Tip of the iceberg. I'm waiting for someone to start taking advantage of azaborine chemistry to make new stuff. Just replace a C=C bond in a carbon ring with a N=B. It's recently been applied to indoles, which opens the door to a couple dozen psychoactive chemicals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1...

Also, what is it about anesthesiology and its practitioners that makes them succumb to the lure of academic forgery? Something about people who enjoy putting other people at the edge of death being power-mad? Or, it could be that these journal editors just decided to crack down, and if a bunch of editors of say, cardiology journals did the same, they'd find just as much fakery in their field.

And again, what the analysis of actual pitch trajectories shows is that the supposed effect of the varying forces on the ball due to the slight rotation in-flight is totally negligible! If they were not, the knuckleball trajectories would not be fittable to the 9-parameter equation, which assumes that the forces on the ball are constant after leaving the pitcher's hand. What the article suggests is really happening is that things like seam orientation do play a role in determining the forces on the ball at the release point, which in turn feed in to the trajectory. But these forces do not change mid-flight in any measurable way.

On the other hand, your description of slightly different knuckleballs that do different things is very interesting. The analysis of Dickey's pitches from last year did show two clusters of pitches with slightly different speeds. I wonder if a more extensive analysis of his pitches from this year would show more distinct clusters, indicating better control over his pitches, and if this can go some way to explaining his recent success.

Even the personal catchers have trouble catching them. Some even use softball mitts, or first basemen's gloves, to improve their chances of getting leather on the ball.

The wind tunnel data analyzed in your link are in fact mentioned in TFA. Yes, these varying forces exist but the conclusion of the new analysis based on actual trajectories is that their effects are negligible. Also see the article mentioned below for more detailed science; I thought about linking it in the submission but was worrled about slashdotting the poor Prof! Looks like I needn't have worried; fewer people than I thought appear to share my fascination with the knuckler... :P

Also the reason why a good change-up can be effective; looks like a fastball, moves 10-20 MPH slower.

Moreso than the actual test score, it is precisely your willingness to admit the possibility that you would do poorly on the test that makes you a reliable scientist.

The experiment reports a new upper limit on the neutrino mass. I've seen upper limit estimates before this one, but I don't ever recall seeing a lower limit reported on a direct measurement of the neutrino mass. Nonzero mass is a requirement in standard theories of neutrino oscillation but that's a consequence of the theory, not a direct measurement. Is there a direct measurement of a lower limit out there that I'm not aware of?

Err, didn't mean for that comment to be AC. Sure being a grown man playing DDR is a bit embarassing, but I'm not proud.

I'm not a fan of Newt in any way, but he's probably fairly serious about wanting to resuscitate space exploration. He's had a long friendship with science fiction author Jerry Pournelle, to the point that they almost collaborated on a book before Newt became Speaker of the House. But like Pournelle his vision for space is far more right-wing and militaristic than that of most people here on /. or in NASA I expect.

Please get it right. He only had 10 holes-in-one. Sheesh.