)
Impact Factors reflect the journal not the article, vary with time and correlate only poorly with perceived excellence. Simple comparison of impact factors in different specialties may be misleading. Review journals often have higher Impact Factors than those with original data. Both authors and editors can try to manipulate journal Impact Factors
(from Impact factors: uses and abuses by James Neuberger and Christopher Counsell - pdf)

Peter about Higgs

Contrary to the custom at this conference, I want first of all to disclaim priority for some of the concepts to which my name is commonly attached in the literature. For this exaggerated view of my originality I have to thank the late Ben Lee, who at the 1972 High Energy Physics Conference at Fermilab plastered my name over almost everything concerned with spontaneous synlnetry breaking.
"Higgs fields", for example, are just the scalar fields of a linear sigma model, which was discussed in 1960 by Gell-Mann and Lévy but had been introduced three years earlier by Schwinger. And "the Higgs mechanism" was first described by Philip Anderson: perhaps it should be called "the ABEGHHK'tH ....mechanism" after all the people (Anderson, Brout, Englert, Guralnik, Hagen, Higgs, Kibble, 't Hooft) who have discovered or rediscovered it! However, I do accept responsibility for the Higgs boson; I believe that I was the first to draw attention to its existence in spontaneously broken gauge theories.
Higgs P. (1993). SBGT and all that, AIP Conference Proceedings, 300 159-163. DOI:

Milano street art: Albert Einstein

posted by @ulaulaman #AlbertEinstein #StreetArt #Milano
In Paolo Sarpi, a street of Milano, there is a street artist who sketches a lot of subject (for example Iron Man or this iconic space monkey). In particular today I find a beautiful reproduction of the most famous photograph about Albert Einstein:
On Einstein's 72nd birthday on March 14, 1951, UPI photographer Arthur Sasse was trying to persuade him to smile for the camera, but having smiled for photographers many times that day, Einstein stuck out his tongue instead. This photograph became one of the most popular ever taken of Einstein, often used in merchandise depicting him in a lighthearted sense. Einstein enjoyed this photo and requested UPI to give him nine copies for personal use, one of which he signed for a reporter.
Source: Wikipedia
Sulmondo, the nick of the street artists, add only one little detail to the original photo!

Some quotations about the amplituhedron

posted by @ulaulaman via @tanzmax about #amplituhedron
However, the calculation using the shape in an infinite-dimensional space, the amplituhedron, should provide us with completely new perspectives how to look at the dynamics – perspective that is timeless, obscures the location of objects and events in the space and time, and obscures the unitarity (the requirement that the total quantum-calculated probability of all possibilities remains 100%), but it unmasks some other key structures that dictate what the probabilities should be, structures we were largely ignorant about.
If the new picture becomes sufficiently generalized, you could perhaps throw away the old books because you will get an entirely new framework to compute these things and to think about all these things. But once again, you don't have to throw them away because the physical results are the same.
(Luboš Motl on physics.stackexchange.com)
The amplituhedron is not built out of space-time and probabilities; these properties merely arise as consequences of the jewel’s geometry. The usual picture of space and time, and particles moving around in them, is a construct.
(from Quanta Magazine via Marginal Revolution)
This rich structure is also completely new to the mathematicians.
(Jaroslav Trnka - pdf)

Friday the 13th in science

posted by @ulaulaman about #superstitions #friday13th #mathematics #economics #socialscience
Men would never be superstitious, if they could govern all their circumstances by set rules, or if they were always favoured by fortune: but being frequently driven into straits where rules are useless, and being often kept fluctuating pitiably between hope and fear by the uncertainty of fortune’s greedily coveted favours, they are consequently, for the most part, very prone to credulity.
Benedict de Spinoza, A Theologico-Political Treatise, Preface Part 1.
In Italy 13 is considered a lucky number, so the unlucky day for us is Friday the 17th, but in the last decades also Friday the 13th becames an unlucky day. Following wiki.en, the origin of this superstition is unknown: the earliest evidence about it is referred in the biografy of Gioacchino Rossini written by Henry Sutherland Edwards in 1869: indeed Rossini died on a Friday 13th
He [Rossini] was surrounded to the last by admiring friends; and if it be true that, like so many Italians, he regarded Fridays as an unlucky day and thirteen as an unlucky number, it is remarkable that one Friday 13th of November he died.
Now, from an economical point of view, could be interesting the following abstract:
The Friday the 13th anomaly of Kolb and Rodriguez (1987) is revisited in an international context. Drawing on the philosophy of science approach of Lakatos (1978), the paper argues the importance of “anomalies” and the need for triangulation. Using the FTSE world indices over 1988–2000 for 19 countries, it is found that there is some evidence that returns on Friday the 13th are statistically different from, and generally greater than, returns on other Fridays.(1, 2)
Lucey's results seem a confirmation of the results of another work by Andrew Coutts:
In recent years much evidence has been documented of the existence of regularities in security price returns. However, one of the least investigated anomalies concerns the socalled ‘Friday the 13th’ effect, where returns on Fridays which fall on the 13th of the month display significantly lower returns than other Fridays. Employing daily logarithmic returns from the Financial Times Industrial Ordinary Shares Index (FT 30) for the period July 1935 through December 1994, we find no evidence of a Friday the 13th effect. Indeed, if anything, we find returns are higher on Friday the 13th than on other Fridays. We then partition the sample into six subsamples each of ten years, again concluding that there is no evidence of a Friday the 13th effect, and that once again returns on Friday the 13th tend to be higher than on other Fridays. Finally, we conclude that our results support the extremely limited evidence documented for the UK market concerning the Friday the 13th effect.
So the ancient superstitions could have an influence also in our advanced society: