E’ sorprendente come twitter stia frastornando facebook. Ma forse no.
Dopo questa mia profonda riflessione, consiglio a tutti – anche a quelli che schifano i social network – di appuntarsi l’account di Giovanni (che twitter si può seguire anche senza starci dentro). Io lo seguo e lui mi onora seguendomi.
Lo voglio celebrare con questo post parafrasando il Travaglio della prefazione al libro della banda Spinoza:
“Appena leggo un tweet di Giovanni, finito di ridere mi incazzo con me stesso perché avrei voluto tweettarlo io”.
Dopodiché, quando penso a Giò, spesso mi viene in mente l’inconfondibile voz de Julio. Ma si sa, non ci deve essere sempre un motivo per tutto.
We have not received our census form even though we have lived at this same address since 1994. I followed your phone procedure and called one number listed on the website and was referred to another number which I called. The recording wanted our census number that is on the form we didn’t receive. It also stated not to call back unitl after 4/12. Help!!!
My parents were born in Ireland and became nationalized citizens of the U.S. My skin color is white, I am fair-haired and have light blue-green eyes. My color is therefore white, my ethnic origin is Irish, and I am a citizen of the U.S. by birth. I also agree with the comment on disability, since this is an issue not associated with “race.” As an anthropologist, I also agree with the comments that the AAA did away with the entire concept of “race.” If ethnic origin is the real issue, then allow all respondents the opportunity to indicate the countries of their origins. My parents never considered themselves “Irish-American,” but would state that they were born in Ireland and were citizens of the U.S.
I like what you posted. I definitely believe whatever you wrote.
“Normal Science consists of working within and in the light of the paradigm, making it more and more explicit and precise, actualizing its initial promise. In the course of such articulation, however, “anomalies” arise which, after repeated efforts to resolve them have failed, give birth to the kind of situation in which a scientific revolution can take place New candidates for fundamental paradigm are introduced; ultimately one may become accepted, often necessitating a redefinition of the corresponding science” [1]The lecture given by John Preston and Christopher Nagel at the SMarchS Colloquium on October 1st 2010 differed from the previous lectures given at the Colloquium. Not only was its field unrelated to Architecture, but furthermore the style, motivationand the scope of the talk were unfamiliar to the audience. All claims made by Chris Nagel and the economic potential they pose, very eloquently articulated by John Preston, can be considered substantial. The presentation resonated greatly within the audience. We believe that every listener was struck either by awe or disbelief or both, be it simultaneously or sequentially. Sensitized Elements Nagel, a physicist with a Master in chemical engineering from MIT, and Preston former Director of the Technology Development and Licensing Office at MIT, an expert in energy, environment, technology and entrepreneurship form an effective and experienced team in developing and commercializing Nagels’ inventions. One invetion, Catalytic Extraction Process (CEP), converts biomass and even hazardous waste into Syngas, another Preston called “the best and most transformative invention he has ever seen”.[1]In 2000 Nagel, researching on large scale production of nanotubes, stumbled upon a surprising and radical discovery: While he was experimenting with current running through motlen copper a lightning struck the laboratory building, disabling the current supply to the copper yet Nagel was still measuring a voltage difference within the copper! He had “accidentally” changed the basic properties of an element. Further research on the field led him to discover he could induce and change qualities of an element. Nagel called the elements with altered properties “Quasi ” and after revision “Sensitized Elements” (SE), a phenomena formerly unknown to physics an their creation believed to be impossible.The discovery and description of Sensitized Elements was first introduced to the scientific community in the paper titled, “Unique Properties of Thermally Tailored Copper: Magnetically Active Regions and Anomalous X-ray Fluorescence Emissions” [3].In this paper Nagel describes phenomena observed in high-purity-copper ingots after subjecting them to “hot metal tailoring”, a process in which the copper ingot undergoes a process of thermal cycling, addition of graphite and exposure to inert gasses as well as irradiating light sources. Having been subjected to this procedure the ingot shows regions that appear to be magnetically active and exhibit unusually high X-ray fluorescence (XFR) emission, signatures corresponding to V, Cr, Mn, Fe, and Co, all elements that were not present in the ingot, along with greatly reduced Cu emissions. [3] Progressing from this first paper that merely introduces the discovery of “sensitized elements”, Nagel, outlined his recent findings and a theory explaining his discovery. The theory, even though only roughly sketched out for the audience, involved, but was not limited to, a new understanding of light, and how its interaction with fields, energy and matter is able to change to topology of systems. These findings demonstrate a novelty in science and the models for trying to understand what happened involved at least a basic understanding of physical chemistry, quantum-mechanics, topological spaces (Hilber, Riemannian, Cartan) and dark matter.
As the majority audience did not pocess knowledge in any of these fields they were led to make a judgement based on the speaker’s persuasive qualities and credibility, whether or not to accept these radical findings as truth. In fact John Preston later pointed out that “there are only 25 mathematicians in the World that would have been able to understand and follow the talk Chris Nagel just gave”. Nagel reported being able to use light to induce ferromagnetic attraction in copper to a wide range of elements like sulfur. Other experiments showed that cooper could be tailored to exhibit Meissner effects at room temperature, a phenomena that is usually a sign of superconductivity. Furthermore light was used to change these properties permanently or temporarily and on demand. Nagel generalized his findings to the point that it would be possible to induce a change in any property (conductivity, melting point, hardness, etc.) of any element. This leads to the hypothesis that the Periodic table has a third dimension, that -as the authors understand- of all “sensitized variations” of each element.The business-side of scienceResorting to a accessible narrative John Preston comes in as the businessman of the team. Creating a setting for his talk Preston draws the well known scenario of problems humanity is currently facing: An ever-growing population with rising living standards diminishing the earths natural resources in which energy sources and materials have to significantly change in order to meet future demand.Reporting from his experience as Managing Partner of C-Change Investments, a private investment company looking into novel ways of creating solutions for sustainable housing, Preston stated that the construction industry has “failed to innovate for the last hundred years”. He introduced a technology he helped commercialize: a new type of cement produced at lower costs and emissions while having superior structural properties. It is very interesting to observe how smoothly and effectively Preston connects the solutions he offers to current environmental problems. Pointing to the energy supply gap created by the development of alternative energy sources not keeping up with increasing demand in times of peak-oil, climate change and air pollution, Preston suggests that the CEP Gasification Process could be used to temporarily close this gap and allow emission free consumption of the vast remaining coal resources available in the U.S., until new technologies have developed to step up to the demand. Furthermore, the geostrategic implications such a technology suggests are immense: USA along with many other industrialized countries struggle from the dependency created by their massive reliance on imported energy in the form of oil and natural gas. According to Preston’s argument a dependency that would be greatly reduced if coal could effectively be substituted for gas and oil.While these new technologies appear to yield high economic potential and could possibly become a crucial part of the solution to the great problems of our time, they are still set apart from the radical novelty of Nagel’s “Sensitized Elements”.Radical Scientific Novelty As a natural reaction to the paradigm shift posed by the discovery, the team has encountered opposition and skepticism from the scientific community. Preston referred to an episode where he was asked to prove this theory without discarding any of the known laws of physics, which can be regarded as an account for the resistance to the implied revolution that certainly accompanies the claimed discovery. The proper introduction of Sensitized Elements to the scientific community has been slowed down by the incompability of there findings with the predominant paradigm. Publication of papers proves to be difficult, as there are few journals and peer-reviewers that do not declare the existence of SE’s as impossible. Nagel and Preston reported that the same reaction could be observed from independent laboratories, which frequently sent back samples and complained about de-calibrated measuring equipment. Confronted with this slow-moving process Nagel and Preston are now pursuing a new strategy of getting independently reproduced experiments to back up their theory. By selling “tailoring machines” to third-party developers that allow independent research the two hope to generate a critical mass of supporting results. Another mesure to force this paradigm shift gain momentum is to substanciate their theory through the support of two Nobelprize winners.Taking the Michelson-Morley experiment from 1887 as an comparative example reveals similaritys as well as differences. This “experimentum crucis” disproved the theory of luminiferous ether and marks “the moving-off point for the theoretical aspects of the Second Scientific Revolution”[4]. Upon comparing the discovery and the research around Sensitized Elements as an experiment that may lay roots for paradigm shifts certain similartys arise: The controversy and the resistence to accept the new findings can be observed likewise. But Michelson and Morley research findings had ultimate credibility concerning their motives as they had set out to prove the ether theory and the experiments failure ultimatly opposed their interests.
Furthermore their new insight was not commercialy exploitable at that time. However, this new “scientific revolution” appears to come hand in hand with great economic potential and it is therefore particularly hard to distinguish between motives of “pure” scientific search for insight and commercial interest. To the speakers defense, it should be taken into account that a clearer separation between science and business may be impossible to make in a world where doing research is forced to be a cost intensive endeavorer and might just be a sign of the increasing commercialization of research. If the findings and the commercialization potential that Chris Nagel and John Preston suggested do hold true this new technological paradigm will not only change the current understanding of the world, but should introduce great changes in the future be it by the use of steel than can protect itself from corrosion by attracting argon from the surrounding air, or copper with superconducting properties at room temperature that can save 10% of the world’s electrical energy lost on its way from the producer to the consumer. And maybe these scenarios only serve as a starting point to bring about a second industrial revolution harvesting the potential of the third dimension of the periodic table.-[1] Shapere, D, “The Paradigm Concept”, Science Vol 172 , 1971
[2] Preston, J. “Technological Paradigm”, presentation for the SMArchS Faculty Colloquium, MIT Department of Architecture, 10/01/2010 (quotes taken from this presentation.)
[3] Nagel, C, “Unique Properties of Thermally Tailored Copper: Magnetically Active Regions and Anomalous X-ray Fluorescence Emissions”, Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2009
[4]Earl R. Hoover, Cradle of Greatness: National and World Achievements of Ohio’s Western Reserve (Cleveland: Shaker Savings Association, 1977)
Hi there, just changed into aware of your blog thru Google, and located that it is truly informative. I’m going to be careful for brussels. I’ll be grateful should you proceed this in future. Numerous folks shall be benefited from your writing. Cheers!
But wanna remark that you have a very decent web site , I enjoy the style and design it actually stands out.
This is a very good thing, is your best choice, this is a good thing.
I hope you never stop! This is one of the best blogs Ive ever read. Youve got some mad skill here, man. I just hope that you dont lose your style because youre definitely one of the coolest bloggers out there. Please keep it up because the internet needs someone like you spreading the word.
*Nice post. I discover some thing much harder on various blogs everyday. Most commonly it is stimulating to study content material from other writers and exercise a specific thing from their internet site. I’d opt to apply certain while utilizing the content material in this little blog whether or not you do not mind. Natually I’ll provide a link on your own internet weblog. Appreciate your sharing.
I haven’t checked in here for some time since I thought it was getting boring, but the last several posts are good quality so I guess I will add you back to my daily bloglist. You deserve it my friend