A community for people who like science
Just science on reddit, without the drama.
All posts must relate to a scientific report, science news event or scientific idea. In the case of a news event, the source must be less than one month old.
Posts can be in the form of an article, image, video or discussion post. There is considerable discretion in terms of assessing what type of media is permitted. If you have a cool way of sharing exciting science - go for it! We just ask that posts are not "low effort" spam.
Link in the comments to a source material, if applicable (i.e. if you link an image from a paper, please include a comment with a link to the full article).
No sensationalized or editorialized titles; no agenda pushing, especially against well-established science.
Comments must be on-topic. No memes. Jokes are only permitted if they are exquisitely funny (at moderator discretion).
No abusive comments.
No medical advice.
Progress in Nuclear Energy, Volume 169, 2024,105089, ISSN 0149-1970
Does anyone remember that time travel show from the early 2000’s about a time travel museum where a class takes a field trip there and they talk about the discovery of time travel and how it works? Had an Asian lady who was the host talking to the kids, and features a bunch of experts including Neil Degrasse Tyson? I can’t find anything on it any more and it use to be on YouTube. Please help! #science
On Friday I did a photosynthesis lab yall might be familiar with. We took leaf cuttings and put them in a solution after doing the syringe trick (the labs on YouTube if you’re not familiar) We had 2 different grow lights and a small unfiltered light. All went as expected, grow lights caused leaf cuts to rise to the top of the cup the fastest. However when we aimed 2 grow lights and the unfiltered light at a cup with the same amount as before, it went slower than the other trials. This is the data points on the left most column.
I didn’t have time to retest so it’s possible it was human error in some way, but if not I was wondering why this happened? Over exposure? Competing wavelengths? Because they were angled? Thanks in advance!
Is this even up for debate or total bs?
I found this picture because it looked cool, and more advanced stealth tech is a given.
The idea that made me post this was drones. The CIA had insect sized drones IN THE 1970S. I'm guessing the US or China has some sort of hivemind baby drones they can release en masse that will suicide dive into missiles with incredible precision, effectively negating "Mutually Assured Destruction." I fear that some day this military will use nukes once it looks like a full on war is impending, and then just bat the retaliatory nukes down.
What about y'all? What do you think probably already exists behind closed doors?
PS - Ramez Naam is an angel investor who wrote a trilogy of books about the near future, and all of the tech was based on real tech that's already in R&D. The first one is called Nexus.