Category Archives: Around the Corner
The estimable Michael Robinson proprietor of the always excellent Time to Eat the Dogs has reached the milestone of 100 000 visitor hits on his expedition through the blogatronic-hyper-sphere. If you don’t already read his wonderfully informative and highly entertaining essays on all things exploratory then you should.
Mark Chu-Carroll of Good Math, Bad Math has a very clear, readable, meaningful and above all informative introduction to some elementary aspects of Kolmagorov-Chaitin Information Theory. He deals in particular with the difference between information and meaning. Given the confusion in the Internet debates on the subject, in particular with the statements of some ID supporters this is a must read for anybody involved in the modern debate on the sanctity of science.
At Time to Eat the Dogs the always excellent Michael Robinson (and if you don’t already regularly read him you should) has a stimulating review of a fascinationg online exhibition, from Princeton University, of the historical development of the European cartography of Africa. Both review and exhibition are more than worth your time go look!
Having been nasty to Ethan at Starts with a Bang recently I’m happy to report that I can be nice to him today. He has started a series on the nature of dark matter and why he and most other astrophysicists believe that it must exist. Judging by the first installment this is going to be a really good educational experience. I for one am really looking forward to the next episode.
While we’re on the subject of astrophysics the wonderful people (I seem to recommend everything that they post!) at ‘we are all in the gutter‘ (this time it’s Rita [is she a lovely meter maid?]) have a great post up explain the function of the latest satellite telescope Planck.
John Wilkins has already drawn attention to this but I will do so again, Will Thomas at Ether Wave Propaganda has a really excellent review of the book Objectivity by Galison & Daston. In particular I think his discussion of representation in science [history] and its relationship to an independent objectivity is a must read for anybody interested in the history and philosophy of science.
Researchers at Cornell University think that they can explain how mediaeval manuscript illustrators were able to produced miniscule parallel lines with such precision before the invention of magnifying lenses.
Chad Orzel at Uncertain Principles has had an interesting series of short pop surveys on less well-known names in the history of physics. So far he has covered Thermodynamics, Optics and Precision Measurements with follow ups here, here and here. I find the basic concept very good and will be posting on the underlying theme very shortly.
gg at Skulls in the Stars whose posts on the history of science are always exemplary has found a wonderful Victorian scientific crank for the pleasure of all those, like myself, who enjoy such things.