Consider this thought. If life on earth as we know it is going to be destroyed by some extraterrestrial event some time in the future, it is possible that such an event has already happened.
Fascinating article! I learned a new term from this article – Quantum Critical Point.
I followed one of the names mentioned in the article to find this short lecture on the topic.
A lingering question in my mind is about the energy consumed (be it in a cooling process, or in the application of high pressures, or in some other process) in creating these superconducting states and maintaining them for practical applications. Seems like that would be significant regardless of the efficiencies achieved once you get there. Is there not a trade-off involved? I do not remember any mention of this aspect in the article or the video.
“Albert Einstein didn’t like them.
To him, black holes were a bit of an embarrassment, as they compromised his dream of a “rational” nature, that is, natural phenomena that we could describe and quantify with the usual methods of science. According to this view, good scientific theories shouldn’t generate absurd (read: “irrational”) results.”
A different way to look at what the study of physics can be all about. Perhaps the answer lies in finding a common approach that finds a bridge between the philosophies and approaches of emergence and reductionism.
I think most things are knowable, but perhaps not in a lifetime, or even in several lifetimes. In fact, the deeper you get into it, the more effort and the longer it takes. But scientific curiosity should have no limits. We also need more brilliant minds like Einstein’s to carry the search forward.
It’s time for some convex optimization.
The science behind the spectacular display of the Aurora Borealis a.k.a Northern Lights. This mystical display of colours may be better left to childhood imagination but in the name of science we s…