Group items tagged

We present the design and experimental implementation of a power harvesting metamaterial. A maximum of 36.8% of the incident power from a 900 MHz signal is experimentally rectified by an array of metamaterial unit cells. We demonstrate that the maximum harvested power occurs for a resistive load close to 70 Ω in both simulation and experiment.

Lasers + diamonds --> simulate pressure of thousands of atmospheres on planetary cores!

As a side note, this is also being used as method to create a hypothetical substance called 'metallic hydrogen'. At such high pressures, hydrogen itself should become superconducting at room temperature and thus of tremendous interest...

The researchers have created two-dimensional computer models of the flying snakes, but they've also done real-world simulations - using 3D printed components in water tunnels. Both show that snake-shaped objects would get a special aerodynamic pop should they tilt their bodies at 35 degrees as they drop from tree branches.

NASA did it! In 5 years from now, ESA will release its first educational computer game.

Good, but where are the Xenomorphs attacking the astronauts?

You're right! And they even dare to call it serious!

anyone for a crying baby robot?

"We fit data to zonal interaction models and characterize which individual interaction forces suffice to explain observed spatial patterns." You can get the paper from the first author's website: http://people.stfx.ca/rlukeman/research.htm

PNAS? Didnt strike me as sth very new though... We should refer to it in the roots study though: "Social organisms form striking aggregation patterns, displaying cohesion, polarization, and collective intelligence. Determining how they do so in nature is challenging; a plethora of simulation studies displaying life-like swarm behavior lack rigorous comparison with actual data because collecting field data of sufficient quality has been a bottleneck." For roots it is NO bottleneck :) Tobias was right :)

Here they assume all relevant variables influencing behaviour are being observed. Namely, the relative positions and orientations of all ducks in the swarm. So, they make movies of the swarm's movements, process them, and them fit the models to that data. In the roots, though we can observe the complete final structure, or even obtain time-lapse movies showing how that structure came out to be, getting the measurements of all relevant soil variables (nitrogen, phosphorus, ...) throughout the soil, and over time, would be extremely difficult. So I guess a replication of the kind of work they did, but for the roots, would be hard. Nice reference though.

what the heck is this?? sounds really strange but highly interesting to me ....

can we use this for energy transmission?

read it now more carefully and the answer is probably no ...

Reminds me something... :)

I check diigo for the first time since I left and my spirit is still there yeah !

A critical view on Prof. Markram's Blue Brain project (in German).

As far as I know it's sort of like "Let's construct an enormous dynamical system and see what happens"... i.e. a waste of taxpayer's money... Able to heal Alzheimer... Yeah... Actually I was on the conference the author is mentioning (FET 2011) and I have seen the presentations of all 6 flagship proposals. Following that I had a discussion with one of my colleagues about the existence of limits of the amount of bullshit politicians are willing to buy from scientists. Will there be a point at which politicians, despite their total ignorance, will realise that scientists simply don't deliver anything they promise? How long will we (scientists) be stuck in the viscous circle of have-to-promise-more-than-predecessors in order to get money? Will we face a situation when we'll be forced to revert to promises which are realistic? To be honest none of the 6 presentations convinced me of their scientific merit (apart from the one on graphene where I have absolutely no expertise to tell). Apparently a huge amount of money is about to be wasted.

It's not just "Let's construct an enormous dynamical system and see what happens", it's worse! Also the simulation of the cosmological evolution is/was a little bit of this type, still the results are very interesting and useful. Why? Neither the whole cosmos nor the human brain at the level of single neurons can be modelled on a computer, that would last aeons on a "yet-to-be-invented-extra-super-computer". Thus one has to make assumptions and simplifications. In cosmology we have working theories of gravitation, thermodynamics, electrodynamics etc. at hand; starting from these theories we can make reasonable assumptions and (more or less) justified simplifications. The result is valuable since it provides insight into a complex system under given, explicit and understood assumptions. Nothing similar seems to exist in neuroscience. There is no theory of the human brain and apparently nobody has the slightest idea which simplifications can be made without harm. Of course, Mr. Markram remains completely unaffected of ''details'' like this. Finally, Marek, money is not wasted, we ''build networks of excellence'' and ''select the brightest of the brightest'' to make them study and work at our ''elite institutions'' :-). I lively remember the stage of one of these "bestofthebest" from Ivy League at the ACT...

A short overview on cool experiments with flies.

just to make Nina and Friederike envious ...

What if heuristic algorithms (PSO, DE, ...) do not actually simulate flocking birds or school gish beahviour ?!

of any interest to us?

This is an "old" stuff. It is used, as far as I remember, in IPOPT, the Interior Point OPTimiser, that I use quite often (e.g. gtoc4) ...

Dario and all the other swamers: have a look at this! how do they do?

Geoengineering could be very dangerous.

Completely crazy robots, including sensors for joint position, joint forces, ground contact...

From Nick!!! - this is very nice!!!