FaithFusion offers blogs and columns on
many topics: storytelling, society and culture, philosophy, religion,
politics, science, and especially “deep doctrine magic” about
all seven.
China wants to replicate the astounding success Dr. Octavius had with his experimental fusion reactor:
AN “artificial sun,” an experimental nuclear fusion device to generate potentially infinite energy, will be built this spring in Hefei, capital of Anhui Province.
It will be the world's first such device. The aim is to use nuclear fusion to produce energy by extracting deuterium from seawater under enormous temperatures.
The fusion process would require temperatures of 100 million degrees Celsius, making it equivalent to an artificial sun in terms of energy.
The full superconducting experimental Tokamak fusion device, which aims to generate infinite, clean nuclear-fusion-based energy, will be built in March or April in the east China province.
Experiments with the advanced new device will start in July or August. If the experiments are successful, China will become the first country to build a full superconducting experimental Tokamak fusion device, or “artificial sun,” experts said.
A special headset was placed on my cranium by my hosts during a recent demonstration at an NTT [Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corp., Japan] research center. It sent a very low voltage electric current from the back of my ears through my head — either from left to right or right to left, depending on which way the joystick on a remote-control was moved.
I found the experience unnerving and exhausting: I sought to step straight ahead but kept careening from side to side. Those alternating currents literally threw me off.
The technology is called galvanic vestibular stimulation — essentially, electricity messes with the delicate nerves inside the ear that help maintain balance.
I felt a mysterious, irresistible urge to start walking to the right whenever the researcher turned the switch to the right. I was convinced — mistakenly — that this was the only way to maintain my balance.
The phenomenon is painless but dramatic. Your feet start to move before you know it. I could even remote-control myself by taking the switch into my own hands.
There's no proven-beyond-a-doubt explanation yet as to why people start veering when electricity hits their ear. But NTT researchers say they were able to make a person walk along a route in the shape of a giant pretzel using this technique.
It's a mesmerizing sensation similar to being drunk or melting into sleep under the influence of anesthesia. But it's more definitive, as though an invisible hand were reaching inside your brain.
Now don't you “The Antichrist Is Among Us Already and It's the End Times!” people get started. Because America still has the nuclear warheads.
Perhaps we should begin testing a few of them near Japan, just as a reminder.
The article says nothing of their mind-control waves being able to manipulate hand motions, at least not yet.
Hollywood movie mogul STEVEN SPIELBERG has invented technology he calls “the future of cinema” - and he promises the new film experience will suck audiences into the heart of the action.
The SAVING PRIVATE RYAN director is working on advanced screening technology, but insists he is looking to build on the things that made cinema great in the past, rather than altering it forever.
He tells the Hollywood Reporter, “A good movie will bring you inside of itself just by the sheer brilliance of the director/writer/production staff.
”But in the future, you will physically be inside the experience, which will surround you top, bottom, on all sides.
“I've invented it, but because patent is pending, I can't discuss it right now.”
Well. That's interesting. Some form of surround-sight holography? Let's recall, though, that even a film upgrade as amazing as this won't work long-term if the directors, writers and all of them don't make the story and characters engaging enough to draw the audience in. ... An excellent film on flatscreen would be enjoyed much more by viewers who actually pay attention, than a holographic movie that relies only on special effects.
Pioneer has developed a nifty new way to draw and work with 3D images.
[. . .]
The user draws with a finger placed within a frame; the connected PC and software interpret the movement and put it on the screen. Apparently, the image itself appears in three dimensions without the need for special glasses.
Now by “it's about time,” I don't mean it's about time we had the possibility of three-dimensional hand-drawing. I mean it's about time LiveScience.com ceased caterwauling about the “Intelligent Design” debacle and posted more news about actual observational, operational science going on.
Wired News's Bruce Schneier had a few complaints about John Roberts' confirmation hearings, and it has little to do with abortion or gay rights or any of that:
[i]...[/i] There weren't enough discussions about science fiction. Technologies that are science fiction today will become constitutional questions before Roberts retires from the bench. The same goes for technologies that cannot even be conceived of now. And many of these questions involve privacy.
[. . .]
Recent advances in technology have already had profound privacy implications, and there's every reason to believe that this trend will continue into the foreseeable future. Roberts is 50 years old. If confirmed, he could be chief justice for the next 30 years.
[. . .]
Advances in genetic mapping continue, and someday it will be easy, cheap and detailed — and will be able to be performed without the subject's knowledge. What privacy protections do people have for their genetic map, given that they leave copies of their genome in every dead skin cell that they leave behind? What protections do people have against government actions based on this data? Against private actions?
Should a customer's genetics be considered when granting a mortgage, or determining its interest rate?
[. . .]
New technologies will be able to peer through walls, under clothing, beneath skin, perhaps even into the activity of the brain.
One can find other reasons for restricting these problems, even proactively, rather than invoking a mystic “right to privacy” as Roberts has done.
Yet Schneier also points out that Roberts once referred to “the so-called right to privacy.” That doesn't seem to be the new Chief Justice's opinion now.
(My guess is that Roberts has long since “moderated” his stance, and Bush does seem to be supporting “moderate” conservatives far too often and the results are often disgusting, as Ann Coulter points out this week.)
But why should the Supreme Court take up these issues now when it's Congress's job to make the laws. Why put so much faith in the Supreme Court?
Mark Levin in Men in Black describes it this way: so much of Congress is so public, its flaws so obvious, that perhaps too many people naturally put too much faith in a lesser-public entity such as the Supreme Court, where shouting matches and political moves, if any, are either never found out or discovered many years later. ...
Yet if people are concerned about having their thoughts read in public by some future technology — and they will be — members of Congress will scramble to act. No need to beg for help from the Court.