Accidentally sending an unfinished, unedited email can be a really big mistake, so one wouldn’t want to make this mistake really, really easy…
Here is the button-filled corner of the “Reply” edit window in Gmail. Note the a measurement added in red:
Is there any imaginable excuse for placing the Send button just 10 pixels away from the Formatting options button? A button that gets clicked while you’re still editing?
Is it because someone thought it looked pretty?
Calling Google… Hello?
Sorry for the late mention, but last week I gave a talk at the Technology Ventures Conference at the University of Cambridge. The organizers promise to post a video.
The conference was a lot of fun. I don’t know where else I’d have an opportunity to discuss nanotechnology, additive manufacturing, Haskell, and medicine all in the same day.
The theme of the conference was “Moonshot Thinking”, which let me place nanotechnology in the context of space systems engineering and the modes of thought and problem formulation that I learned in the AeroAstro department at MIT. The great gap in nanotechnology today, of course, is the absence of a well-developed field of molecular systems engineering.
Here’s a reworked diagram of interactions in the Standard Model of particle physics, now in the Wikipedia article:
This supersedes and corrects the previous Wikipedia diagram.
Diagramming the Standard Model is a relatively good excuse to play with graphics.
Failing to read XKCD is, of course, a mistake.
With thanks to Kevin, the previous post has been updated with corrections re. neutrinos and the Higgs.
Last week’s Physics Quiz asked about errors in Wikipedia’s current diagram of the Standard Model.
Here’s the diagram with [corrected] corrections; answers follow:
- What do the arcs represent?
- The Standard Model interactions between particles: the boson-mediated strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces.
- Which of the arcs is incorrect? [And a question that got lost: Where is an arc is missing?]
- The arc linking charged and uncharged leptons is spurious: It does not represent a force.
The arc representing the Higgs-neutrino interaction was omitted (see also #4).
- Extra credit, Wikipedia history department:
How did one correction lead to
- Neutrinos had been lumped together with the charged leptons, wrongly suggesting that all leptons interact with photons; when they were split off in the current diagram, the two classes of leptons were linked by the spurious arc,
while neutrinos lost their link to the Higgs.
- Where is a[n]
second arc missing?
- The Z boson interacts with other Z bosons via the weak force, paralleling interactions between W bosons; this arc is missing.
Note that the Z boson is, from a practical point of view, a leading candidate for the most useless particle in the Standard Model. They’re crucial for neutrino-neutrino scattering, of course, as if anyone really cared.
25 April, to reflect the genuinely puzzling absence of Higgs-neutrino coupling in the Standard Model. My thanks to Kevin (see comments).