Hey Guys, We Made A Flyer That You Can Print Out And Post In Your Places Of Choice! Http://ift.tt/2jNXMm3
Hey guys, we made a flyer that you can print out and post in your places of choice! http://ift.tt/2jNXMm3
More Posts from Drunkscience4u and Others
The Science Has Spoken: Pluto Will Never Be A Planet Again
“What’s perhaps most remarkable is that we can make a simple, mathematical relationship between a world’s mass and its orbital distance that can be scaled and applied to any star. If you’re above these lines, you’re a planet; if you’re below it, you’re not. Note that even the most massive dwarf planets would have to be closer to the Sun than Mercury is to reach planetary status. Note by how fantastically much each of our eight planets meets these criteria… and by how much all others miss it. And note that if you replaced the Earth with the Moon, it would barely make it as a planet.”
It was a harsh lesson in astronomy for all of us in 2006, when the International Astronomical Union released their official definition of a planet. While the innermost eight planets made the cut, Pluto did not. But given the discovery of large numbers of worlds in the Kuiper belt and beyond our Solar System, it became clear that we needed something even more than what the IAU gave us. We needed a way to look at any orbiting worlds around any star and determine whether they met a set of objective criteria for reaching planetary status. Recently, Alan Stern spoke up and introduced a geophysical definition of a planet, which would admit more than 100 members in our Solar System alone. But how does this stand up to what astronomers need to know?
As it turns out, not very well. But the IAU definition needs improving, too, and modern science is more than up to the challenge. See who does and doesn’t make the cut into true planetary status, and whether Planet Nine – if real – will make it, too!
Please subscribe, like, comment, and donate! Next (and last) episode April 15, 2017. Stay tuned for Bloopers from this episode on April 8, 2017. Starring: Candice Lola Directed by Rebecca Berger Produced by Rebecca Berger and Candice Lola Written by Candice Lola Editing, Color, Sound Design by Rebecca Berger Animation by Rachael K McDonald Links: Music: http://ift.tt/1JICaNj and http://ift.tt/2lquxdO http://ift.tt/2lINlQJ http://ift.tt/2lqtjzr http://ift.tt/2lIL08B http://ift.tt/2lqvuCQ (Donations are always welcome!) http://ift.tt/2lITyw7 http://ift.tt/2lqvQJO
Mole-cool
Researchers at King’s College London found that the drug Tideglusib stimulates the stem cells contained in the pulp of teeth so that they generate new dentine – the mineralised material under the enamel.
Teeth already have the capability of regenerating dentine if the pulp inside the tooth becomes exposed through a trauma or infection, but can only naturally make a very thin layer, and not enough to fill the deep cavities caused by tooth decay.
But Tideglusib switches off an enzyme called GSK-3 which prevents dentine from carrying on forming.
Scientists showed it is possible to soak a small biodegradable sponge with the drug and insert it into a cavity, where it triggers the growth of dentine and repairs the damage within six weeks.
The tiny sponges are made out of collagen so they melt away over time, leaving only the repaired tooth.
The team behind Beauty of Science decided to explore the four seasons in this video combining macro footage of crystal growth, chemical reactions, and fluid dynamics. It’s always a fun game with videos like this to try and guess exactly what makes the mesmerizing patterns we see. Are those blue streaming waves in Spring caused by alcohol shifting the surface tension in a mixture? Are the dots of color welling up in Autumn a lighter fluid bursting up from underneath a denser one? As fun as the visuals are, though, what really made this video stand out for me was its excellent use of “The Blue Danube” to tie everything together. Check it out and don’t forget the audio! (Video credit: Beauty of Science; via Gizmodo)
Ask Ethan: Does Dark Energy Mean We’re Losing Information About The Universe?
“The universe’s expansion means our visible horizon is retreating; things faraway are vanishing continuously. (Albeit slowly, right now.) This would seem to imply we are losing information about the universe. So why is it the idea of losing information in a black hole’s event horizon is so controversial, if we’re constantly losing information to another horizon?”
As you look to greater and greater distances, you’re looking back in time in the Universe. But thanks to dark energy, what we can see and access today isn’t always going to be accessible. As galaxies grow more distant with the accelerated expansion of the Universe, they eventually recede faster than the speed of light. At present, 97% of the galaxies in the Universe aren’t reachable by us, even at the speed of light. But that isn’t the same as losing information. As a galaxy crosses over the horizon, its information never disappears from the Universe connected to us entirely. Instead, it gets imprinted on the cosmic horizon, the same way that information falling into a black hole gets imprinted on its event horizon. But there’s a fundamental difference between a black hole’s decaying horizon to the cosmic horizon’s eternal persistence, and that makes all the difference.
Come learn why even with dark energy, we don’t lose information about the Universe, but why the black hole information paradox is real!
-
lordrebeccasama reblogged this · 8 years ago -
drunkscience4u reblogged this · 8 years ago
The official page of Drunk Science! An enthusiastic host performs simple experiments and then humorously explains the science behind the result, all while visibly drunk.
126 posts