Introducing Magnet-Responsive Memory Foam 69
Roland Piquepaille writes "The U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) has recently reported that two research teams have developed a new porous foam of an alloy that changes shape when exposed to a magnetic field. The NSF states that this new material is able to remember its original shape after it's been deformed by a physical or magnetic force. This polycrystalline nickel-manganese-gallium alloy is potentially cheaper and lighter than other materials currently used in devices ranging from sonar to precision valves. It also could be used to design biomedical pumps without moving parts and even for space applications and automobiles."
Space Time Continium (Score:2, Insightful)
Just on track, I believe.
Moving parts (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Pumps with no moving parts? (Score:5, Insightful)
you went to a much better high school than I did
Re:Holy specious conclusions, Batman (Score:5, Insightful)
You know... That where you observe facts, formulate hypotheses and try to invalidate them through experiments.
Thanks for expanding my point (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd be almost equally happy if future politicians got a really good grounding in history, instead of being told that it is irrelevant.
Re:Thanks for expanding my point (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Thanks for expanding my point (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know if I would even go that far. All most Christians want is that the theory of evolution be taught as a theory. As a Christian student, evolution fascinated me. I always felt that a slow evolution of species was much more a miracle than God simply saying "let there be X... and there was". I always wanted to know what happened when (and before... God is timeless after all) God said what he said, and evolution provided that to me. But too many science teachers wannabe scientists (like here on
So I have nothing against the theory of evolution being taught as long as it's taught as a theory. My reasoning for that is nothing religious, but because sometimes, science is wrong. Even Einstein rejected the idea of the "Big Bang" as he rejected the idea of an expanding universe. He told Georges Lemaître (a Catholic Priest, btw) "Your calculations are correct, but your grasp of physics is abominable.". Einstein, of course, had to revise his theories once Hubble proved that the Universe was expanding.
My point is that science evolves just like anything else. What is "fact" today is backward-thinking-junk-science tomorrow. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive. Evolution has about as much to do with disproving religion as the Big Bang, and I don't want it being taught as such. Teaching Darwin is fine. Teaching Darwin as a counter to religion is just wrong.