A friend sent the above video with the following comment, I thought I share it with all.
“I have been thinking… after watching this TED talk [see above].
It explains how very complex and beautiful forms can be made by a series of very simple rules (in the case of this talk its folding ratios) repeating many times (like fractals). There is the obvious comparison to nature here, where the simple rule can be cell division for example and the beautiful complex form could be a living organism.
The Annual MKA Research Association Conference 2012 was held at Darul Amaan Mosque, Manchester on Friday 24th, Saturday 25th and Sunday 26th August 2012.
A total of 30 young enthusiastic Khuddam and 2 Atfal attended the conference [corrected the number of Atfal]. Seventeen Khuddam and two Atfal travelled from London to attend the conference, while one Khadim came from Netherlands to take part in this conference. (more…)
A few news articles on the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin again appeared in the news a few days back (see the end). Arif Khan, a good friend who has written many articles on Should of Turin has most kindly submitted the following on request.
Was the Shroud not Proved Fake in 1988 by Carbon Dating?
Dating of a sample, performed independently by 3 laboratories did return dates ranging from 1260-1390 in 1988, and yet the controversy rages on. The biggest issue was that the dating lead to more questions than it answered. How did the image form? Who formed the image and why?
Recent research, from 2005, by the late Raymond Rogers showed strong evidence to support the idea that the section that was used to cabron date the Shroud of Turin was from re-woven section. This effectively rendered the carbon dating result irrelevant for dating the cloth. (more…)
The field of archaeology exists to understand human development and history through our material remains. At times the archaeologist resembles the role of a detective, piecing together the story, the motive, the purpose behind why a particular piece of pottery or stone or bone or whatever it may be was found where it was, when it was, how it was etc. I recall once participating in an excavation in the remote island of Islay in western Scotland, ploughing my way through layer after layer of thick, sludgy, slimy silt in freezing temperatures with my knee deep in mud, increasingly torrential rainfall and rapidly losing the will to live, only to seemingly find nothing. It turned out the post-excavation process of flotation, sieving and sorting had unearthed a microscopic charred seed remain which, when radiocarbon dated, brought back the date of this particular site to over 1000 years than had previously been estimated, consequently causing a re-evaluation of the entire site. The clues are often subtle, but nonetheless they remain evident.
When you think of a prize-winning scientist, do you picture a young genius bursting with creativity and new ideas, or an older, more seasoned researcher that has been slaving away at the bench for decades? It turns out both images are pretty accurate. According to a recent paper in PNAS, the average age at which scientists complete Nobel Prize-winning work has varied greatly over the history of the prize, depending on the era and the scientific field.
Jellyfish protein amplifies light in first biological laser.
by Zoë Corbyn
Microscope image of a living laser in action. Due to the irregular internal structure of the cell, the laser spot has an apparently random pattern.Malte Gather
Scientists have for the first time created laser light using living biological material: a single human cell and some jellyfish protein.
“Lasers started from physics and are viewed as engineering devices,” says Seok-Hyun Yun, an optical physicist at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, who created the ‘living laser’ with his colleague Malte Gather. “This is the first time that we have used biological materials to build a laser and generate light from something that is living.” The finding is reported today in Nature Photonics 1.