Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
Bappa
Posts:
70
Registered:
1/11/10
|
|
Re: Building a Better Microscope
Posted:
Feb 1, 2013 5:11 AM
|
|
On Jan 31, 7:48 am, Kevin <barry196...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 9:09 am, "Dare" <clydad...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Kevin" <barry196...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:a1d26ca4-00ef-42f1-9b44-ff68550d6ebd@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
> > > Ya know, I met this kid in college and his major was physics... He
> > > was
> > > absolutely positive that he could make cold fusion work and he wasn't
> > > going to let anything stand in his way... Uh, cold fusion has been
> > > discredited and so what are the implications of that? Uh, Well, I'm
> > > obsessed with building a better microscope... No one will pay me to
> > > do
> > > it since cold fusion has been discredited... It isn't like there
> > > should be any obvious link between the two but...
> > > It is a bit of friendly academic tit for tat in speculating what is a
> > > sphere in higher academe... The major priority in building a better
> > > microscope is to determine how to freeze coarse adjustments to
> > > facilitate fine adjustments...
>
> > > A sphere ultimately must mean to identify whatever it is that requires
> > > 'global initiative' in order to obtain an objective view of what the
> > > odds of success are... Basically, Fermilab seems to be most capable of
> > > building a better microscope but that is bad news for me and the rest
> > > of us if Fermilab is a political num-num that helps just the Japanese.
>
> > What kind of microscope?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> A scanning tunneling electron microscope... I say that they don't work
> properly if they neglect the limitations of strong weak interaction...
> Spiral structures would suggest that something is neglected by strong
> weak interaction but scanning tunneling electron microscopes build on
> the premise of strong weak interaction, ergo, a better microscope then
> the ones we have presently has premise.
So what do you want to see with it?
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
|
|
|
|
