Britney Spears' Guide to Semiconductor Physics (2000)

by doener • 6 years ago

168 112 6 years ago

I used the density of states derivation from this site in my degree revision a few years ago as it was better than my textbook

ethbr03• 6 years ago

I miss the 1990s web. :(

tomjen3• 6 years ago

Me too, but the website has news on it from 01

coupdejarnac• 6 years ago

Lots of people here apparently have only experienced the highly corporatized milquetoast web that we have now.

krapp3• 6 years ago

I'm quite old enough to have been around for the '90s web.

It wasn't the golden age of free expression and creative genius people here make it out to be.

sn41• 6 years ago

I do respect the talented Miss Spears. As mentioned in the website, Hedy Lemarr was just a class apart - a great beauty combined with prodigious scientific talent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr

dehrmann• 6 years ago

It is a little known fact, that Ms Spears is an expert in semiconductor physics.

On one hand, it's definitely a joke, but on the other, Offspring frontman Dexter Holland has a PhD in molecular biology and Queen guitarist Brian May has a PhD in astrophysics, so it's not like famous musicians can't be highly educated in the sciences.

ipnon• 6 years ago

I don't think we should be surprised to find doctorates in all walks of life. ~1-2% of Americans have a Ph.D.[0], yet ~1-2% of Americans are not academics. We've all probably been handed our change and receipt by an expert in Anglo-Saxon astrolinguistics at some point or another.

[0] https://www.reference.com/world-view/percentage-americans-ph...

sideshowb2• 6 years ago

True though in May's case he quit his PhD because his band was taking off, and returned to finish it nearly 40 years later

sammorrowdrums• 6 years ago

This list also includes Dr Brian Cox, who was in Dare and the live line-up of D:Ream (with such hits as 'Things can only get better').

And is a well published Physicist, broadcaster and educator.[1]

Also Brian May is deeply into Victorian Stereoscopy and has published books and movie (and takes stereoscopic images with his special selfy stick). He's part of the London Stereoscopic Society, I watched him present his film at a film festival.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Cox_(physicist)

helmholtz• 6 years ago

Adam Steltzner, who was lead engineer for the EDL of the Curiosity Rovoer, used to play in a rock band. I attended his talk, and he was just as charismatic in real life as on camera.

rsynnott3• 6 years ago

I think Cox is the odd one out, as he's probably actually better known as a physicist than a musician these days.

There's also Tom Lehrer, of course.

edgyquant• 6 years ago

Also Bad Religion frontman Greg Gaffin is an evolutionary biologist with a PhD in Zoology

Apocryphon• 6 years ago

Don’t forget cybersecurity expert Taylor Swift.

antegamisou• 6 years ago

Rowan Atkinson has worked on Control Theory in his MSc thesis

https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/searchResults/titleDeta...

iainctduncan• 6 years ago

Cool, I am not surprised he is a smart cat.

mckirk• 6 years ago

If you don't know it yet, listen to '39 by Queen and pay attention to the lyrics -- the meaning of that song certainly caught me off guard the first time I realized it.

kranner• 6 years ago

https://genius.com/Queen-39-lyrics was helpful

gopaz• 6 years ago

Dolph Lundgren (actor):

Degree in chemical engineering from the Royal Institute of Technology

Master's degree in chemical engineering from the University of Sydney

avmich• 6 years ago

Hedy Lamarr has "co-invented an early version of frequency-hopping spread spectrum communication for torpedo guidance" according to Wikipedia, in addition to "appeared in 30 films over a 28-year career".

daveslash• 6 years ago

Natalie Portman is one of only 10 people to have an "Erdos-Bacon" number, which is your Erdos Number + Kevin-Bacon number. How many degrees of separation are you from co-writing a paper with Erdos and how many degrees of separation are you from being in a film with Kevin Bacon. Natalie Portman's Erdos No. = 5, and her Bacon No. is 2, for a combined 7.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erd%C5%91s%E2%80%93Bacon_numbe...

dragonwriter2• 6 years ago

Natalie Portman is one of only 10 people to have an "Erdos-Bacon" number

No, she is one of only 10 people to have an Erdos-Bacon number listed in the Wikipedia page for Erdos-Bacon numbers.

There are lots of people with Erdos-Bacon numbers who aren't listed on that page, e.g., Neil deGrasse Tyson [6].

solarkraft2• 6 years ago

I dig the trend of celebrities getting into education Taylor Swift [0] kicked off.

[0] https://twitter.com/SwiftOnSecurity

747fulloftapes• 6 years ago

To be fair, the Britney Spears' Guide to Semiconductor Physics website has been around for at least 20 years.

Blikkentrekker2• 6 years ago

https://timecube.2enp.com/

It does bring back memories.

solarkraft2• 6 years ago

Okay, true, looks like Britney was first!

_imnothere• 6 years ago

Uhh... the website has HTTPS working though[0]...

[0] https://britneyspears.ac/lasers.htm

Koiwai• 6 years ago

I don't get it, if anyone gets it and is boring, I could use some explanation.

coolgod• 6 years ago

http://britneyspears.ac/physics/basics/basics.htm My prof showed a slideshow in class that included the band diagram photo, which definitely piqued my interest. I think its just an old school informative website on semiconductor physics with a Britney Spears theme, which back in the day must have been a great idea.

nicky0• 6 years ago

It's a 20 year old website about semiconductor phyics with pictures of Britney spears. It was considered a hilarious concept at the time.

throwaway450673• 6 years ago

This website is beyond off-putting. I realize this was written 20 years ago, so I'm willing to forgive what, if written today, would essentially be adding cheap punches to a person who fought widespread mental abuse for over a decade. But apart from that, why is there a "booble" search in the corner, and why are there charts following the cleavage line of (a quite possibly underage) Britney Spears?

Blikkentrekker2• 6 years ago

Because it's humor that made me giggle.

The humor is largely derived from there being no pædagogical answer to the quæstions you asked.

tunnuz• 6 years ago

Agreed, this aged terribly.

Triv888• 6 years ago

surprisingly, it does feature SSL though:

https://britneyspears.ac/lasers.htm

HenryBemis• 6 years ago

and why are there charts following the cleavage line

I always believe that these girls/boys who are dancing semi-naked, at the age of 10-17 need their parents/guardians removed/imprisoned (or worse). It cannot be that (in this example) Britney Spears was clearly being sexualized while underage. This can only cause issues later in life (if not early in life too), and for the example of Britney Spears we read about it in the news.

Yes, 'normal' (not exposed to such degree) also may go off the rails and shave their heads, sue their dads, etc. but we (as a society) need to protect children better from unecessary exposure and hurtful exposure. And social media definitely do NOT help to improve things.

alimw3• 6 years ago

Cheap punches? It would indeed be sad if Britney Spears herself were to see it like that, but let's hope she is more generous in her assessment of other people's motives than you are.

blumomo• 6 years ago

Came here to comment the same. The pictures of Mrs. B. Spears look terrible, disgusting, not in her favor. Poor lady, I feel sorry for her.

nsajko3• 6 years ago

I think you're turning a blind eye towards the more than strong association of Spears' public image and marketing with her sexual appeal. I suspect that the way she was marketed as an idol was actually influential in the business.

For instance, those photos of Spears were surely released on her behalf, to boost her career.

Sex sells: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_in_advertising

truculent4• 6 years ago

There are ways to engage with sexuality which aren't demeaning or dismissive. Personally, I would not say that "Booble" qualifies in this respect. YMMV

WnZ39p0Dgydaz1• 6 years ago

I love this comment. It demonstrates nicely how the web and (mostly American, I think other nationalities react differently) culture has changed over the past 20 years.

20 years ago this was simply funny. Nobody took it seriously. It even got an "awards" page.

These days, nobody would ever want to be associated with such a site out of fear of press and social media jumping at them and ruining their career forever.

Not here to judge right or wrong, I think it's somewhere in the middle, but it's an interesting observation.

jahnu2• 6 years ago

I wouldn't want to be associated with such things not because I'm afraid of being lynched but because I've learned that it's demeaning to people. Pitchforks and pile are the excesses of a generally good movement to excise mean spirited or just unintentionally demeaning stuff from our culture but growing and learning to respect others is not a bad impulse. So I wouldn't pile on the author of this site but definitely will not be sharing it amongst my peers.

throwaway450673• 6 years ago

The other reply already said what needed to be said. I too genuinely find the site distasteful and am not just virtue-signaling for social status.

I would just like to add that I'm, in fact, not American (nor Western European) and that we dislike low-key misogyny in other parts of the world too.

maxehmookau6• 6 years ago

No, this isn't correct IMO. 20 years ago, this was funny to the small group of young men who would've been aware of it. "Locker-room talk" if you will. This was never "simply funny" to a lot of people, they just weren't empowered to say or do anything about it. Thankfully, things are changing.

Web technology isn't just the reserve of "geeks" making websites in their basements anymore. It fills every corner of our existance. It's no longer in the locker room and it should behave as such.

teekert• 6 years ago

It is isn't it? I've been watching StarTrek The Original Series lately and oh boy, have we changed. There is a Netflix Explained episode on Political Correctness, fascinating stuff.

To be clear, in my opinion we definitely changed for the better, the position of women at the end of the 60's (which seems so close) is almost mind boggling to me now. It's just 2 generations away from me, but back then my grandmother's mother told my grandmother: "You want to work? What? I'll teach you how to work, in the kitchen, and around the house." I think this caused my grandmother to be very liberal with her kids and as a result my mother was with me and my brothers. As a result I never understood how one can not see men and women as equal. TOS gives some "nice" insights into the matter though...

mickof• 6 years ago

out of fear of press and social media jumping at them and ruining their career forever

People like to claim this all the time, with very little evidence of it actually happening. Also the web is full of sexist shit, even 20 years later. I really don't see the point you are making.

In reality you are WAY more likely to get fired for union organizing or for being the victim of sexual harassment, rather than for being an edge lord on the internet.

michaelt• 6 years ago

These days, nobody would ever want to be associated with such a site out of fear of press and social media jumping at them and ruining their career forever.

To an extent - but 20 years ago was also pre-Facebook when use of psudeonyms was widely accepted internet safety advice.

deepstack• 6 years ago

Hmm sounds like a bit too PC now days.

truculent4• 6 years ago

I think this comment says more about you than about the website, to be frank.

The distribution of people and cultures represented on the internet may have changed, but I think plenty of people would have seen this as objectionable at the time, even if you weren't as aware of them as you are now.

These days, nobody would ever want to be associated with such a site out of fear of press and social media jumping at them and ruining their career forever.

Would the fact that the website is still up, _with_ a "contact me" link, undermine your point somewhat?

krapp3• 6 years ago

These days, nobody would ever want to be associated with such a site out of fear of press and social media jumping at them and ruining their career forever.

Is it really because "nobody would ever want to be associated with such a site out of fear of press and social media jumping at them and ruining their career forever" or because the web has matured beyond its "shitposting teenage edgelord" phase and many people now legitimately don't find that sort of thing funny?

kristopolous• 6 years ago

The jokes fall flat because it's no longer taboo, it feels derivative even if it was original, and the context is gone.

This is why Bob Hope is lame to us. He may have popularized the "tight 5" standup format but everyone copied him and many do it better.

This is also why Amos & Andy is just a fairly uninteresting half hour of blackface racism or why Mr Yunioshi in breakfast at tiffany's just looks stupid now. Sure these are racist but when you look past that, they're also not funny any more.

They're pointing at some, bringing focus to it, but it has no more symbolic resonance.

It's also why if someone made say mrs doubtfire today it'd look like an outdated flop.

There's a societal context that gave these things a dynamic which no longer exists.

It's actually the same reason Monica lewinsky and draft card jokes wouldn't work today. There's no longer a supportive scaffolding to give it the context.

Race and sex based comedy can still be done, it just needs to live in the 2021 context.

It's still racist and sexist, which are both morally objectionable, but unlike this site, it could probably still also be funny.

For instance, you could do a black Mr. Magoo who gets treated with constant dangerous racial prejudice but in the magoo character, always assumes good intentions and miraculously survives everything. Runs into klansman, thinks it's a costume party, etc..

You might also be able to pull off the 3s company dynamic (in the original, straight guy needed to convince everyone he was gay so the premise was "straight man in the closet") but using a different spectrum that's more relevant to today's conflicts.

api• 6 years ago

It's mirrored an overall change in the culture. The left has become much more critical and sensitive, while the right has entered Satanic Panic 2.0 and decided that anything remotely edgy is evidence of Satanic baby eating and sees pedophilia absolutely everywhere.

20-30 years ago it was perfectly acceptable to make incredibly lewd or offensive jokes or have your band LARP as Satanists. The culture was far more tolerant of coarseness and taboo-breaking.

Here's an example that would drive the present-day left and right bonkers if it was released today:

https://www.metrolyrics.com/my-sharona-lyrics-the-knack.html

rsynnott3• 6 years ago

These days, nobody would ever want to be associated with such a site out of fear of press and social media jumping at them and ruining their career forever.

Or, er, maybe they wouldn't want to be associated with it out of other motivations, such as common decency?

leetcrew• 6 years ago

is it that different than the scene in the big short where margot robbie explains subprime loans (presumably) naked in a bathtub? that was in 2015.

I guess margot robbie consented to that depiction at least, but the punchline is essentially the same.

ffgjjj64chj• 6 years ago

Yes and no. I think it is possible to appreciate it for what it is while acknowledging the ways in which it is problematic.

I mean, can we all agree that this is neither a great work of art in the vein of a Voltaire or Boticelli, nor is it “Mein Kampf”?

The site is irreverent and crass. The level of humor you is what you would expect to find on the door of a middle school boys’ bathroom stall.

Imo that is about all the merit and demerit this deserves.

That someone seems to have put a significant amount of time and effort into this is an amusing and sad little bit of meta.

stareatgoats• 6 years ago

While I sympathize with your points I believe they are missing the mark. This isn't cringeworthy today because of the mental abuse that Spears was subjected to, or her possible underage status: this has aged terribly because there has been a seismic shift in how we (as a society in the west) talk about people in general, and women in particular. In my view, bullying and sexually tainted degradation has gone (is going) out of fashion, and not a moment too soon.

throwaway450673• 6 years ago

That was my point as well, I guess I just didn't explicitly state it. Thank you for adding this comment

aaron695• 6 years ago

I'm willing to forgive

This website was ~7 years before her mental health issues became apparent. They don't need your forgiveness.

Her breakdown was handled very badly those 7 years later by society.

The Internets lack of empathy for mental illness in 2007 has been replace by the toxic virtual signalling we see today. It follows all the same patterns.

why is there a "booble" search

If that's a genuine question, it might have been Brittney 'gif art' they have grabbed from somewhere, the logo seems to pre-date the website.

Internet humour in 2000, was like all societies as they progress, simplistic. It's a simple match of a 'rude' (but not extremely 'rude') kinda rhyme with Google.

Google also was not then what it is today, it might have been seen as somewhat of an in joke (I'm cool because I know Google and get the riff)

Britney Spears was also marketed around sex at that time. The internet allowed people to leave the medias bounds and parody it or cut to the chase.

See https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/memes-then-memes-now

ok123456• 6 years ago

It's meant to be absurd. It was never intended to be "laugh out loud" funny.

The point was the juxtaposition of semiconductor physics and a pop star who made music for tweens. Remember that she was the most popular search query on the internet for a long time, and a lot of those queries were a lot more explicit than "britney spears cleavage." Look at it as a joke attempt at SEO at making basic semi-conductor physics rank higher.

shureluck• 6 years ago

Are you a fundamentalist Christian? You kindof sound like one.

Ice_cream_suit• 6 years ago

I am surprised that Ms B.Spears' lawyers have not yet sent them a cease and desist letter.

dorkwood• 6 years ago

I don't understand most of this website, but the story about Hedy Lamarr in the "introduction" section is fascinating.

jl2718• 6 years ago

I believe this is older. I first found this around 2002, and given that half the 1998-2000 internet was about Brittney Spears, it didn’t seem all that weird. Several female coworkers (Physics PhDs) showed me around 2005 without the slightest allegation of sexism, although they suggested I should make one based on male body part displays. If that exists, it wasn’t me.

VLM• 6 years ago

The web 20 years ago was "how can I laugh at this"

The web now suffers from extreme chilling effects along the lines of "how can I bully people by virtue signaling against this"

Igelau• 6 years ago

I met a traveller from an antique land who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand, half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown, and wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command, tell that its sculptor well those passions read which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things, the hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed: and on the pedestal these words appear:

Mr. T Ate My Balls

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ate_my_balls

unholiness• 6 years ago

Serious question: If I'm interested in getting a better understanding of the physics of semiconductors (starting around "atoms have protons and electrons" and ending around "...therefore an NPN transistor should act as a switch in this setup and a current source in this setup"), where would be a good, Spears-less place to learn this?

marksbrown• 6 years ago

I've been fascinated by sites like this most of my life. A bit of searching a decade ago showed the author ended up with an undergraduate Desmond in physics.

What's fascinating is how useful this website still is and how genuinely poor teaching resources become once you leave mainstream education.

Here's another one. http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~kovar/hall.html

Britney Spears' Guide to Semiconductor Physics (2000)

Related Stories