1627

It opens the door for materials to superconduct at sustainable moderately low temperature and moderately high pressure.

1628
1629

I surprised myself with how rapidly I clicked that link. Then I watched the video of the ostrich and realized there are so many things about nature left for me to learn.

1630

Here’s a readable version of the paper where the guy made the graphene generate power.

1631

That is some impressive engineering.

1632

When did Randall Munroe start writing for the NYT?

1633

The universe truly is in your mind:

1634

Apparently it’s also in Italian…

1635

Haha yep!

1636

I don’t know why the universe is in Italian. They could have chosen from among any number of other languages.

1637

Perhaps because “quarantadue” sounds better?

1638

This is far from awesome.

NSF begins planning for decommissioning of Arecibo Observatory’s 305-meter telescope due to safety concerns

1639

2020 is just one long list of tragedies, both great and small.

1640

Tax cuts for billionaires and their companies, but not enough money for science. This is bullshit.

1641

I certainly agree with you. Thing is, even if they throw money at it now, there is no guarantee that it can be fixed. Your point certainly is valid.

1642

It’s been starved for money for more than a decade. Meanwhile China can afford one.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02790-3

image
image800×533 120 KB

1643

Protein folding solved?

In this year’s CASP, AlphaFold predicted the structure of dozens of proteins with a margin of error of just 1.6 angstroms—that’s 0.16 nanometers. This far outstrips all other computational methods and for the first time matches the accuracy of experimental techniques to map out the structure of proteins in the lab, such as cryo-electron microscopy, nuclear magnetic resonance and x-ray crystallography. These techniques are expensive and slow: it can take hundreds of thousands of dollars and years of trial and error for each protein. AlphaFold can find a protein’s shape in a few days.

Edit: Nature link -
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03348-4

1644

I am always in favor of scientific advancement, and I am in awe of what DeepMind can do, but I have to say I find it problematic that as nearly as I can tell, Google owns it?

1645

Did you feel better when the model was owned by a different private company that designed it?

1646

I feel better if it is in the hands of researchers who aren’t backed by a profit motive.

And I don’t trust Google as far as I can throw them. Hell, I’d rather it be owned by Microsoft than Google.