Matthew Bailes has another excellent entry in the "State of Science" series of public conversations on science:
- Log in to post comments
More like this
A new Pulsar Planet has been discovered, and it is a beaut.
In a paper published in Science, Matthew Bailes and collaborators announce the discovery of the third pulsar planet, and this one is a wonder.
Very nice video summary bu Matthew hisself
The first exoplanets discovered, were found…
The Aspen Center for Physics does a number of public outreach and engagement activities.
A new and quite interesting effort underway is Radio Physics, in collaboration with KDNK community radio.
The project links (visiting) physicists with local AP physics classes, who do a 30 minute group…
The "Physical Applications of Millisecond Pulsars" conference is under way at the Aspen Center for Physics, going through thursday when the X-Games take over.
The meeting started with surveys of current observational and instrumentation projects, in particular the amazing serendipitous discoveries…
You may be aware that there is a huge discussion about framing science going on in the blogosphere. It has gotten out of hand. But, for those who want to dig in, or want to analyze the posts and comments (that is a lot of data!), here is the comprehensive list of links (excluded are links to…
This "catastrophism == more funding" meme is a serious misreading of the problem. As a climate modeller (never mind as a human!) a big catastrophe is not what I want; it leads to despondency: why should a politician bother funding us to do anything at all if the problem is so huge?
The real challenge is getting realistic 'everyday' forecasts for whats going to happen over the next few decades. We know (from observations, theory and models) that we expect more extreme conditions: drier summers, heavier flooding in the North, etc. So we need more reservoirs, etc to catch the winter rains, etc. but also, when the rain does fall the individual events are likely to be more severe: we need bigger drains.
How much bigger? thats the 64 trillion dollar question and our models aren't up to it. We need to remove the uncertainty.
Climate modelling is not going to save us from a Global Warming catastrophe, and I don't know anyone who pretends that it will. We know what we need to do already, and its a political, not modelling, problem. The modelling is about minimising the cost of adapting to our new warmer, climate.