Sentences with phrase «simple physics at»

This links events within a contorted space - time geometry, such as in a black hole, with simpler physics at that space's boundary.

Not exact matches

Simple «spin models» used to explain magnetism can precisely reproduce any possible phenomenon in classical, non-quantum physics, according to scientists at the MPQ and UCL.

«We can now start with a pretty simple disk, pretty simple physics, and reproduce the outer solar system — and that's never been done before,» says Hal Levison, a planetary scientist at Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado, who led the study.

«We demonstrate that the simplest small mixing, related to the ratios of the scale at which electroweak physics operates, and a possible Grand Unified Scale, produces a possible contribution to the vacuum energy today of precisely the correct order of magnitude to account for the observed dark energy,» Krauss explained.

«Our paper demonstrates that a very small energy scale can at least be naturally generated within the context of a very simple extension of the standard model of particle physics.»

«Simple physics models are elegant and can explain a lot,» says study coauthor Dan Zitterbart, a physicist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts.

However, this simple observation is only valid at the level of classical physics — the laws and principles that appear to explain the physics of relatively large objects at human scale.

Starting in the 3rd year of his 5 - year degree at the University of Vigo, Ourense, in Spain, Añel spent 4 hours a week in Luis Gimeno's Group of Atmospheric and Ocean Physics at the university's Department of Applied Physics, computing climate change quantifiers using simple parameters such as precipitation and air temperature.

Erkan Tüzel, left, associate professor of physics, biomedical engineering, and computer science at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), and PhD candidate James Kingsley examine a microfluidic sperm sorting device called SPARTAN (Simple Periodic ARray for Trapping And IsolatioN).

Background It might not seem like it at first, but a simple balloon car is loaded with physics and engineering concepts!

Using historical data from horizontal wells in the Barnett Shale formation in North Texas, Tad Patzek, professor and chair in the Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering in the Cockrell School of Engineering; Michael Marder, professor of physics in the College of Natural Sciences; and Frank Male, a graduate student in physics, used a simple physics theory to model the rate at which production from the wells declines over time, known as the «decline curve.»

Roman Morgunov from the Institute of Problems of Chemical Physics at the Russian Academy of Sciences and colleagues have now developed a simple additive - based method for ensuring the stability of permanent magnets over time, with no loss to their main magnetic characteristics.

Now, scientists from the research group of Nir Bar - Gill at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem's Racah Institute of Physics and Department of Applied Physics, in cooperation with Prof. Eyal Buks of the Technion — Israel Institute of Technology, have shown that ultra-high densities of NV centers can be obtained by a simple process of using electron beams to kick carbon atoms out of the lattice.

«The physics is simplest if you can just look at the motions of stars,» she says.

As a whole, now the conceptual transition occurs from proving the inflationary paradigm in general and testing some of its simplest models to applying it for investigation of particle physics at super-high energies and of the actual history of the Universe in the remote past using observational data.

«Simple physics (effect of [sea - level rise] on storm surge) and simple thermodynamics (i.e. Clausius - Clapeyron) are valid whether or not we can trust the models to get the specifics dynamical linkages between climate change and extreme weather events right (and I'm deeply skeptical the models are up to this task at present).&Simple physics (effect of [sea - level rise] on storm surge) and simple thermodynamics (i.e. Clausius - Clapeyron) are valid whether or not we can trust the models to get the specifics dynamical linkages between climate change and extreme weather events right (and I'm deeply skeptical the models are up to this task at present).&simple thermodynamics (i.e. Clausius - Clapeyron) are valid whether or not we can trust the models to get the specifics dynamical linkages between climate change and extreme weather events right (and I'm deeply skeptical the models are up to this task at present).»

Our son was born there and Liam's dad is from Barnsley so I was really pleased Liam chose to buy my ring there as I love sentimental things like this.Liam has a simple cobalt band, he is a physics teacher so he has to wear something hard wearing as he's always coming home having burnt his tie or some such accident so his ring is bound to be in danger at some point!

At the 3DO Company in the early and mid 90s, he was very involved in the generational video game transition from games built on simple algorithms with 2D sprite graphics to games with real - time 3D photorealistic graphics and physics engines.

The best explanation I have seen for wariness at various points in the market is Butler Philbrick Gordillo's in The Physics Of Investing In Expensive Markets: How to Apply Simple Statistical Models:

To accomplish all of this physics based nonsense you'll need to utilize the games simple but intuitive control system which uses the least amount of buttons that it possibly can, which in a game where you're frantically trying to control a blob of jelly hurtling through the air at high - speed is certainly a good thing.

according to dice they both look equally crappy (run at pc lowest settings) at 1280x704 with no v - sync, no texture filtering and smaller maps and player count the ps3 uses spu based differed rendering while 360 uses tile based differed rendering they are both the same thing but the ps3 version is simoly called spu based differed rendering because the differed rendering is done on SPU and NOT the gpu the 360s gpu is much more advanced than the ps3s gpu (which is why the gpu can handle the differed rendering while with ps3 it must be done on spus) while the ps3s cpu is better at graphics calculations and simple physics than the 360s cpu but the 360 cpu does win in branch intensive operations ust so you know the 360s cpu can also help out with graphics operations and post processing effects just not as much as the cell because MS focused on putting more power into the gpu even IBM stated that the cell is better for more things than xenon but that the 360s gpu is «very sophisticated» compared to the ps3s rsx.

I do not really think MS is ahead of this game, wonder how Frostbite 3 does it... (BF4, PvZ GW, NFS Rivals,...) Possibly simpler to move off physics calculations to the server - you shoot at something, it breaks, all players (within view) gets updated.

Summary: A simple little physics game that's fun and relaxing to play, and at such a cheap price it's well worth checking out.

Instead of throwing difficult puzzles and complicated gadgetry at players, this quirky physics - based game makes even the simplest task difficult.

With an innovative and deceptively simple control scheme, realistic physics including a skeletal system on your player, and a gigantic city to roam in, the talented folks at EA Black Box made a huge statement, and the game outsold Tony Hawk's Proving Grounds.

If you like the draw of simple casual play, a physics engine mixed with action gameplay, or shooting down enemy ships in a giant squid shaped plane, then Mini Squadron is a worth a look at.

At its core, the gameplay seems simple enough but requires a lot of strategy and use of physics.

It seems like a simple control scheme, but the brilliance is when it's used with the game's physics, allowing you to move around like a real snake, coiling around poles and maneuvering around bamboo structures, giving you a lot of freedom to traverse across obstacles at your own free will, whether that's going slow or fast.

I have to admit that this is exactly the kind of physics I enjoy, good simple theory joined at the hip with real world observation, and I find it very convincing.

There is no certainty in simple physics — but uncertainty comes — as I keep saying — at the risk of an inherent climate instability.

If that is not happening, then everything I am saying is complete BS:) If it is happening, then you might just want to dust off your old thermodynamics books, blow off GHG theory and look at what really controls our climate, simple physics..

At about 14:50 he says: «You can not deny the simple physics of CO2 dissolving into the ocean.»

Some nice simple java demonstrations of STC can be found on the web page of Mike Cross (physics prof at Caltech), here.

there is a simple but very solid explanation (with deference to SM) of the Marcott fraud here http://theinconvenientskeptic.com/2013/03/introducing-the-marcott-9/ maybe stick * (pun intended) to Gleick type investigations you are very good at that but Atmospheric physics zero refer to Lindzen maybe

«Simple physics says that if I drop a ball and a feather they will fall at the same rate.

At this point, very simple physics takes over, and you are pretty much doomed, by what scientists refer to as the «radiative» properties of carbon dioxide molecules (which trap infrared heat radiation that would otherwise escape to space), to have a warming planet.

By simple physics that meant the Arctic was losing energy to space at a much higher rate than average.

I think this article and the subsequent discussion is utterly fascinating — because the physics is so simple, but I am faced with two different conclusions that are utterly at odds with each other!

That's why I kept the argument in the top post above simple — limited to addressing only Jelbring and the EEJ paper so we could do adiabatic apples to apples reasoning, limited to a picture that even people who don't know much physics can understand — anybody who has tried to touch the handle of a heating pan and found it hot to the touch has direct experience of Fourier's Law, so whether or not they fully understand the algebra they know this happens — and appealing to their intuition as much as to the letter of the various forms of the second law (there are at least four or five that I know of offhand).

However, unlike the «simple physics» theory, it is at least plausible and worthy of investigation.

When we looked in detail at the so - called «simple physics», we found that it was actually «simplistic physics».

BH: Some of them are talking about climate sensitivity at 1.2 C, at 1.5 C. I think this is completely implausible because the basic energetics of the climate system responding to the additional greenhouse gas emissions almost from simple physics, has to be at least 1.2 C and possibly more before you begin to take into account any of the feedbacks in the system from water vapour in clouds and so on.

The physics of ice, at least, was simple and undeniable.

:) I mean it in a good way here... but it's not a physics paper... it's a statistical methods paper attempting to show that any reasonable analysis of the AGW signal can not begin with GCM verification (circular logic) or simple signal processing (because there are a series of complicated longer - term climate oscillations at work).

Physicists like to do thermodynamic calculations at constant volume as the equations are simpler, or that's what I remember Feynman saying in freshman physics.

Take a few laws of physics, add a soupcon of well - known and well - validated equations applicable to simple and sometimes theoretical situations; stir in judicious amounts of SWAG (GCMs perhaps being the most egregious example); then have at interpreting mostly manipulated empirical data in light of that.

I do believe we should treat our lucky position in this galaxy with some respect and at least acknowledge what we have discovered about simple physics.

This is readily quantified, at least roughly enough, using undergraduate level physics and a simple spreadsheet, and shown to be a strong enough effect to account for all the temperature increase.

But, I think it's quite reasonable to demand good evidence for these purported feedbacks and in the absence of that evidence assume the simple physics of radiation and humidity dependence at constant relative humidity hold.

It's a simple, natural control scheme that works well in both physics - based games that require you to manipulate virtual objects, and in menus where you can simply point at items with your finger to select them.