Keeping Up with Technologies to Improve Places brings together a selection of papers presented at the First International Academic Conference on Places and Technologies, held at the University of Belgrade – Faculty of Architecture in April 2014. The conference was organized by the University of Belgrade - Faculty of Architecture and the Urban Laboratory, in order to bring together leading researchers, professors and PhD students, as well as practitioners, to create a platform for sharing knowledge and know-how in the fields of growth, new technologies, and the environment. The book will appeal primarily to members of the academic community in the fields of urban design, planning and architecture, engineering and technical sciences, and the humanities and social sciences, including professors, researchers and PhD students. It will also be of interest to professional institutions and companies, governments, and NGOs, who will directly benefit from the knowledge and know-how sharing presented here.

These posters were designed for other federal agencies, and as travel posters, education and civic activity posters, health and safety posters, and propaganda posters for World War II.

Shelton describes the startling questions that have arisen about the reliability of many forms of scientific evidence which were traditionally regarded as reliable and have been routinely admitted to prove guilt. The exonerations resulting from the development of DNA have exposed the lack of truswortiness of much of the "scientific" evidence that was used to convict people who turned out to be innocent. The Congressionally commissioned report of the National Academy of Sciences documented the lack of scientific basis in many of these areas. Nevertheless, Shelton discloses that many courts continue to routinely admit such evidence in criminal cases, in spite of the obligation of judges to be the "gatekeepers" of forensic science evidence. He explores reasons for that phenomenon and describes whether and how it might change in the future.

Three's a crowd, but four's a war. Big girl undies? Check. Speech planned? Check. Nerves of steel? Check. A single crush? …not check…? What do you do when you find your best friend/crush kissing your other best friend on the day you were going to declare your feelings for him? You only agree to fake date your crush’s rival. The King of the Bows, popular golden (play)boy, and all around douche, Xander wouldn’t be my last choice for a boyfriend. Across the school, battlelines are drawn and sides are taken between the new ’it’ couple of my former best friends and the excitingly scandalous pairing of me and King Douche. Xander keeps distracting me from the plan; make Jason jealous. He insists on holding my hand and kissing me and being nice. Ugh. Xander’s not nice and he’s not the relationship type, but he’s doing a damned good job of acting both parts. He calls it ‘keeping up appearances’, I call it ‘take one more pass at my arse and I’ll break your nose’. They say all’s fair in love and war, but what’s so fair about falling for the wrong guy when your two best friends are on the other side of the battlelines? Please be aware that this story is set in Australia and therefore uses Australian English spelling and syntax.

The technical basis of environmental regulation is always at the edge of scientific and engineering understanding. As knowledge improves, questions will inevitably arise about past decisions. Understanding how the regulatory system accommodates changing scientific and engineering knowledge is vital for achieving environmental values. In this new volume, seven case studies shed light on the interplay between environmental regulation and scientific and engineering understanding, with practical conclusions on how science and engineering should be used for more sound and timely regulatory decision making. The book provides helpful timelines of scientific and regulatory developments for the cases, which include: Factors impeding clean-up strategies in the Chesapeake Bay. Pivotal questions in the regulation of ambient ozone concentrations. How science has been heeded but also ignored in regulation of new municipal waste combustors. Impact of scientific findings on control of chlorination by-products. Acid rain and what can be learned about research and public policy debate. Controversy over the need for formaldehyde regulation. The effect of public perception on management decisions concerning dioxin. This volume will be of practical interest to policymakers, business and environmental advocates, scientists, engineers, researchers, attorneys, faculty, and students.

Discusses the scientific scandal that arose when researchers at Bell Laboratories discovered that wunderkind physicist Jan Hendrik Schön falsified his data to prove that he had discovered a simpler way to make transistors, which would have drastically improved energy technology.

One of the pathways by which the scientific community confirms the validity of a new scientific discovery is by repeating the research that produced it. When a scientific effort fails to independently confirm the computations or results of a previous study, some fear that it may be a symptom of a lack of rigor in science, while others argue that such an observed inconsistency can be an important precursor to new discovery. Concerns about reproducibility and replicability have been expressed in both scientific and popular media. As these concerns came to light, Congress requested that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine conduct a study to assess the extent of issues related to reproducibility and replicability and to offer recommendations for improving rigor and transparency in scientific research. Reproducibility and Replicability in Science defines reproducibility and replicability and examines the factors that may lead to non-reproducibility and non-replicability in research. Unlike the typical expectation of reproducibility between two computations, expectations about replicability are more nuanced, and in some cases a lack of replicability can aid the process of scientific discovery. This report provides recommendations to researchers, academic institutions, journals, and funders on steps they can take to improve reproducibility and replicability in science.

As more schools begin to implement the National Science Education Standards, adults who care about the quality of K-12 science education in their communities may want to help their local schools make the transition. This booklet provides guidance to parents and others, explains why high-quality science education is important for all children and young adults, and shows how the quality of school science programs can be measured. Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education Staff; 1998, 32 pages, 8.5 x 11, single copy, $10.00; 2-9 copies, $7.00 each; 10 or more copies, $4.50 each (no other discounts apply).

Cline recounts the development of quantum theory, capturing the atmosphere of argument and discovery among physicists in the 1920s. She explores the backgrounds of the major figures—Rutherford, Bohr, Planck, Einstein—separately, but draws them together as they begin to consider each other's questions about the nature of matter.

This book takes an integrated approach, using the principles of story structure to discuss every aspect of successful science writing, from the overall structure of a paper or proposal to individual sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words. It begins by building core arguments, analyzing why some stories are engaging and memorable while others are quickly forgotten, and proceeds to the elements of story structure, showing how the structures scientists and researchers use in papers and proposals fit into classical models. The book targets the internal structure of a paper, explaining how to write clear and professional sections, paragraphs, and sentences in a way that is clear and compelling.