Then ascended to become pure EM spectrum as his final Gigahertz form.
Hertz, showing the difference between science and engineering
a year ago by The Picard Maneuver to c/science_memes
Then ascended to become pure EM spectrum as his final Gigahertz form.
With great power comes great corruption and tyranny. So begins the dark era of Terahertz
"Hello, is that DarkHorse comics?
Boy, do I have an epic 5-phase graphic novel for you!"
I know I'm replying to a 7 months old thread, but reading it got me wondering is there a limit to frequency? Well, I'm sure there is, my question is more like what is it? Is it when the wavelength nears or reaches plank legnth, if that even makes any sense?
He might have won the very first Nobel Prize, had he not passed away just a few years prior, and much too young, wasn't he in his late-30s or early-40s?
In fact, I believe that had Hertz remained alive and won his prize, the Nobel Committee would not have felt obliged to give it to Marconi a few years later.
Marconi was a back-stabbing asshole who became one of the wealthiest men in the world by abusing the gentlemanly trust of others, and coasting on someone else's technology - particularly the way crystals oscillate, and some of them serve nicely as a sort of "translation point" between electromagnetic waves and the physical apparatus that transmits and/or receives the signal.
He might have won the very first Nobel Prize, had he not passed away just a few years prior,
Basically the same thing happened twenty years later with Henrietta Swan Leavitt, who made a discovery that's essential to figuring distances in space. She noticed something while working as a computer at Harvard College Observatory that eventually became known as Leavitt's Law. Her Nobel nomination was halted because she passed away and the award is not given posthumously. Hubble's work heavily relied on hers.
If you think about it, almost all computer-technology is radio. Wifi, bluetooth, GPS, radar, and cellular are literally radio. Meanwhile everything else runs on transistor tech developed and refined... for radios.
Our modern economy couldn't exist if people like Hertz and Maxwell didn't get to toy with their useless hobbies. But we can't rely on the curiosity of the leisure class anymore. Basic research is expensive, necessary, and a public good. I'm afraid that the Trump regime has already spoiled the secret sauce that makes America the technology leader of the world.
Ithink you could be more charitable in your reply. Transistors were developed to replace tubes in telephone systems... Okay but the tubes had been developed to where they were because of their usefulness in radio.
And while computers don't inherently rely on radio, it's radio communication that's taken computers from one in every office to one in everyone's pocket. Right? The main thrust of the previous commenter is true.
Even more than that, just proving Maxwell was right was a key stepping stone to all of modern physics. Maxwell, not Einstein, was the first to show that the speed of light is invariant, and Einstein's Relativity was a framework for explaining how tf physics works if that's actually true. Prior to Einstein, physists all just kind of assumed there was some flaw in Maxwell's theorems to lead to this crazy speed invariance, but as the evidence just kept piling up in favor of Maxwell, they started having to wrestle with the uncomfortable thought that this could actually be true. In this sense, Hertz can also be thought of as an important step to Einstein and beyond, and almost all of our modern technology.
Two inventions:
are independent of each other, but go together nicely.
You could have an internet (sort of) without computers. Consider Teletypers, FM Radio broadcasts, or Telephone.
Faraday, after demonstrating how moving a magnet through a coiled wire induced a current in the wire was asked by a visiting statesman what was the use of this.
Faraday responded, "In twenty years, you will be taxing it"
Similarly, at a demonstration of hot air balloons in France, Benjamin Franklin was asked "Of what use is this?"
Franklin replied, "Of what use is a newborn baby?"
Everything I've ever heard about Franklin makes him a boss. This is a new one.
Here's a little known fact that is not true, which will bring some nuance to the previous anecdote, Benjamin Franklin ate babies.
Another one that is true but sounds like an onion.
He enjoyed the company of GILFS
Benjamin Franklin fucks
British children! Maybe a few Prussians too.
The British were John Paul Jones, but Franklin taught him.
Funnily enough, Faraday seemingly also understood that the Electric Field only possesses a potential in the absence of changing magnetic fields. Because only in the absence of changing magnetic fields, the rotation of the Electric Field is zero, and only then it has a potential.
That's a really cool Franklin quote. Visionary.
"Mr. Franklin, of what use is this hot air balloon contraption?"
"You can take ladies up in it with a bottle of wine and a blanket and you know, they can’t refuse, because of the implication. Think about it. She's floating up in the middle of the sky with some dude she barely knows. You know, she looks around, and what does she see? Nothing but open air. 'Ahhhh! There’s nowhere for me to run. What am I gonna do, say ‘no?’"
That last bit is me when dealing with people who "aren't impressed" by today's AI.
Ok boomer
AI tools are pretty good in Photoshop; they're pretty good in copilot; Ukraine claims they're good at guiding a drone to a Russian bomber (though they also hit decommissioned aircraft). I think you only see the use of less specialised AI used to generate low quality text and soulless images
I'm sure they have trouble sleeping over that
I mean, it would be some 25 years until the radio was invented. And Hertz' machine required a 30kV spark on a 2.5m meter long antenna with 2 solid 30cm zinc spheres, and his transmission range was something like "barely down the hall".
Not the most practical method.
At least physics will never get patched. The spark device with zinc spheres will always do that thing.
FCC: And get you arrested
Fun fact: The german word for using a radio is "funken"; literally "to spark". A radioman is, or was, a "Funker". When you are talking over the radio, you are doing it "Über Funk".
ooh i always guessed the word "Funk" comes from function, i.e. the radio is a useful tool that has a function to whoever is using it.
It really is from "Funkentechnik": "Spark technology". I wonder how many people appreciate the post for the cute etymology and how many because it sounds funny.
Good information for ham radio people, too. Hobby sounds too geeky? Just say you're into Über-Funk-Parties.
Appreciate for both of course!
ok but now, where does the word "Funke" (spark) come from?
Pretty much the first type of commercially viable radio transmitter was the spark-gap transmitter ("Knallfunkensender" in German). It worked by charging up some capacitors to up to 100kV and then letting them spark. This spark sent a massive banging noise on the whole radio spectrum, which could then be turned into an audible noise using a very simple receiver. That was then used to send morse codes (or similar encodings).
They went into service around 1900, and by 1920 it was illegal to use these because they would disrupt any and all other radio transmissions in the area with a massive loud bang.
“Knallfunkensender”
Literally "Bang-Sparks-Sender".
Are you sure it's because of the radio spectrum bang? I always thought it was because of the audible bang.
If someone operated such a thing today, any guesses what the death zone for electronic devices would be?
Yes, except you need to buy each bit in a big glass jar.
Edit: only half joking, they used big Leiden Jars, which were basically giant glass batteries. There was no such thing as people with power at home, unless you were crazy rich
There were electrochemical cells (invented in 1800) that provided a constant current for some time.
Idk the details. Look up Galvanic cell, Volta cell.
Sure, but those are still "big glass jars full of electricity"
Those practical methods would never have existed if not for Hertz' experiments. Those were 25 years of other scientists, having seen that this new concept exists, refining his contraption into what eventually would become the machine that we know as a radio.
I feel like I hear about this guy once every second
which is about the frequency that the heart (german Herz) is beating with.
this type of science-discovery to usefulness-realization latency is the norm, pretty sure Curie didn't envision nuclear power plants
Just like how anthropological archeologists compete to eat the oldest thing they find
most likely other humans eat it first, they just didn't write it down and publish it
She didn't envision a lot of things
There's a good NPR podcast in the same vein as this: https://www.npr.org/...
It's about congressman talking about government waste and targeting the sciences. It's like, you don't get the "cool" applications without the "weird" research. I'm doing a horrible job describing it, but I thought it was a good listen.
Planet Money has some really good episodes. Unfortunately, a lot of filler as well.
Oh yeah. No one appreciates blue sky research. We don’t know where the question will take us, which is why governments fund the research. They can take on the 0.1% chance something useful is created 20 years later.
This post tickles a fond memory of mine. I was talking to a right-wing libertarian, and he said there should be no research done ever if it couldn't prove beforehand its practical applications. I laughed out loud because I knew how ignorant and ridiculous that statement was. He clearly had never picked up a book on the history of science, on the history of these things:
When talking with libertarians you should keep in mind they have completely different axiomatic values. It is often the case that they understand a certain policy would be on net bad for everyone, they simply don't care. They are rarely utilitarian about those issues.
I get along much better with libertarians who justify libertarianism with values extrinsic to just "muh freedom" -- they are usually much more willing to yield ground in places where I can convince them that a libertarian policy would be net negative, and they have also moved me to be more open minded about some things I thought I would never agree with.
Mm for instance, I think in some contexts markets are pretty powerful, like prediction markets are pretty good at predicting things. (Not saying they're flawless -- polymarket likely overpredicted Trump's victory). Or that benign-looking regulation is frequently detrimental to the public -- while not libertarians at all, Abundance makes a good case for repealing a lot of regulation related to construction. Such regulation is often motivated by people who want to preserve the value of their homes, even though on the surface it appears to be about environmental concerns. (Obviously, I think the environment is important, so we shouldn't just repeal everything. Just that we should be more critical of such regulation.) Another example is how the U.S. banned civilian supersonic aviation in its airspace because of disruptive sonic booms; apparently the technology now exists to keep such booms very quiet, but the regulation persists, because it's not booms which were banned but instead supersonic speed as a proxy for booms.
Those are much rarev in my opinion.
Bullshit. Lasers have been intended to gain interplanetary superiority since the dawn of time. We just didnt know how to make them or that they could also be used to read music from a circle
His customers lamented that driving was so boring and they wished there was some magical way for the cars to play music.
Oh well. Nothing to be done there.
Hertz donut
This may be an even better example than the positron. Originally a theoretical antimatter form of the common electron, with no practical application.
Turned out to be a vital tool for medical imaging. If you or someone you know has ever had a PET scan, now you know what the P stands for.
I always thought it stood for "pepperoni." So, you're saying "PET" stands for "Positrons, Endives, and Tomatoes"?
No it stands for animals you keep at home.
PET scan, its powered by hamsters.
I guess they decided CAT scan wasn't inclusive enough.
Cats were originally used for their curiosity, but training hamsters and eventually parakeets led to much smaller machines.
I feel like this is a very "scientisty" thing - the theoretical aspect is so fascinating and being able to fit all the pieces into a model that is mathematically accurate is the reward.
Considering the practical application of the model and how it can benefit society (or in other words, be marketed for profit) takes a different set of skills.
I absolutely detest the equivocation of "benefits society" and "marked for profit".
Plenty of things have been discovered to have practical applications which can benefit society yet are shelved or have its implementation frustrated because it cannot be exploited for profit or threatens the profits of a preexisting application which it would replace.
We stand on the shoulders of giants etc etc. But it seems odd to me that they wouldn't think about using this for communication at least.
It's not always immediately obvious to what end you can use a new innovation. For instance, the Romans discovered and built a steam engine. But nobody connected the dots that it could be used to power a train.
To me, it showcases the main reason why we need to collaborate. Only together, we can exponentially increase the potential of everything we build.
Good for us as we wouldn't exist without the world going exactly as it has (I guess unless you're from a culture that didn't get conquered/settled and has been quite insular), but imagine where technology would be if industrial civilisation had been continuous from so early
Herons steam "engine" had no power whatsoever and was not scalable. And even if it would have been scalable, they had had no fuel to drive it.
No fuel? All you need is something that makes a fire. And it is not like crude oil wasn't know to people back then.
If the invention had been further explored it is entirely reasonable to assume people could have invented a "practical" steam engine 2.000 years ago. All it would have needed is fixing the steam exhaust and have it drive a shoveled wheel.
Still, going from a stream powered spinning toy to locomotive is a few orders of magnitude. Heron's "engine" was a little jet engine. Heated water pushed it's way out of pipes. It's a far cry from building steam pressure in a tank, using that pressure to drive a crank shaft, and pushing along a vehicle of any kind.
There are a number of industrial era inventions required before you can even start putting something like a train together.
The Romans didn't even have replaceable parts yet. Every nail was custom made.
If you haven't seen it, watch Clickspring's series on the antikithra mechanism. It'll give you an idea of how hard it was to produce complicated machinery was at the time.
They did not use coal back then – I'm not sure whether it was even known to the Mediterranean culture. Forests were plundered for shipbuilding. Crude oil was only available as naphtha in the Middle East, barely enough for the local fishermen to pitch there boats and for the Byzantines to use in their flamethrowers. Furthermore, crude oil was not used in steam engines — you cannot shovel a heep of oil under a kettle. Fuel existed, yes, but they had no access to it.
All it would have needed is fixing the steam exhaust and have it drive a shoveled wheel.
So a completely different machine? Shoveled wheels were invented centuries after Heron. Even if they played with such a setup – an open, non-pressurized turbine has no usable power. To use steam, you'll have to pressurize it, and the technology to tame high pressure was only developed to build cannons that do not burst.
In the history of the steam engine, the fuel supply was available before the engine. IIRC, Watt's incentive for the invention of the steam engine was the need to drain coal mines.
I thought they did invent a steam engine at some point. I'm sure I read that somewhere.
The thing is they were never going to invent the steam engine because they didn't have the technology to produce steel to the quality and strength that would be needed to build rails. And for that matter they didn't really have the metallurgy necessary to construct reliable boilers either.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_radio
By August 1895, Marconi was field testing his system but even with improvements he was only able to transmit signals up to one-half mile, a distance Oliver Lodge had predicted in 1894 as the maximum transmission distance for radio waves.
I suppose beyond the engineering know how required they were looking at possible transmission ranges and thinking it simply wasn't practical, square law and all that.
This.
There are often actual limits to what can be done, and there are practical limits. Especially in the early days of a technology it's really hard to understand which limits are actual limits, practical limits or only short-term limits.
For example, in the 1800s, people thought that going faster than 30km/h would pose permanent health risks and wouldn't be practical at all. We now know that 30km/h isn't fast at all, but we do know that 1300km/h is pretty much the hard speed limit for land travel and that 200-300km/h is the practical limit for land travel (above that it becomes so power-inefficient and so dangerous that there's hardly a point).
So when looking at the technology in an early state, it's really hard to know what kind of limit you have hit.
I LOVE SIGNAL PROCESSING
Half of the field is viable thanks to a single algorithm: FFT
ME TOO!
I feel like the signal processing community is really passionate about their work. It comes out in their books. I know I can talk for hours and hours and hours about signal processing. And my DSP professor was like that too. That was such a fun class.
i would like to hear about it :)
And this is why science shouldn't be beheld to the whims of politicians and capitalists
Because of car radio? Vertical integration, you know.
I thought he was a baker. When I was a kid people would always be talking about "Hertz donuts". Then they'd punch me. I never knew why.
Imagine if he had to apply for funding
"these waves have the potential to transform how we communicate and will likely find world wide usage"
He would actually be right unlike all the other funding applications which are largely oversold.
Hilariously, light is an electromagnetic wave.
So, yes, we can see electromagnetic waves.... Just, only a very small segment of them.
How wrong he was. Now we use EM daily for everything.... Communicating via Wi-Fi, listening to music in the car (FM broadcast), or via Bluetooth and using LTE... Even heating our food. Not to mention medical applications like X-rays...
There's a shitload of stuff we use EM for without even thinking. It's all around us, all the time, like the matrix. I love EM science.
This goes to show you that, just because someone discovered a thing, doesn't mean that they have any idea what to do with that discovery, or that the discoveries end there....
Before, reality was just what humans could touch, smell, see, and hear, but after the publication of the charged electromagnetic spectrum, we now know that what we can touch, smell, see, and hear, is less than one-millionth.
I think new research says otherwise.
Aw, cheer up; someone will apply you in thirty to forty years.
The germans are really something else, what innovation hasn't sprung from their imagination?
Did it Hertz when he realised the opposite, or did that happen after his time?
Oof! One of those moments which kinda' make one wish there wasn't an afterlife...
Thank you for the tidbit, though, and fuck Fascists regardless!
I'm of the "I don't know, whatever" persuasion=))
@mander.xyz
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
go to feed...
@mander.xyz
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
go to feed...
He probably would have figured it out had he had time to evolve into Megahertz.
save