To: Brett66
Sounds like cool stuff. But this sentence:
By constructing artificial materials that break long-standing rules of nature,
is pitiful. A science writer blithely stating that "rules of nature" had been broken. Think again sweetie.
To: ClearCase_guy
When you attempt to break Ohm's law expect a lot of smoke.
4 posted on
03/28/2003 7:36:41 PM PST by
Only1choice____Freedom
(Again, protestors have NO RIGHT TO BE HEARD, only a freedom to speak.)
To: ClearCase_guy
"A science writer blithely stating that "rules of nature" had been broken."
Hell, dems do that all the time. There are no absolutes. Rules are for others. We still don't know what "is" is.
5 posted on
03/28/2003 7:38:43 PM PST by
lawdude
To: ClearCase_guy
A science writer blithely stating that "rules of nature" had been broken.kAcknor Sez:
No use trying to deny it has never happed... ;)
"rut yIHmey ghom Hoch." (Everyone meets tribbles)
Have you checked the *bang_list today?
7 posted on
03/28/2003 8:02:39 PM PST by
kAcknor
To: ClearCase_guy; Cicero
Found an article with more detail. Certain behaviours of these metamaterials do seem to violate basic optical principles, Newtonian principles I think, but they do understand what's going on in terms of physics with these materials. Amazing stuff!
Unnatural optics create precise photonic lens
8 posted on
03/28/2003 8:30:27 PM PST by
Brett66
To: ClearCase_guy
A science writer blithely stating that "rules of nature" had been broken. More like the rules that we've decided are the rules of nature have been broken. Maybe.
9 posted on
03/28/2003 8:32:15 PM PST by
templar
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson