Here's a photo album of it: https://photos.app.goo.gl/EZ74yJaMZX8VuoEp7
My favorite examples: https://photos.app.goo.gl/JX1f8uhrvnj4k6EY9
You weren't too far off:
> In 2015, the fungus Exidiopsis effusa was identified as key to the formation of hair ice.
- They state there is a "significant ammonium concentration" in hair ice. Ammonium is a frequent byproduct of metabolism, that becomes potentially harmful if concentrations become too high. Maybe hair ice allows the fungus to get rid of ammonium. (I'm extrapolating this from my knowledge of animal cell metabolism, where getting rid of ammonium is a recurring theme. I might be wrong on how well it applies to fungi.)
- Hair ice also seems like it has the perfect shape to prevent the formation of solid sheet ice on top of the deadwood. No sheet ice -> better ventilation.
- I also like sibling's theory of using it a means of dispersal, but the paper makes no mention of hair ice containing any fungus/spores at all.
It could also just be a random trait; something that's not beneficial or harmful and just happens to survive.
"Frost Beard" is the OBVIOUSLY superior name of this phenomenon.
How in all that is holy can you connect a bio-meteorological phenomenon to the Donald? When people say we are living in dark times I have to concur, public discourse is being destroyed with partisan and identity politics.
Also, not a supporter, but I think his rhetorical flourishes are quite arresting and quirky at times.
Leads me to think that there are a lot of undiscovered properties of materials that could potentially be unlocked by engineering different life forms. We're pretty far from exploring all the possibilities in manufacturing techniques.
I have friends in AI, biotech, clean tech, web/apps, robotics, but none in material sciences. And yet materials are so important technologically that we name ages after them (Stone Age, Iron Age, Bronze Age). I lived in "Silicon Valley" even — our industries and progress are so tied to materials, why isn't there more of a focus on material science?
We're constantly learning things in the semiconductor space, the battery space, and especially in ceramics, both industrial and superconductors, but almost all the initial breakthroughs came from curious people who had a "that's odd" moment when studying something unrelated.
Even the development of tin and copper working is suspected to be a side effect of better pottery ("hey, what are these little hard things in my kiln that came out of that strange rock") and iron working is suspected to be a side effect of better glass ("hey, what are those hard things in my furnace that came out of that strange rock").
There is. A huge example of one that has a lot of crossover is battery and energy storage technology, which at its core, is material science.
3d printing is more popular now than ever before and continues to rise in popularity. SpaceX prints their SuperDraco rocket engine entirely out of Inconel , which is a good example of a major breakthrough in material science.
The "scientists" you seek often wear welding aprons, face shields, and are creating stuff. The material science revolution is what we call the "Maker" revolution.
One example is I was thinking about path dependence in manufacturing or growing things. If you take a large handful of dry spaghetti, you can break it fairly consistently in half. But if you cook it first, there is no way to split all the strands in half any more.
I don't browse HN for this garbage.
Of course this means you have to go hiking in the cold. Totally worth it.
My mind usually defaults to "most things have already been discovered AND confirmed", seeing something like this confirmed only so recently is always cool, as it forces me to rethink some of my assumptions!
(Yes, I know there are plenty of undiscovered, and even more unconfirmed things out there, that doesn't change my mind's default reaction though!)
But in the middle happens most what we cannot comprehend. How does a cell know when to divide. How exactly the process goes. Why do we have consciousness? Having theories capable of describing atoms and stars we can't figure out the middle, this is fascinating.
Imho the issue is the complexity of system. Stars and atoms are actually not that far apart. In the middle the amount of effects with comparable magnitude and stable states are the greatest.
They didnt know that around freezing you have equilibrium that is both melting and freezing.
As you leave that the equilibrium shifts to freezing only.
Thinking that each of those fibers from the moss start the strand and the ice grows as a result.
EDIT: Chem engineer here, not sure what to cite on something like this, or even the proper language.
"a large Man-like figure, at least fourteen foot high, very sturdy, with a tall head, and hardly any neck. Whether it was clad in stuff like green and grey bark, or whether that was its hide, was difficult to say. Arms, at a short distance from the trunk, were not wrinkled, but covered with a brown smooth skin. The large feet had seven toes each. Grey beard, deep brown eyes, shot with a green light"