Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery
In this patent application (via the New Scientist), a system of two cameras emulates the human vision. The whole field of view of the human eye is not of constant resolution. We have a 4 degree high resolution central spot in the retina called the fovea, and our brain builds a high resolution composite view by moving the eye back and forth. The system in this patent application does something similar – a low-resolution wide-angle camera takes the whole surveilled area at one time, and an algorithm controls a tele-lens camera that sweeps parts of the field of view of the other camera, giving priority to areas where movement has been detected, building a high-resolution composite image.
Small steps
This article in the New Scientist reminded me of two things I find interesting in the relationship between science and technology. The first one is that all the technologies we take for granted are the result of innumerable small steps – there is no single Eureka! moment that gives us our current wonders; the second one is that the state of the art is absolutely dependent on the production side of things, i.e., if you can’t make something economically it’s like the scientific breakthroughs behind it never existed, technology-wise.
Gravitational Waves vs. Quantum Entanglement
Researchers at the National University of Singapore have proposed a theoretical method to detect gravitational waves through measurements in the change of the properties of entangled particles. Via the New Scientist.
Football
I don’t like football by itself, by I do enjoy what it tells us as a civilization. It’s at the same time the sign that we are intelligent beings able to live together, and also the sign that deep down we’re irrational animals. On one hand, it’s a game with rules agreed on by all, that joins people together from different nations and continents. On the other, it brings to the surface the most primitive emotions and behaviours. It gets a human being all worked up about an abstract game, which the outcome won’t affect anything “real” – it won’t change your ability to reproduce, your ability to survive. How can we get so irrational about a rational construct?
I was reminded of this dichotomy by this article on the New Scientist technology section, about a system to disrupt offensive chants on football stadiums.
A petabyte in your pocket? Peanuts…
Remember my “wacky” bet about the petabyte in your pocket? Well, courtesy from the friendly researchers at Drexel and Penn, we might be much closer than we all postulated. Check the story at Engadget, although not for today, but we’re talking at theoretical densities of 12.8 PB per cubic centimeter, if the manufacturing hurdles can be overcome.
