Yep, this is the "easy" way to chloride silver wires in the lab. I've chlorided silver wires by immersing part of the wire in bleach (regular household Clorox) and taping it in place so it sits for ~10-20 minutes.
Silver wire is pretty cheap online, so it's not too hard to get started.
This is a pretty good introduction. I highly recommend Feynman's book "QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter" as an excellent in-depth work that does not sacrifice accuracy for the sake of making difficult ideas understandable. It is both very clear to the layperson and accurate to the physics.
Wholeheartedly seconded. This book occupies a nearly unique position in the physics literature: it is neither a textbook nor a popularization. It assumes little more knowledge (of math or physics) than the typical popularization, but it explains what is very nearly the true, complete structure of its subject matter (quantum electrodymanics). Now, the methods that it teaches are absolutely unwieldy: it would be hopeless to do any real, meaningful calculation by drawing countless little arrows! But (as I think Feynman says) you can go to grad school to learn the efficient tricks. The underlying concepts will carry through essentially unchanged.
An interesting and surprising fact about Feynman's books is that he never _wrote_ any of them, as such; he famously disliked writing. QED is essentially a transcript of a lecture (although I don't know how much polishing and editing was done by Feynman himself; probably some). Same with his collection of physics lectures. His most popular book, "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman", was transcribed from a series of interviews, pretty much verbatim.
Relativity: The Special and General Theory by Einstein would also fit that description, I think. (Though I haven't read Feynman's book so I may be misunderstanding you.)
It's a marvelous book, but a little frustrating as well for not quite explaining enough to calculate with, even super-inefficiently. Can't we get a correct formula for the propagator, including the four spin components? When I tried to fill that in from other sources I was snowed under by all the formalism or prerequisites -- yes, it's probably a short step if you already understand it or you're smarter than me.
If someone made a clear-but-impractical QED simulator using, say, lattice gauge theory, I pledge to sing its praises. (You'd expect this to be possible for general relativity too.)
It would be nice to have a version that uses complex numbers and linear algebra instead of spinning arrows. A little bit more math would make it easier to connect with the "grown up" version of the theory.
It starts off with a spring mattress analogy (like the one in the linked article, but with more math) and goes on to more advanced material from there. I remember it requiring little background besides LinAl and multivariable calc.
It's been a while but I'm pretty sure the spinning arrows are Phasors. Ironically the spinning arrows might make more sense than the math that describes them.
Much less famous than Feynman's Messenger Lectures at Cornell (or his real "Lectures" that got turned into the books) are the lectures he gave in New Zealand that became QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter.
Computers were at the core of Jurassic Park. Remember, the novel was published in 1990.
Among other important uses:
* the widespread use of computers for nearly complete automation of the park--maintaining feeds (to a certain extent), automatically delivering medicine, etc. These systems were buggy, but it was a major early demonstration of how computers could be used to automate out many jobs.
* Think the Internet-of-Things but for tracking hundreds of dinosaurs in xyzt space around the park using image recognition from hundreds of distributed sensors/cameras around the park.
* They had several Cray XP supercomputers in order to help with DNA sequencing.
* Ian Malcolm studied chaos theory--a field that is reliant on numerical simulations (rather than pure pen-and-paper calculation).
As a slight spoiler to the book: human hubris in building incredibly complex biological systems under the control of relatively simple technological systems is what led to the downfall of the park.
Between Alamaden (San Jose) and Yorktown Heights (NY) in the US, IBM is one of the last few industrial basic sciences/engineering labs in the US, resembling Bell Labs and Xerox PARC from a few decades ago.
IBM/Intel/Samsung buy tools from various companies. By "tools", I really mean huge pieces of instrumentation that cost many (tens to hundreds) millions of dollars from other companies that are used for the various processing steps (deposition/growth of materials on wafers, patterning resists, etching, etc). The development of each of these tools is immensely difficult and challenging and making them talk to each other and designing manufacturing pipelines is another immense challenge. IBM/Intel/Samsung's job is to design chips (a immense challenge on its own), come up with a process to manufacture them, and then take each of these very complex tools, integrate them into a manufacturing pipeline (with QC), and manufacture the devices that they want.
How much is like turn key
and how much is lots of
one off, proprietary engineering
and system integration?
I was guessing that maybe
for the fabs themselves,
mostly
there was some one company
that delivered
fabs. Or, why reinvent the
wheel several times?
Sure, for the chip design,
say, by Qualcomm, Samsung,
Intel, IBM, that's a lot
of design software, know how,
etc. And, sure, QC has to
be one heck of an Excedrin headache
but with likely some
long standing basic ideas
for testability.
SOI is better than the planar design since you can fully deplete the channel. But it's worse than FinFETs when you consider the control of the gate on the channel and when it comes to thermals. The oxide below the channel also acts as a thermal isolator. So the heat can't be transported away as efficiently.
The upside of SOI is that it's easier to manufacture. That's why we see so much of it around (AFAIK, GlobalFoundries and TSMC still do it).
But the actual way forward is the FinFET. The 7nm chip from the article is actually built with FinFETs. Otherwise that thing would probably not work very well.
Certain parts of the cleanroom will look yellow--these are the spaces where they do lithography with resists that are openly accessible to the air. UV-sensitive resists will chemically crosslink in UV light, so they put on filters on the fluorescent lights (or use special lights) that keeps the wavelength away from the higher-energy blues and towards the lower-energy yellows and reds.
> This is one step closer towards an effective full Office Suite on Linux
Are you referring to Microsoft Office specifically?
LibreOffice is a full-fledged office suite, is feature-complete for just about 99% of things you can do in MS Office, is free (both, as in beer and freedom), and runs very well under Linux.
I don't think the two are comparable. LibreOffice is still a rather poor (in my view) 1990s office suite. Office 365 is a modern ecosystem that includes a more powerful suite of office programs with much better ease of use, a 50GB mailbox, 1TB of online storage, the great integration of email, OneDrive and online software, the ability to stream Office programs without installing local copies, plus the cross-platform tablet and smartphone apps (ie including Apple and Android).
Buy Office 365 Home and you get all that for five people, which could mean your family or flatmates.
You can't get all that stuff from LibreOffice. As a matter of fact, you can't get it from Google either.
> LibreOffice is a full-fledged office suite, is feature-complete for just about 99% of things you can do in MS Office
Did you seriously just compare LibreOffice to MS Office? Look I'm a huge Linux fan, but buggy LibreOffice is nowhere near this imaginary "99% feature matched" you've spit out here. The performance is also a joke when it comes to LibreOffice.
As much as the open source camps would like to believe, Microsoft still hast them beat in the Office sector.
Yes, I was referring to Microsoft Office in the comment.
I've used LibreOffice for years while running Linux before. I noticed perfomance issues compared to Microsoft Office on Windows that were especially bad for spreadsheets.
I consider myself to be a power-user of MS Office. Last time I used LibreOffice, it did not have many of the features that I used extensively (especially in their PowerPoint analog). In addition, the interoperability between MS Office and LibreOffice was not great.
Lastly--there isn't an adequate OneNote replacement on Linux. Evernote doesn't cut it for me. This is really my killer app--if there was a good OneNote on Linux (non-browser, a native desktop app), I could deal with the other issues as they came up.
+1 for the onenote issue. I spent a lot of time looking for alternatives on linux and didn't find anything close either. It's one of the tipping reasons I use Windows.
It is increasingly common for large labs in the life sciences (25+ members) to hire multiple support staff (with PhDs) to help offset this load. This is in addition to positions like Senior Research Scientists (senior postdocs) who often serve as 50% "project managers" and 50% independent postdocs.
Silver wire is pretty cheap online, so it's not too hard to get started.