exchemist

I agree. The title is misleading, as so often in journalism. What occurred to me, as to you, about this case study was the tendency for men to dominate meetings, syndicate work etc. Towards the end of my time at Shell we were given training on this, to stop an "alpha male" character from seizing control of every discussion by picking up the marker pen, when there were probably more insightful and capable women present, who just were not as aggressive in putting themselves forward in a public forum. I suspect these researchers are so blinded by their ideological prejudice that they simplistically attempt to attribute everything to race, when there may be other, more obvious, factors at play. I am reminded of the excesses of the post-structuralist movement in literature - denial of the role of the author etc. Academia can occasionally be prey to fads whereby the latest theory, which may be well-founded in its original form, is pushed way beyond the bounds of what is reasonable, before gradually settling down to a more modest place in the battery of ideas.

Fair point. You have inspired me to look up the paper too. Here is a link: https://journals.aps.org/prper/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.18.010119 I have to agree the argument about whiteboards is not that they are physically white in colour, but the way a whiteboard (or potentially a blackboard, or a flipchart, I imagine) is used in teaching, to focus discussion of a topic. But I did find the paper shocking. I think it is worth reproducing a part of it. The authors analyse a recorded discussion about heat capacity. I quote an extract from their analysis (an "EID" is an Energy Interaction Diagram): QUOTE In the episode we analyzed in this paper, we observe an interaction in which Drake and the representation he is constructing are centered, and Gail and Paris’ sense making and contributions are marginalized, both in their interactions within their (small) group and in the larger-group discourse. This social organization is co-constructed and co-maintained by at least five mechanisms of control: the EID representation, physics values, the use of whiteboards, gendered social norms, and the structure of schooling. Importantly, we would suggest that these mechanisms operate mostly invisibly; actors’ participation in them is sensible and normal. At the same time, actors are (consciously or unconsciously) renegotiating their relationship to the center or expressing aspirations to change whiteness as social organization [51,53,64]. For example, Iris expresses a wish for her class to reflect nonhierarchical social structure, and has made a number of pedagogical choices that make this more possible, even if not actualized in this episode. Paris describes herself as “making sure that me and Gail had a say” in interactions with Drake, and Gail challenged Drake’s assertions and made moves toward the center. Drake seeks Gail’s approval at the end of the episode and makes discursive moves to distribute the credit for the construction of the representation (using “we” pronouns). That these aspirations and microchallenges did not fundamentally change the nature of the interaction or the social organization of the classroom in this episode points to the power and the institutionalization of whiteness. Even our notions of what collaboration means are shaped, epistemically, by whiteness. Our goal in this paper has been to “make whiteness visible,” in the tradition of Critical Whiteness Studies. In particular, we have sought to make visible how everyday physics classroom interactions reproduce whiteness as social organization, and how physics representations, values, and pedagogical tools play a role in this reproduction. That whiteness is “ordinary” in physics classrooms is not surprising, given critical race theory’s assertion that whiteness is endemic to every aspect of U.S. society [7]. The ordinariness of whiteness’ reproduction is not surprising either, given critical scholarship’s emphasis on the invisibility and hegemony of whiteness. UNQUOTE This strikes me as verging on parody. The authors clearly have a preconceived ideological conviction that any form of steering of a discussion is - culturally - "white" and, ipso facto, A Bad Thing. Well, good luck with trying to keep any form of discussion on-topic, then! These people would obviously accuse the moderation on this forum of "whiteness", for a start. It's nuts. But actually, the point Krauss was objecting to was not so much the article, daft though it is, but the impossibility of responding to its claims, due to the Catch 22 attitude of the editors of the journal. There will always be contentious papers published, but refusing to accept a critique of them is more alarming, academically.

Yes we had dark green ones at both school and university, which were some kind of flexible rubber material, in a loop on rollers at top and bottom, so one could scroll them up or down. Handy for long mathematical derivations that took up more than could be written on one panel. But you still wrote on them with chalk.

There is no evidence of any connection, so far as I can see. Troublemakers were logged in a black book, sure (from the 2nd link below, Henry VIII is the first documented case of someone who did this) , but there's no evidence that it had anything to do with slavery or skin colour. Black and white have been contrasted for hundreds, if not thousands, of years, due to light being associated with goodness and reason and dark with danger and evil. It probably goes right back to when we lived in caves. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-and-white_dualism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blacklisting

Being a mere chemist by training, I had the same difficulty for many years. I found this article by Matt Strassler very helpful: https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/virtual-particles-what-are-they/ One key takeaway for me was that the term virtual particle is a bit unfortunate, as these disturbances in the relevant field are not particles, but just disturbances that can modelled using much of the same mathematics. However, as a chemist, I have never studied QFT. Some of the real physicists here may be able to comment with far more authority.

I think it's pretty obvious to most people that there's nothing remotely racist about the term "blacklist". Black sheep is obviously not racist in origin, though one can definitely sympathise with the idea that the concept of separating sheep by colour and denigrating black ones is not a comfortable metaphor in a multiracial society. So that's a metaphor that is probably past its sell-by date. Re master bedroom, I was actually brought up short yesterday in a Hi-Fi shop, where I was getting advice about stereo bluetooth speakers. These are sold as a pair, with one having the bluetooth receiver and power supply and the other running from it by a wire. So I said something like "Aha I see, so it's a master and slave setup. The shop assistant slightly uncomfortably replied "Well we call them primary and secondary". So there we are. The "master" and "slave" metaphor has been standard in engineering throughout my life (e.g. the cylinders in hydraulic brakes on a car), but no longer, it seems. I suppose that's fair enough: when I was growing up, Britain was nothing like as multiracial as it is now, so now there will be different sensitivities to step around. But, assuming the article is not a spoof, I am sort of intrigued as to what they would say about a blackboard.

How funny. I’m old enough to remember when all our teachers used a blackboard. Would that be seen now as “cultural appropriation”, perhaps? And what about the universal prevalence of white paper for writing and printing? Pretty shocking, eh? Something Must Be Done! 🤪

It's not a surprise that organisms adapt to make use of their environment, if that is what you mean. That's what evolution does, after all.

Is a Naiver Stroke a medical condition you suffer from?

You haven’t bunked it yet. 😁

A lie is an intentionally false statement. Are you really accusing @Mordred of that?

Can you give an example to show how this would work?

Probably.

The transposition, you mean?…..

Yes it seems Emma Kirkby's version can't be seen in the US, for some arcane copyright reason I presume. But the singer in your version has slightly screwed it up by failing to use the flattened note in the last line (when pitched in G, as Kirkby sings it, some of the F#s are flattened to natural) which gives it its sexy bittersweetness. Here's another, more authentic version (transposed down to E♭ - sung by someone who has chosen, in view of the subject matter, not to wear a bra, by the look of it.......

I can't claim expertise in this area but it is certainly interesting. Thanks for posting. The Li ion battery exploits the very small size of the Li+ ion, which is isoelectronic with helium and will be even smaller, due to the higher nuclear charge. This can fit into interstitial sites in cobalt oxide reversibly, i.e. the ions can flow in and out without disrupting the crystal structure, due to their small size. I would assume one of the challenges of trying to do the same thing with the far larger Na+ ion is to find crystal structures sufficiently open to allow the same thing to happen with a larger cation. This appears to be what lies behind the choice of Prussian White. This is is a mixed-cation ionic compound with ferrocyanide (Fe(CN)6)4- anions, Fe2+ cations plus a second metal cation to make it electrically neutral - which can be Na. It has large interstitial sites due to the large size of the ferrocyanide anion. The other electrode, which is carbon, also has to be able to accept the cations reversibly into its structure - easy for the tiny Li+ ion, but more of a challenge for Na+. From what I read, there is however one particular, amorphous type of carbon that can do this. So that's what I have been able to pick up so far on this topic. Comments, additions or corrections welcome. I would guess there will be not insignificant commercial manufacturing challenges, but from an environmental and geopolitical point of view, getting away from dependence on lithium and cobalt would seem to be a very good idea indeed.

It's years since I listened to this CD. I was inspired by seeing Westminster Abbey at the coronation to play some of Purcell's music (he was the Abbey organist as one stage in his life), and was rather captivated by this song. It's in 6/4 time and in G major but with some flattened F#s, which give it some minor/modal bittersweet character. It's about the seduction of a maid: When first Amintas sued for a kiss, My innocent heart was tender, That though I push'd him away from the bliss, My eyes declar'd my heart was won. I fain an artful coyness would use, Before I the fort did surrender, But love would suffer no more such abuse And soon, alas! my cheat was known. He'd sit all day, and laugh and play, A thousand pretty things would say; My hand he squeeze, and press my knees, 'Till further on he got by degrees. My heart, just like a vessel at sea, Would toss when Amintas came near me, But ah! so cunning a pilot was he, Through doubts and fears he'd still sail on. I thought in him no danger could be, So wisely he knew how to steer me, And soon, alas! was brought to agree To taste of joys before unknown. Well might he boast his pain not lost, For soon he found the golden coast, Enjoyed the ore, and touched the shore Where never merchant went before.

The problem is that "in science", as a fellow chemist and schoolteacher on another forum likes to remind people, "you can't just make shit up". Contrary to what you say, there does not seem to be any discernible "logic" to what you have posted here, nor have you offered any observational support for any of it. The fact that you are not familiar with the relevant science ought - at least if you are a sensible person - to make you cautious in how you put forward novel ideas, especially in a science forum. You should be checking the logic at each stage with people who know the science that you do not. As for how clouds of gas condenses into stars, the answer is simple and explanations are widely available on the internet. It's gravity that does it. If you have a gravitational field whose escape velocity exceeds the speed of the gas atoms or molecules, the cloud will condense. Gravity on Earth is strong enough to stop the atmosphere flying off into space, after all. So if you have a much bigger mass, like that of the sun, it should not be hard to see that it can pull gases in very powerfully.

Haha you sound a bit like the late Ian Paisley: "Naow Paopereaigh!"😁

Here is an example I found on line to illustrate how it is done: "Once you have process the spectrum with software like Demetra, ISIS or Vspec, it must look like the one below (case of a galaxy with a redshift z = 0.06). The noise level of the spectrum depends on the total exposure time on the target. We obtain a spectrum strongly shifted in the red with easily identifiable lines and very broad Balmer lines : H Alpha line is thus shifted to red at 6970 Å while its value “at rest” is 6563 Å. " So this is saying this Hα line in the hydrogen spectrum is found at a wavelength of 6563 Angstroms if measured in the lab here on Earth. But with this distant object the same line appears at a wavelength of 6970. It has been shifted towards the red by 6970-6563 = 407 Angstroms.

The spectrometer tells you the wavelength or frequency of each line. So you just compare the reading for hydrogen in the star with the standard reading for the same spectral line in a lab here on Earth.

That's what I'm talking about. Here is an article with a picture of some of the lines from hydrogen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balmer_series The "visible" hydrogen emission spectrum lines in the Balmer series. H-alpha is the red line at the right. Four lines (counting from the right) are formally in the visible range. Lines five and six can be seen with the naked eye, but are considered to be ultraviolet as they have wavelengths less than 400 nm. Now, if the star emitting these lines is red shifted, the whole set of these lines will be moved a bit from their normal positions towards the red (lower frequency, longer wavelength) end of the spectrum. But they are all still there and so is the spacing between them. So you can still identify that it is hydrogen emission you are looking at.

Because the lines in the spectrum, which are characteristic of the elements of which it is composed, are all still there, just moved along a bit, to lower frequency. So you get the same pattern of lines, which can easily be recognised by a spectroscopist. Once you have found one element and determined from that how big the red shift is for that object, you then immediately know by how much all the lines for other elements will be shifted, and so you can assign them to the elements responsible. P.S. One thing you may possibly not be aware of is that each element emits (or absorbs) not just a single line but a whole series, corresponding to electrons making transitions between different atomic orbitals in the atoms of that element. So it's a whole pattern you are looking for, not just a single line. I agree that if it were only a single line per element, you would not be able to do it.

OK, generally I don’t, but I admit I did find this one funny so I made an exception. Point taken about the link - I hadn’t thought about that.

At neutral pH, glycine in solution is mainly present as a zwitterion: NH3⁺-COO⁻. So I think what will happen when you dissolve the glycinate: NH2-COO⁻, is it will pick up 2 protons from citric acid to form NH3⁺-COOH, leaving you with citrate and/or hydrogen citrates, depending on the relative amounts of citrate and glycinate (Citric acid is tribasic so it can release up to 3 protons, depending on the relative pKa s - or pKb s if you prefer - of both it and the other species around.) Mg²⁺ in solution will be present as a solvated cation anyway, so it won't be affected by any of this.