Word: atomical
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
SPEAKING OF SCIENCE, WHAT'S CAUGHT YOUR EYE IN THE FIELD? I'm doing a fair amount of work on nanoscale. It's the science of [the] very small: one atom up to about 400 atoms. Imagine if you can take 3 million little nanopills in the morning with orange juice, and they run through your body eating each cancer cell. Or imagine a detector that senses a potential nuclear weapon by just picking out three or four atoms in the air. You'd have much greater safety against terrorists...
...Like the subjects of this week’s scrutiny, Gossip Guy has been spending a lot of time at the lab. His hours among bubbling test tubes and spectrograms and whatnot have paid off: This week’s column features revolutionary, nanotechnology-assisted lies, atom-splitting rumors and titanium-enhanced innuendo...
This battle should have been called a massacre. To place troops, no matter how highly trained, in a field of mortar fire and grenades to face an enemy in fortified caves was unpardonable. The commanders of the U.S. troops don't know their military tactics. A small atom bomb should have been used to clean out the rat's nest of al-Qaeda fighters. I would not be as gracious as some parents who say their son died doing what he wanted to do. In my view, many of these young folks died when they should have lived. GEORGE...
...meeting between physicists NIELS BOHR, top, and WERNER HEISENBERG is a challenge that has enthralled many theatergoers, thanks to the Tony Award-winning play Copenhagen. Michael Frayn's drama imagines what might have happened at the meeting in occupied Denmark between Heisenberg, chief of Hitler's atom-bomb program, and Bohr, his Jewish mentor. Did Heisenberg, postulator of the uncertainty principle, attempt to extract information from Bohr? Or did he use the meeting to confess his anguish over helping Hitler? The latter is what the play suggests. But last week Americans got a different version of the story, when unsent...
...this scenario was rudely challenged last week by Kevin Pope, a former NASA scientist. Reviewing recent studies of atom-bomb blasts and analyses of particles in strata at the 65 million-year level, he concluded in Geology that most of the dust particles were too large to have remained suspended in the air for many months. The finer particles that stayed airborne would not have blocked enough sunlight to cause mass extinctions. Pope speculates instead that soot from the worldwide conflagrations, sulfate aerosols and other impact phenomena were to blame. His findings prompted such headlines as ALVAREZ TEAM WAS WRONG...