Blatant fraud is rare in physics, engineering, chemistry. Lying is rare. Quality is high at the highest institutions of physics and chemistry. Exaggerated claims occur, but much less than in day to day life. Top visibility work is quickly reproduced. Reproduction is the essence of science.
Did you google "fraud in physics" or "fraud in chemistry"? (I just did.)
> Exaggerated claims occur, but much less than in day to day life.
"Day-to-day life" does not lay the foundation for millions of dollars in followup research, or set the direction of a grad student's research, i.e. their career.
Measuring the three-dimensional (3D) distribution of chemistry in nanoscale matter is a longstanding challenge. Here, high-resolution 3D chemical imaging is achieved near or below one-nanometer resolution. Multi-modal data fusion enables high-resolution chemical tomography often with 99% less dose by linking information encoded within both elastic (HAADF) and inelastic (EDX/EELS) signals. We thus demonstrate that sub-nanometer 3D resolution of chemistry is measurable for a broad class of geometrically and compositionally complex materials.
The algorithm is made available; may be of interest to HN comp sci community. Fused multi-modal electron tomography reconstructs three-dimensional chemical models by solving an optimization problem seeking a solution that strongly agrees with (1) the HAADF modality containing high SNR, (2) the chemically sensitive spectroscopic modality (EELS and/or EDX), and (3) encourages sparsity in the gradient domain producing solutions with reduced spatial variation.
A lot of non-quantum waves have discrete allowed values. EM cavities, guitar strings, etc. Quantum waves are described by a special wave equation, actually a complex diffusion equation (first order in time, second order spatially).
Be careful with large numbers: 10^23 shoes would be roughly 854B shoes for every (~117B) human that have ever lived, that is about 14 million pairs of shoes per individual and per day. I am pretty sure there has never been a market for that many shoes.
An average paper clip is 204.8mm^3. 10^23 of those would be 2.048x10^19 L in volume[1]. That would be only two orders of magnitude less than total volume of oceans 1.33x10^21 L [2]. So I think not.
Headline is misleading. Waterbears are quite fragile, albeit tougher than most. I bought some and found nearly all would die after short exposure to low vacuum. Manuscripts seem to corroborate our findings. It is the exaggerated headlines that lead me to believe they are indestructible.
I’ve yet to have ChatGPT produce useable content for my technical writing, or even lighter portions of proposal writing, rec letters, emails etc. I found it has done well at cleaning up text, fun language games, and quickly sourcing readily available information. I don’t think 2023 is the year books are replaced (maybe low novelty blogs). I feel a disconnect with how GPT is being exalted, and my underwhelming experience for useable content.
reply