When I was in college I satisfied my math, hard science, and bio science requirements by taking a year-long "Physics for Poets" series of classes. It was only about 3 units per quarter (out of a standard of about 15 for humanities people) and was pretty low-key.I distinctly remember that one of the papers I wrote discussed antimatter. I think it was inspired mostly by a mid-century Heinlein article republished in his Expanded Universe. One of the things it argued was that the 1908 Tunguska incident was proof of antimatter, based on the hypothesis that the mass destruction must have been from a piece of antimatter because there was no crater.
I got a B on the paper.
Gasperini's team says that the basin's unusual shape is the result of a fragment thrown from the Tunguska explosion that plowed into the ground, leaving a long, trenchlike depression.
"We suggest that a 10-meter-wide [33-foot-wide] fragment of the object escaped the explosion and kept going in the same direction. It was relatively slow, about 1 kilometer a second [0.6 mile a second]," Gasperini said.
This raises the distinct possibility that some of my other sophomore year hypotheses might be inaccurate.
Last 5 posts by Ken White
- Hate Speech Debate on More Perfect Live - September 5th, 2017
- Popehat Goes To The Opera: Un ballo in maschera - August 19th, 2017
- Department of Justice Uses Search Warrant To Get Data On Visitors to Anti-Trump Site - August 14th, 2017
- America At The End of All Hypotheticals - August 14th, 2017
- Lawsplainer: Why John Oliver Is Anti-Diversity Now - August 11th, 2017