Wizards create magic spell to produce eternal energy.

OK, you read this article and tell me whether or not I summarized it accurately:

(PhysOrg.com) — Physicists at Yale University have made the first definitive measurements of “persistent current,” a small but perpetual electric current that flows naturally through tiny rings of metal wire even without an external power source.

The team used nanoscale cantilevers, an entirely novel approach, to indirectly measure the current through changes in the magnetic force it produces as it flows through the ring. “They’re essentially little floppy diving boards with the rings sitting on top,” said team leader Jack Harris, associate professor of physics and applied physics at Yale. The findings appear in the October 9 issue of Science.

The counterintuitive current is the result of a quantum mechanical effect that influences how electrons travel through metals, and arises from the same kind of motion that allows the electrons inside an atom to orbit the nucleus forever. “These are ordinary, non-superconducting metal rings, which we typically think of as resistors,” Harris said. “Yet these currents will flow forever, even in the absence of an applied voltage.”

As to what they’re going to do with this shiny new ability… well, that’s up to the people with the robes and pointy hats. But with any luck at all we’ll get a blaster pistol out of it, or something.

Via Fark Geek.

Trying to decide whether to keep bothering with YouTube comments.

  • On the one hand, I’m not really impressed by the general tone you get over there.  I derive some mild amusement out of deleting the goofier comments, but it’s a bit of a drag.
  • On the other hand, no comments means less traffic on that site, and YouTube makes its money off of on-site advertising, right?  Or does YouTube not make money?  Anyway, it seems vaguely like freeloading.
  • On the gripping hand, it’s not like I’m getting anything like value-added coming from that direction anyway.

It’s interesting: my general indifference is more or less fighting with my ingrained tendencies towards sadism on this one.  Which is odd, because typically with me sadism wins: I suspect that it’s because the hate mail that gets generated via that avenue is, well, lame…

Yet more fanfic from our pundit class.

The I-like-to-write-about-what-the-President-who-lives-in-my-head-tells-me brigade is growing:

Apparently none of them actually read what the President has already said on the subject.  Which is to say: he’s happy enough to praise the military, in their place.  Which is distinctly behind advocates for climate change.

Moe Lane

*(“How is this different than what Mickey Kaus wrote? – ed.” Two reasons: first, Mickey was writing advice, and advice that he already knew was going to be rejected out of hand.  Second, I don’t mess with Mickey if I can possibly help it. – ML”)

PS: Yes, I’d like to stop writing about this, too.

Crossposted to RedState.

Q. How does Al Gore handle inconvenient truths?

A. By getting the microphone cut off, of course. Via Breitbart TV and the B-Cast:

For the record, I find the sight of Big Green shills stomping on the free speech of an independent whistleblower – yes, that was fun to write; thanks for asking – to be just a sign that they themselves know that they’re having problems pushing their agenda these days. When even the BBC’s no longer a reliable stenographer (H/T: AoSHQ), well…

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

John Aravosis is upset about the HRC speech.

[UPDATE]: Welcome, Instapundit readers.

Yes, everybody else knows that the President’s trust-me yesterday on ending DADT is more of the same: nicely prepackaged rhetoric; good, standard delivery – and absolutely no substance whatsoever.  And that won’t change.  So you, and a large portion of the left-sphere, are now unhappy about the whole situation.

And?

I mean, really: what are you going to do about it?  Vote Republican?

Moe Lane

Links via Instapundit & Jake Tapper.

Crossposted to RedState.

Hey, does Gibbs read Instapundit?

Check out the bobble at the end.  Not conclusive, but at least worth noting.

Via Scott Ott‘s Facebook account; I agree with Scott that Chip Reid’s asking a legitimate question about Reagan’s notable lack of a Nobel Peace Prize*.  I will also note that my wife laughed out loud at Gibbs’ suggestion that the Washington pundit class get out more; so did I, but that was also because Gibbs needs to be at the head of that particular line.

Moe Lane

*I already know the answer, though.  So does Scott.  So does Chip Reid.  Heck, so does Gibbs.  But really, what is he going to say? “Well, they led my boss in unto temptation, and he’s enthusiastic about giving in?”

Which is the real reason that they never offered it to Reagan.  He would have accepted it, graciously – and then used it to further his vision of peace, not the Nobel prize committee’s.

Crossposted to RedState.