Monday, March 23rd, 2015

I love the search results when I do math in DuckDuckGo. Here's the top hit for my latest calculation:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.6474

Decay of the pseudoscalar glueball into scalar and pseudoscalar mesons

Walaa I. Eshraim, Stanislaus Janowski, Francesco Giacosa, Dirk H. Rischke
(Submitted on 31 Aug 2012 (v1), last revised 29 Apr 2013 (this version, v2))
We study a chiral Lagrangian which describes the two- and three-body decays of a pseudoscalar glueball into scalar and pseudoscalar mesons. The various branching ratios are a parameter-free prediction of our approach. We compute the decay channels for a pseudoscalar glueball with a mass of 2.6 GeV, as predicted by Lattice QCD in the quenched approximation, which is in the reach of the PANDA experiment at the upcoming FAIR facility. For completeness, we also repeat the calculation for a glueball mass of 2.37 GeV which corresponds to the mass of the resonance X(2370) measured in the BESIII experiment.


Also posted to ソ-ラ-バ-ド-のおん; comment count unavailable comments at Dreamwidth.

(1 comment | Leave a comment)

Monday, November 10th, 2014

numbers stations are passé

Check this out: listening to dead satellites. Or at least semi-dead satellites. These are satellites with dead batteries but with transmitters which turn on whenever the solar panels are in the right direction anyway. Some of the noises they make are weird and interesting.

I particularly like Transit 5B-5, launched 1964, for military navigation purposes. But recordings of many different satellites can be found at the link. Echos of the cold war – fitting, don’t you think, for the days surrounding the anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall?

Mirrored from Crime and the Blog of Evil. Come check out our music at:
Bandcamp (full album streaming) | Videos | iTunes | Amazon | CD Baby

Also posted to ソ-ラ-バ-ド-のおん; comment count unavailable comments at Dreamwidth.

(Leave a comment)

Sunday, November 2nd, 2014

biggest spider web evar

Four Acre Spider Web Engulfs Building. There aren't enough photos but the ones which are there are totally cool.

Also posted to ソ-ラ-バ-ド-のおん; comment count unavailable comments at Dreamwidth.

(Leave a comment)

Sunday, September 14th, 2014

and here we go

Would you download a car from the internet?

vroom vroom

Also posted to ソ-ラ-バ-ド-のおん; comment count unavailable comments at Dreamwidth.

(Leave a comment)

Saturday, September 13th, 2014

ever feel like you've been being lied to?

So I was poking around for new LED decorative bulbs - specifically, clear bulbs, because the selection there has been a problem for a while, and no frosted bulb looks good in a ceiling fan. Just for example. And I stumbled across something on Amazon, or more specifically, two somethings, both made by the same company originally: LED filament bulbs, in various tiny wattages.

I noticed that the 4w bulb was being claimed as a "40w replacement," and honestly, while I've seen improvements in output per watt, that's less than half the power draw of any legitimate LED or CFL replacement I've seen at the claimed output lumens. So I imagined that really, it's putting out more like 200 lumens or so, and the output is whiter, which makes people think its brighter. The one customer photo made me think the same, but that'd be okay anyway, so I ordered a couple in different bases, to test.

Which, of course, I have done.


Test setup


When I got the bulbs out of their boxes, I immediately felt the lightness - they felt like incandescent bulbs, not LED or CFL. The weight isn't there. And they don't look like LEDs. I mean, seriously, look at this thing.


What the hell.


The electronics are down in the base, such as it is. They're visible from the top. There's no vacuum inside; the globe is to protect the electrics and such.

I'm going to cut straight to the chase: IT'S NOT A LIE. I kept remeasuring output and power consumption levels to revalidate it. They're 2700K as claimed. The 4w bulb actually draws between 3.6 and 3.7 watts; the 2w bulb draws 2.1-2.2. But compare for yourself.

Here's a side-by-side of the outputs. Bulbs in same location, camera set to manual and the same settings (ISO400, f3.5, 1/30th second exposure) in both cases.


Side-by-side


This photo is mostly the incandescent, but with horizontal rectangles of the LED Filament bulb overlaid. A couple of them are obvious, where the LED's output is more obviously brighter; a couple of the others are harder to find.


Stripe Overlays. 3.8w source image, 40.1w source image


The 3.8 watt LED Filmament bulb, in the fixture, and also, a photo of the consumption reading (in watts) on the metre.





And the 40 watt incandescent (actual draw 40.1w) used for comparison purposes, with its load level as well.







As you can see, the spread is wider on the 3.8 watt LED bulb, but I think that's mostly a function of the fixture and relative location of filaments. If I had a way to do true equivalent spread, the 3.8w output photos would be even brighter in comparison to the 40.1w decorative clear bulb.

I kept thinking something had to be fraudulent here, but... I can't find it. I kept checking back on the power metre to see if it had jumped up somehow, just because this is literally twice the best efficiency per watt that I've ever seen.

The bulbs are rated in the 15,000-hour range. One source says 15,000 hours; another says 25,000 hours. I'm going with the lower to be more cautious.

I checked for strobing, too. I have one way to test for that only. According to it, the LED strobes less than the incandescent.

And as far as most places are concerned, this doesn't even seem to exist. I can't buy it anywhere reasonable, I have to order it from obscure sellers online. And they aren't brand new; Amazon reviews go back a while. They're $8 each, cheaper(!) than the frosted and less-efficient LEDs I've been buying, even on a per-lumen sort of basis.

So yeah, genuinely, it's like finding a little alien artefact my mail. Seriously, what the hell?

These aren't dimmable. That's explicit on the packaging. Make them dimmable and the excuses for incandescents are pretty much gone. So we're not there yet - but we're close.

eta: By request: closeup of the filaments, powered, but low exposure for detail. This is actually a different bulb of the same type - this one is 2w (a different but same model drew 2.2w in testing), with output similar to a 25w incandescent.



Also posted to ソ-ラ-バ-ド-のおん; comment count unavailable comments at Dreamwidth.

(18 comments | Leave a comment)

Sunday, February 9th, 2014

Somebody built a better... axe.

Specifically, some Finns built a better firewood-splitting axe. It offsets the blade and adds a hook, so that downward force is translated to horizontal force after impact, which tears the wood more efficiently and tosses the new section of the split off to the side.

http://vipukirves.fi/english/

(Via Ben Deschamps on Facebook.)

Also posted to ソ-ラ-バ-ド-のおん; comment count unavailable comments at Dreamwidth.

(9 comments | Leave a comment)

Wednesday, January 1st, 2014

vodka science

Okay so there's a lot if sampling here, so I'm a liiiiittle wobbly. But it's still science, I wrote it down.

Okay, so two good drinks came out of this. We think. This is unverified result, must try again after less sampling.

Siberian Honey:
2x vodka, 2x barenjager, 1x grapefruit juice (dirty). cold, shaken. pour strained; very sweet. Too sweet for me but the favourite of the shatterdome floor crew.

Kuril Islands Chrysanthemum:
Prepare tippy assam (black) tea, allow to cool, do not adulterate. Then:
2x vodka, 1x barenjager, 2x fresh-squeed grapefruit juice (dirty), shake hard, pour unstrained, add 1x _tea_, stir in. Unexpectedly delicate; Flowery without excess sweetness; tastes of chrysanthemum.

I'll also note this unexpected result: take the Siberian Honey, then after pouring, squeeze in a dollop of fresh squeezed lemon juice and lemon zest and stir. Result tastes inexplicably of black liquorice. If you like that, this may be good for you.

We tried a variety of other proportions, involving lemon and club soda, mostly. None of the rest were of note.

Also posted to ソ-ラ-バ-ド-のおん; comment count unavailable comments at Dreamwidth.

(Leave a comment)

Friday, November 1st, 2013

water is strange

Found this piece of lost chemistry notes from 2007, while cleaning out a closet. My notes are… occasionally random.


Water is Strange

Yes. Yes, it is.

Mirrored from Crime and the Blog of Evil. Come check out our music at:
Bandcamp (full album streaming) | Videos | iTunes | Amazon | CD Baby

Also posted to ソ-ラ-バ-ド-のおん; comment count unavailable comments at Dreamwidth.

(Leave a comment)

Friday, September 20th, 2013

waveform rectifiers are weird

Playing with a waveform rectifier. It’s external hardware, so to bounce stuff through it, I have to route out through analogue and back in, old-school. That’s fine, but kind of slow.

The odd part is, to me, the difference is substantial – at least, when the drums are thrown at it, not so much with the zouk and vox – but Anna doesn’t hear much of a difference. I wonder which is more typical?

Trying to throw an entire drum mix through it and using that in place of the separates Does Not Work, though. If I want to use this even as an incremental change tool, I should use it live (as recommended by maker, actually) or bounce per-instrument. That’s also suggested as reasonable in the manual.

Either way, it’s not showing up that hugely in the mix, even to me, and a lot of what this is doing is reminding me how much better the headphone amp in my workstation is than the headphone amp in my Macbook. By which I mean damn.

But at least I get to say “I have a waveform rectifier.” That’s cool.

Mirrored from Crime and the Blog of Evil. Come check out our music at:
Bandcamp (full album streaming) | Videos | iTunes | Amazon | CD Baby

Also posted to ソ-ラ-バ-ド-のおん; comment count unavailable comments at Dreamwidth.

(Leave a comment)

Friday, July 5th, 2013

to the north

Heading off today, north! To festival! To Harrison Hot Springs! Back on Monday. I’ll probably be tweeting a lot tho’. Remember: send any geekmusic news you have for the podcast by Monday if at all possible! If you don’t have any, forward that link around to people who might.

Here, have an awesome link – I actually already knew some of this but not this particular early outright-digital state. Ironically, I think this process got more analogue before it got less – there were comparably-small machines in the 60s and 70s which did more or less this, only with a single copy of the photo print. But they sent over ordinary phone lines, and I think those machines were varying tone in a more analogue fashion. But I could be wrong; maybe they were digitising down to these same five-bit images. Anyway, enjoy:


How Photos Were Cabled Across the Atlantic Ocean in 1926

Finally, welcome Radish Review readers; I think you’ll find this post on harassment in person vs. online trenchant. It’s called “Power and Supervillainy.” And my regular readers may also enjoy Scalzi’s Q&A on his anti-harassment-policy policy, including complaints made by some calling his policy anti-free-speech, an idea about which I can only giggle sadly, not manically. And if I’m not giggling manically, you are doing it wrong and I have a heat ray. Shape up – or else.

TO THE NORTH!

Mirrored from Crime and the Blog of Evil. Come listen to our music!

Echoed via dw:ソ-ラ-バ-ド-のおん. comment count unavailable comments at Dreamwidth.

(2 comments | Leave a comment)
Previous 10