Skip to main content

Home/ Advanced Concepts Team/ Group items matching "X" in title, tags, annotations or url

Group items matching
in title, tags, annotations or url

Sort By: Relevance | Date Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
jcunha

'Disruptive' science has declined - 2 views

www.nature.com/...d41586-022-04577-5

disruptive science technology

shared by jcunha on 07 Jan 23 - No Cached
  • jcunha on 07 Jan 23
     
    About "Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time" https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05543-x. "Overall, our results deepen understanding of the evolution of knowledge and may guide career planning and science policy. To promote disruptive science and technology, scholars may be encouraged to read widely and given time to keep up with the rapidly expanding knowledge frontier. Universities may forgo the focus on quantity, and more strongly reward research quality56, and perhaps more fully subsidize year-long sabbaticals. Federal agencies may invest in the riskier and longer-term individual awards that support careers and not simply specific projects57, giving scholars the gift of time needed to step outside the fray, inoculate themselves from the publish or perish culture, and produce truly consequential work. Understanding the decline in disruptive science and technology more fully permits a much-needed rethinking of strategies for organizing the production of science and technology in the future."
LeopoldS

The Moon's mantle unveiled - 2 views

www.nature.com/...d41586-019-01479-x

China Moon exploration geology

shared by LeopoldS on 17 May 19 - No Cached
  • LeopoldS on 17 May 19
     
    first science results reported in Nature (as far as I know) from the Yutu-2 and Chang'e mission .... and they look very good!
  • Athanasia Nikolaou on 17 May 19
     
    Sure they are very useful! It will be even better if they manage to fit the data to modeled circulation of the lunar magma ocean that was formed posterior to the "Theia" body collision with Earth. The collision was the cause of the magma ocean in the first place. The question now is how this circulation pattern of the lava-moon "froze" in time upon phase transition to solid. Because, what crystallizes last in sequence, is more rich in "incompatible" with the crystal structure, elements, we might combine data+models to predict their location. Those incompatible tracers are mainly radioactively decaying elements that produce heat (google publications about lunar KREEP elements (potassium (K), rare earth elements(REE), and phosphorus(P)). By knowing where the KREEP is: - we know where to dig for them mining (if they are useful for something, eg. Phosphorus for plants to be grown on the Moon) - we avoid planning to build the future human colony on top of radioactives, of course. The hope is that the Moon, due to lack of plate tectonics, has preserved this "signature of the freezing sequence". Let's see.
  • LeopoldS on 19 May 19
     
    thanks Nasia! very interesting comment
hannalakk

Japanese Space Research Center will be Suspended Over a Moonlike Crater - 1 views

www.universetoday.com/...spended-over-a-moonlike-crater

architecture habitat technology

shared by hannalakk on 22 Nov 18 - No Cached
  • hannalakk on 22 Nov 18
     
    They are developing so-called "Avatar" technology which will allow people to control robots remotely, as in the movie "Avatar." With Avatar X, they hope to revolutionize space eXploration, resource eXtraction, and other space-based activities. On the Avatar X website, it says, "AVATAR X aims to capitalize on the growing space-based economy by accelerating development of real-world Avatars that will enable humans to remotely build camps on the Moon, support long-term space missions and further eXplore space from afar."
LeopoldS

Rapid adaptation to microgravity in mammalian macrophage cells - 72510785c9ca9518b647f9e82ee322164d24799abc759ba1231bc92614b808e1.pdf - 1 views

s3.amazonaws.com/...9abc759ba1231bc92614b808e1.pdf

microgravity cells

shared by LeopoldS on 01 Mar 17 - No Cached
gpetit liked it
  • LeopoldS on 01 Mar 17
     
    very nice paper on adaptation of cells to microgravity
  • Dario Izzo on 09 Mar 17
     
    You need to avoid posting these types of links in the title as it is not managed well by plugins connected to our diigo account. Try to go to the source next time, and get rid of useless url codes.
Alexander Wittig

SS-520 No. 4 Launch Results | ISAS - 3 views

www.isas.jaxa.jp/...000827.html

shared by Alexander Wittig on 16 Jan 17 - No Cached
  • Alexander Wittig on 16 Jan 17
     
    At 8:33 a.m., (Japan Standard Time) January 15, 2017, SS-520 No. 4, JAXA's sounding rocket launched from the Uchinoura Space Center. Through SS-520 No. 4 launch, JAXA sought for research and development of launch vehicles and satellites and the launch demonstration of TRICOM-1, its onboard nanosat that weighs about 3 kilograms. The launch was part of Japanese government's program for development of launch vehicles and satellites in public-private partnerships. Long story short: Space-X has the better fireworks
Alexander Wittig

Deepest X-ray Image Ever Reveals Black Hole Treasure Trove - 1 views

chandra.harvard.edu/...press_010517cdfs.html

science space

shared by Alexander Wittig on 09 Jan 17 - No Cached
LeopoldS liked it
  • Alexander Wittig on 09 Jan 17
     
    Deepest X-ray Image Ever Reveals Black Hole Treasure Trove An unparalleled image from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory gives astronomers the best look yet at the growth of black holes over billions of years beginning soon after the Big Bang.
fichbio

[1610.08323] Evidence for vacuum birefringence from the first optical polarimetry measurement of the isolated neutron star RX\, J1856.5$-$3754 - 3 views

arxiv.org/1610.08323

shared by fichbio on 02 Dec 16 - No Cached
  • fichbio on 02 Dec 16
     
    Abstract: The "Magnificent Seven" (M7) are a group of radio-quiet Isolated Neutron Stars (INSs) discovered in the soft X-rays through their purely thermal surface emission. Owing to the large inferred magnetic fields ($B\approX 10^{13}$ G), radiation from these sources is eXpected to be substantially polarised, independently on the mechanism actually responsible for the thermal emission.
jcunha

A view at Google X philosophy - 1 views

www.ted.com/...benefit_of_celebrating_failure

Google X moonshot projects

shared by jcunha on 18 Apr 16 - No Cached
  • jcunha on 18 Apr 16
     
    A TED talk about Google X way of working and some closer look at the project loon (stratospheric balloon network for internet connection) by the 'moonshot captain' Astro Teller.
Alexander Wittig

TED 2016: $5m AI X Prize announced at conference - BBC News - 2 views

www.bbc.com/...technology-35599773

AI TED

shared by Alexander Wittig on 22 Feb 16 - No Cached
  • Alexander Wittig on 22 Feb 16
     
    Get cracking, ACT AI team ;) A new X prize designed to advance artificial intelligence has been announced at the TED (Technology, Entertainment and Design) conference. The X Prize was set up to push the boundaries of technology to solve issues such as climate change. The winner, which will be announced at TED in 2020, will win $5m (£3.4m).
Alexander Wittig

The Internet Archive's Windows 3.x Showcase - 4 views

archive.org/...y_win3_showcase&tab=collection

history fun

shared by Alexander Wittig on 12 Feb 16 - No Cached
  • Alexander Wittig on 12 Feb 16
     
    Travel back in time and play with the original Windows 3.11. back when using a computer still meant loading EMM386 in your config.sys ;) Remember that expensive big box of hardware you were so proud of? Now the whole thing is simulated in your browser. Using JavaScript. And still runs faster. This is a collection of curated Windows 3.x software, meant to show the range of software products available for the 3.x Operating System in the early 1990s.
  • Ma Ru on 13 Feb 16
     
    Awesome :) It's even got skifree!
jcunha

New frequency record breaking laser in the X-ray - 0 views

www.nature.com/...nature14894.html

technology BIO science PHY

shared by jcunha on 31 Aug 15 - No Cached
  • jcunha on 31 Aug 15
     
    Good news for the imaging community: simpler and smaller x-ray sources are on the way.
Thijs Versloot

A Groundbreaking Idea About Why Life Exists - 1 views

www.businessinsider.com/g-idea-of-lifes-origin-2014-12

life physics mathematics

shared by Thijs Versloot on 15 Dec 14 - No Cached
  • Thijs Versloot on 15 Dec 14
     
    Jeremy England, a 31-year-old assistant professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has derived a mathematical formula that he believes explains this capacity. The formula, based on established physics, indicates that when a group of atoms is driven by an external source of energy (like the sun or chemical fuel) and surrounded by a heat bath (like the ocean or atmosphere), it will often gradually restructure itself in order to dissipate increasingly more energy. This could mean that under certain conditions, matter inexorably acquires the key physical attribute associated with life. The simulation results made me think of Jojo's attempts to make a self-assembling space structure. Seems he may have been on the right track, just not thinking big enough
  • johannessimon81 on 15 Dec 14
     
    :-P Thanks Thijs... I do not agree with the premise of the article that a possible correlation of energy dissipation in living systems and their fitness means that one is the cause for the other - it may just be that both go hand-in-hand because of the nature of the world that we live in. Maybe there is such a drive for pre-biotic systems (like crystals and amino acids), but once life as we know it exists (i.e., heredity + mutation) it is hard to see the need for an amendment of Darwin's principles. The following just misses the essence of Darwin: "If England's approach stands up to more testing, it could further liberate biologists from seeking a Darwinian explanation for every adaptation and allow them to think more generally in terms of dissipation-driven organization. They might find, for example, that "the reason that an organism shows characteristic x rather than Y may not be because x is more fit than Y, but because physical constraints make it easier for x to evolve than for Y to evolve." Darwin's principle in its simplest expression just says that if a genome is more effective at reproducing it is more likely to dominate the next generation. The beauty of it is that there is NO need for a steering mechanism (like maximize energy dissipation) any random set of mutations will still lead to an increase of reproductive effectiveness. BTW: what does "better at dissipating energy" even mean? If I run around all the time I will have more babies? Most species that prove to be very successful end up being very good at conserving energy: trees, turtles, worms. Even complexity of an organism is not a recipe for evolutionary success: jellyfish have been successful for hundreds of millions of years while polar bears are seem to be on the way out.
Thijs Versloot

Light bending material facilitates the search for new particles - 0 views

www.nanowerk.com/...newsid=37760.php

physics cherenkov high energy metamaterials

shared by Thijs Versloot on 17 Oct 14 - No Cached
  • Thijs Versloot on 17 Oct 14
     
    The problem is that the light cone angle has a limit - all particles with high momentum (mass x velocity) generate light cones with the same angle. Hence, these particles are indistinguishable. Now Chalmers researcher Philippe Tassin and his colleagues at the Free University of Brussels have designed a material that manipulates the Cherenkov cone so that also particles with high momentum get a distinct light cone angle too. The work is on the cover of this week's issue of the journal Physical Review Letters ("Controlling Cherenkov Radiation with Transformation-Optical Metamaterials").
LeopoldS

Athena: Europe plans huge X-ray space telescope - 2 views

www.bbc.com/...science-environment-28053831

x-ray XMM astronomy PHY

shared by LeopoldS on 27 Jun 14 - No Cached
  • LeopoldS on 27 Jun 14
     
    good news for x-ray astronomers
Luís F. Simões

The Truth About Google X: An EXclusive Look Behind The Secretive Lab's Closed Doors - 4 views

www.fastcompany.com/...the-google-x-factor

google innovation

shared by Luís F. Simões on 16 Apr 14 - No Cached
  • Space elevators, teleportation, hoverboards, and driverless cars: The top-secret Google X innovation lab opens up about what it does--and how it thinks.
  • Thijs Versloot on 16 Apr 14
     
    Interesting insight indeed, I see quite some overlap with the ACT mantra, athough they have 250 people and an outdoor playground.. To Teller, this failure-loving lab has simply stepped into the breach. Small companies don't feel they have the resources to take moonshots. Big companies think it'll rattle shareholders. Government leaders believe there's not enough money, or that Congress will characterize a misstep or failure as a scandal. These days, when it comes to Hail Mary innovation, "Everyone thinks it's somebody's else's job," Teller says.
Guido de Croon

Will robots be smarter than humans by 2029? - 2 views

robohub.org/be-smarter-than-humans-by-2029

AI

shared by Guido de Croon on 10 Mar 14 - No Cached
  • Guido de Croon on 10 Mar 14
     
    Nice discussion about the singularity. Made me think of drinking coffee with Luis... It raises some issues such as the necessity of embodiment, etc.
  • ...9 more comments...
  • Luís F. Simões on 12 Mar 14
     
    "Kurzweilians"... LOL. Still not sold on embodiment, btw.
  • Ma Ru on 12 Mar 14
     
    The biggest problem with embodiment is that, since the passive walkers (with which it all started), it hasn't delivered anything really interesting...
  • Paul N on 13 Mar 14
     
    The problem with embodiment is that it's done wrong. Embodiment needs to be treated like big data. More sensors, more data, more processing. Just putting a computer in a robot with a camera and microphone is not embodiment.
  • Marcus Maertens on 14 Mar 14
     
    I like how he attacks Moore's Law. It always looks a bit naive to me if people start to (ab)use it to make their point. No strong opinion about embodiment.
  • johannessimon81 on 14 Mar 14
     
    @Paul: How would embodiment be done RIGHT?
  • Guido de Croon on 16 Mar 14
     
    Embodiment has some obvious advantages. For example, in the vision domain many hard problems become easy when you have a body with which you can take actions (like looking at an object you don't immediately recognize from a different angle) - a point already made by researchers such as Aloimonos.and Ballard in the end 80s / beginning 90s. However, embodiment goes further than gathering information and "mental" recognition. In this respect, the evolutionary robotics work by for example Beer is interesting, where an agent discriminates between diamonds and circles by avoiding one and catching the other, without there being a clear "moment" in which the recognition takes place. "Recognition" is a behavioral property there, for which embodiment is obviously important. With embodiment the effort for recognizing an object behaviorally can be divided between the brain and the body, resulting in less computation for the brain. Also the article "Behavioural Categorisation: Behaviour makes up for bad vision" is interesting in this respect. In the field of embodied cognitive science, some say that recognition is constituted by the activation of sensorimotor correlations. I wonder to which extent this is true, and if it is valid for extremely simple creatures to more advanced ones, but it is an interesting idea nonetheless. This being said, if "embodiment" implies having a physical body, then I would argue that it is not a necessary requirement for intelligence. "Situatedness", being able to take (virtual or real) "actions" that influence the "inputs", may be.
  • Ma Ru on 17 Mar 14
     
    @Paul While I completely agree about the "embodiment done wrong" (or at least "not exactly correct") part, what you say goes exactly against one of the major claims which are connected with the notion of embodiment (google for "representational bottleneck"). The fact is your brain does *not* have resources to deal with big data. The idea therefore is that it is the body what helps to deal with what to a computer scientist appears like "big data". Understanding how this happens is key. Whether it is the problem of scale or of actually understanding what happens should be quite conclusively shown by the outcomes of the Blue Brain project.
  • johannessimon81 on 17 Mar 14
     
    Wouldn't one expect that to produce consciousness (even in a lower form) an approach resembling that of nature would be essential? All animals grow from a very simple initial state (just a few cells) and have only a very limited number of sensors AND processing units. This would allow for a fairly simple way to create simple neural networks and to start up stable neural excitation patterns. Over time as complexity of the body (sensors, processors, actuators) increases the system should be able to adapt in a continuous manner and increase its degree of self-awareness and consciousness. On the other hand, building a simulated brain that resembles (parts of) the human one in its final state seems to me like taking a person who is just dead and trying to restart the brain by means of electric shocks.
  • Paul N on 17 Mar 14
     
    Actually on a neuronal level all information gets processed. Not all of it makes it into "conscious" processing or attention. Whatever makes it into conscious processing is a highly reduced representation of the data you get. However that doesn't get lost. Basic, low processed data forms the basis of proprioception and reflexes. Every step you take is a macro command your brain issues to the intricate sensory-motor system that puts your legs in motion by actuating every muscle and correcting every step deviation from its desired trajectory using the complicated system of nerve endings and motor commands. Reflexes which were build over the years, as those massive amounts of data slowly get integrated into the nervous system and the the incipient parts of the brain. But without all those sensors scattered throughout the body, all the little inputs in massive amounts that slowly get filtered through, you would not be able to experience your body, and experience the world. Every concept that you conjure up from your mind is a sort of loose association of your sensorimotor input. How can a robot understand the concept of a strawberry if all it can perceive of it is its shape and color and maybe the sound that it makes as it gets squished? How can you understand the "abstract" notion of strawberry without the incredibly sensible tactile feel, without the act of ripping off the stem, without the motor action of taking it to our mouths, without its texture and taste? When we as humans summon the strawberry thought, all of these concepts and ideas converge (distributed throughout the neurons in our minds) to form this abstract concept formed out of all of these many many correlations. A robot with no touch, no taste, no delicate articulate motions, no "serious" way to interact with and perceive its environment, no massive flow of information from which to chose and and reduce, will never attain human level intelligence. That's point 1. Point 2 is that mere pattern recogn
  • Ma Ru on 18 Mar 14
     
    All information *that gets processed* gets processed but now we arrived at a tautology. The whole problem is ultimately nobody knows what gets processed (not to mention how). In fact an absolute statement "all information" gets processed is very easy to dismiss because the characteristics of our sensors are such that a lot of information is filtered out already at the input level (e.g. eyes). I'm not saying it's not a valid and even interesting assumption, but it's still just an assumption and the next step is to explore scientifically where it leads you. And until you show its superiority experimentally it's as good as all other alternative assumptions you can make. I only wanted to point out is that "more processing" is not exactly compatible with some of the fundamental assumptions of the embodiment. I recommend Wilson, 2002 as a crash course.
  • Paul N on 24 Mar 14
     
    These deal with different things in human intelligence. One is the depth of the intelligence (how much of the bigger picture can you see, how abstract can you form concept and ideas), another is the breadth of the intelligence (how well can you actually generalize, how encompassing those concepts are and what is the level of detail in which you perceive all the information you have) and another is the relevance of the information (this is where the embodiment comes in. What you do is to a purpose, tied into the environment and ultimately linked to survival). As far as I see it, these form the pillars of human intelligence, and of the intelligence of biological beings. They are quite contradictory to each other mainly due to physical constraints (such as for example energy usage, and training time). "More processing" is not exactly compatible with some aspects of embodiment, but it is important for human level intelligence. Embodiment is necessary for establishing an environmental context of actions, a constraint space if you will, failure of human minds (i.e. schizophrenia) is ultimately a failure of perceived embodiment. What we do know is that we perform a lot of compression and a lot of integration on a lot of data in an environmental coupling. Imo, take any of these parts out, and you cannot attain human+ intelligence. Vary the quantities and you'll obtain different manifestations of intelligence, from cockroach to cat to google to random quake bot. Increase them all beyond human levels and you're on your way towards the singularity.
Athanasia Nikolaou

Nature Paper: Rivers and streams release more CO2 than previously believed - 6 views

www.klimacampus.de/631+M59214efc590.html

climate emissions

shared by Athanasia Nikolaou on 25 Nov 13 - No Cached
LeopoldS liked it
  • Athanasia Nikolaou on 25 Nov 13
     
    Another underestimated source of CO2, are turbulent waters. "The stronger the turbulences at the water's surface, the more CO2 is released into the atmosphere. The combination of maps and data revealed that, while the CO2 emissions from lakes and reservoirs are lower than assumed, those from rivers and streams are three times as high as previously believed." Alltogether the emitted CO2 equates to roughly one-fifth of the emissions caused by humans. Yet more stuff to model...
  • ...10 more comments...
  • Dario Izzo on 26 Nov 13
     
    This could also be a mechanism to counter human CO2 emission ... the more we emit, the less turbulent rivers and stream, the less CO2 is emitted there ... makes sense?
  • johannessimon81 on 27 Nov 13
     
    I guess there is a natural equilibrium there. Once the climate warms up enough for all rivers and streams to evaporate they will not contribute CO2 anymore - which stops their contribution to global warming. So the problem is also the solution (as always).
  • Athanasia Nikolaou on 27 Nov 13
     
    "The source of inland water CO2 is still not known with certainty and new studies are needed to research the mechanisms controlling CO2 evasion globally." It is another source of CO2 this one, and the turbulence in the rivers is independent of our emissions in CO2 and just facilitates the process of releasing CO2 waters. Dario, if I understood correct you have in mind a finite quantity of CO2 that the atmosphere can accomodate, and to my knowledge this does not happen, so I cannot find a relevant feedback there. Johannes, H2O is a powerful greenhouse gas :-)
  • Dario Izzo on 27 Nov 13
     
    Nasia I think you did not get my point (a joke, really, that Johannes continued) .... by emitting more CO2 we warm up the planet thus drying up rivers and lakes which will, in turn emit less CO2 :) No finite quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere is needed to close this loop ... ... as for the H2O it could just go into non turbulent waters rather than staying into the atmosphere ...
  • Athanasia Nikolaou on 03 Dec 13
     
    Really awkward joke explanation: I got the joke of Johannes, but maybe you did not get mine: by warming up the planet to get rid of the rivers and their problems, the water of the rivers will be accomodated in the atmosphere, therefore, the greenhouse gas of water.
  • Dario Izzo on 03 Dec 13
     
    from my previous post: "... as for the H2O it could just go into non turbulent waters rather than staying into the atmosphere ..."
  • johannessimon81 on 03 Dec 13
     
    I guess the emphasis is on "could"... ;-) Also, everybody knows that rain is cold - so more water in the atmosphere makes the climate colder.
  • LeopoldS on 03 Dec 13
     
    do you have the nature paper also? looks like very nice, meticulous typically german research lasting over 10 years with painstakingly many researchers from all over the world involved .... and while important the total is still only 20% of human emissions ... so a variation in it does not seem to change the overall picture
  • Athanasia Nikolaou on 04 Dec 13
     
    here is the nature paper : http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v503/n7476/full/nature12760.html I appreciate Johannes' and Dario's jokes, since climate is the common ground that all of us can have an opinion, taking honours from experiencing weather. But, the same as if I am trying to make jokes for material science, or A.I. I take a high risk of failing(!) :-S Water is a greenhouse gas, rain rather releases latent heat to the environment in order to be formed, Johannes, nice trolling effort ;-) Between this and the next jokes to come, I would stop to take a look here, provided you have 10 minutes: how/where rain forms http://www.scribd.com/doc/58033704/Tephigrams-for-Dummies
  • Dario Izzo on 04 Dec 13
     
    omg
  • johannessimon81 on 09 Dec 13
     
    Nasia, I thought about your statement carefully - and I cannot agree with you. Water is not a greenhouse gas. It is instead a liquid. Also, I can't believe you keep feeding the troll! :-P But on a more topical note: I think it is an over-simplification to call water a greenhouse gas - water is one of the most important mechanisms in the way Earth handles heat input from the sun. The latent heat that you mention actually cools Earth: solar energy that would otherwise heat Earth's surface is ABSORBED as latent heat by water which consequently evaporates - the same water condenses into rain drops at high altitudes and releases this stored heat. In effect the water cycle is a mechanism of heat transport from low altitude to high altitude where the chance of infrared radiation escaping into space is much higher due to the much thinner layer of atmosphere above (including the smaller abundance of greenhouse gasses). Also, as I know you are well aware, the cloud cover that results from water condensation in the troposphere dramatically increases albedo which has a cooling effect on climate. Furthermore the heat capacity of wet air ("humid heat") is much larger than that of dry air - so any advective heat transfer due to air currents is more efficient in wet air - transporting heat from warm areas to a natural heat sink e.g. polar regions. Of course there are also climate heating effects of water like the absorption of IR radiation. But I stand by my statement (as defended in the above) that rain cools the atmosphere. Oh and also some nice reading material on the complexities related to climate feedback due to sea surface temperature: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0442(1993)006%3C2049%3ALSEOTR%3E2.0.CO%3B2
  • Athanasia Nikolaou on 10 Dec 13
     
    I enjoy trolling conversations when there is a gain for both sides at the end :-) . I had to check upon some of the facts in order to explain my self properly. The IPCC report states the greenhouse gases here, and water vapour is included: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-2-1.html Honestly, I read only the abstract of the article you posted, which is a very interesting hypothesis on the mechanism of regulating sea surface temperature, but it is very localized to the tropics (vivid convection, storms) a region of which I have very little expertise, and is difficult to study because it has non-hydrostatic dynamics. The only thing I can comment there is that the authors define constant relative humidity for the bottom layer, supplied by the oceanic surface, which limits the implementation of the concept on other earth regions. Also, we may confuse during the conversation the greenhouse gas with the Radiative Forcing of each greenhouse gas: I see your point of the latent heat trapped in the water vapour, and I agree, but the effect of the water is that it traps even as latent heat an amount of LR that would otherwise escape back to space. That is the greenhouse gas identity and an image to see the absorption bands in the atmosphere and how important the water is, without vain authority-based arguments that miss the explanation in the end: http://www.google.nl/imgres?imgurl=http://www.solarchords.com/uploaded/82/87-33833-450015_44absorbspec.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.solarchords.com/agw-science/4/greenhouse--1-radiation/33784/&h=468&w=458&sz=28&tbnid=x2NtfKh5OPM7lM:&tbnh=98&tbnw=96&zoom=1&usg=__KldteWbV19nVPbbsC4jsOgzCK6E=&docid=cMRZ9f22jbtYPM&sa=x&ei=SwynUq2TMqiS0QxVq4C4Aw&ved=0CDkQ9QEwAw
1 - 20 of 70 Next › Last »
Showing 20▼ items per page