Slashdot Mirror

"There are no detailed criteria for winning a Nobel Prize. Instead, this prestigious Swedish award is given out annually based on nominations of people who have made the greatest contributions in five fields: chemistry, literature, medicine, physics, and peace (a sixth prize, in economics, is not technically a Nobel Prize).

The Nobel Prizes are the most prestigious awards in their respective fields, although the Peace Prize alone generally attracts the most attention from the media and the general public. Since 1901 (and the Prize in Economics since 1969), these prizes have been awarded annually to those individuals or groups who have made the most important contribution to human progress in their respective subjects. The awards are granted by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, the Nobel Assembly, the Swedish Academy, and the Norwegian Nobel Committee on the basis of the original endowment left by Swedish businessman Alfred Nobel. Winners currently receive a $1.5 million prize." http://www.helium.com/items/1920814-how-to-win-a-nobel-prize

Actually according to the Poncas there were a few woolly mammoths left around until about the 1200's. At least one tribe has a story of an extremely long winter when food supplies were running low, and they then went hunting and killed a woolly mammoth, and it saved the tribe.

Who knows what animals survived in small herds in the America's until the Europeans arrived.

Source:
http://www.helium.com/items/2119958-sightings-of-living-woolly-mammoths

The exciting(?) thing about this study though is how small of an area is contaminated beyond the legal limit. Since Cs is the major radionuclide that was released then these mappings should also be closely correlated to background doses. Given the conservative estimates that are used for setting regulations I am even more convinced that the general Japanese public is in essentially no danger from the radiation. I would like to see a more detailed analysis of the area right around the plant but given the picture in the article it gives me hope.

Many in the anti-nuclear crowd like to spout off and say that Fukushima has rendered vast amounts of land unusable for generations. This news actually bodes well for the Japanese people that in a couple of years all the land that was previously not part of the power generating stations might be returned to original state.

In Soviet Russia, the government controls the commerce.

Interesting sig. It's the other way around here in the US. It reminds me of an old one:

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's the other way around

See, this is what I mean about knee jerk reactions without ever engaging higher cognitive functions. Intelligence is the mother of all evolutionary advantages, do you really think it that unlikely that we might be the first to develop it?

I still don't see what you mean. You have a basic assertion that your idea has merit based on your reasoning. I actually gave some examples of possible descendants or related creatures of the so-called 'pink unicorn'. I'm not sure how you get knee-jerk out of that. You're going to have to either explain (and carefully) or back down. Just repeating that I'm over-reacting constantly doesn't make it any truer.

Take a look here http://www.helium.com/knowledge/291333-the-most-important-accidental-scientific-discoveries There's even a word for it, serendipity. Anyway I think you misunderstood my point, its not that people out for a wander stumble on new discoveries out of the blue, although they have, its that imagination and the ability to step outside the box mentally play an important role in the scientific method. Strident dogmatism is the antithesis of that, and will ultimately lead to serious problems.

Every link on that page proves my point. The researchers were A) not looking for the discovery in question so no additional imagination or 'out of the box' thinking was required. and B) Every one of them had to have the pre-requisite knowledge and grounding in 'in the box' thinking in order to recognize the meaning of their new observation. EVERY ONE of them started with an observation, not wishful thinking, not imagination, just good observation and letting those observations lead them to a conclusion and not letting a pre-ordained conclusion lead their observations.

Which is exactly what I said. I challenged you to come up with a discovery that was led by imagination (i.e. was not based on an observation or previous knowledge), and you haven't.

Now you might be talking about the willingness to overturn previously held beliefs when new evidence overturns them, but this has little to do with imagination or creative thinking. Imagination and creative thinking can be used to hold off new ideas (and has) as easily as it could be used to accept and pioneer new ideas. It takes a certain amount of courage and rigor when the observations don't match the expected to pursue them diligently and explore what those new observations mean.

No I really don't see the difference between those two things besides ideology. You've chosen to argue that one is more likely than the other without any evidence whatsoever. The two things are equally possible.

See, this is what I mean about knee jerk reactions without ever engaging higher cognitive functions. Intelligence is the mother of all evolutionary advantages, do you really think it that unlikely that we might be the first to develop it?

*boggle* I challenge you to find one discovery in the history of the human race that wasn't built on the backs of previous researchers and the observational evidence that came before.

Take a look here

http://www.helium.com/knowledge/291333-the-most-important-accidental-scientific-discoveries

There's even a word for it, serendipity. Anyway I think you misunderstood my point, its not that people out for a wander stumble on new discoveries out of the blue, although they have, its that imagination and the ability to step outside the box mentally play an important role in the scientific method. Strident dogmatism is the antithesis of that, and will ultimately lead to serious problems.

not accountable to share holders

Ever hear of elections?

Why does the government have this helium?

The article explains this one, so im not going in to it other than to say "Blimps".

Did they pay for it, or just claim it? Did they pay for the storage space, or just claim it?

Yes, and Yes... see here http://www.helium.com/items/874929-understanding-the-helium-privitization-act-of-1996

Do they pay taxes on its sale?

why would the government pay taxes to it's self?

Just a few tidbits I found since I assume many will follow the same track:

REF: http://www.helium.com/items/19276-the-uses-of-helium

Helium has many uses even though it is inert. There are three major uses for helium.It is used in low-temperature cooling systems and pressure, lighter-than-air objects and purge systems.

Helium can be very useful in low-temperature cooling because at -270*, or liquid temperature, is able to cool anything because it is so cold. A good example of this as useful is in superconducting devices, because superconducting (electricity can pass from one place to another without wasting any energy) can occur only at very low temperatures.
In pressure systems a gas is used to pressurize the system but the gas is not acceptable if it is able to react with any of the surroundings. Helium is an inert gas that is ideal for these situations. As well, in a purge system an inert gas is used to sweep all gas in a container without reacting with the contents, being inert it is ideal for these situations as well.
Helium is ideal for blimps, balloons and other lighter-than-air crafts because it is neither flammable nor have the lifting effects of hydrogen, this makes it much safer. Although only used for advertising and other limited purposes, it is an ideal element to make these possible.....

Some other common uses for helium include: :leak detection systems :welding :growing silicon and germanium crystals; protective shield :titanium and zirconium production; protective shield :nuclear reactors; cooling medium :diving and others working under pressure; artificial atmosphere with 20% oxygen :supersonic wind tunnels :cryogenic applications :liquid fuel rockets; pressurizing :effecting voice if breathed

I was then curious as to how quickly we lose helium to space and ran across this:

REF: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_do_gases_such_as_helium_escape_Earth's_atmosphere

No planet can hold any gas. Everything escapes, the only question is how fast.

Atmosphere is lost faster, when:
gas is lighter
temperature is higher,
gravity is lower,
planet has smaller size.

Potential energy of helium atom near the surface is
P = -mgRe = -/Na gRe

Exponential factor in Boltzmann distribution is
exp(-P/kT) = exp(/Na gRe / kT) = exp(/(RT) gRe)

Assuming T= 300 K we have /RT gRe = 0.004/(8.3 300) 9.8 6,370,000 = 100

So once per exp(-100) ~ 10^-43 attempts at escaping helium atom manages to do so. Probabilty 10^-34 is very small, but it sharply depends on temperature. Throw in 1000K and you have p ~ 10^-13, which means rather quick escape.

I gather from the above that although helium can escape earths atmosphere, it does so very slowly.

In the end, it seems foolish to me to release a known finite resource (finite as to what our technology can easily harvest today) to the hands of whim.

Debunking requested? Sure! :)

I hesitate to even post the URL, but I'm sure the Slashdot folks will give this "ominous report" the debunking it so thoroughly needs: Doomsday: How BP Gulf disaster may have triggered a 'world-killing' event

Interesting link, albeit woefully flawed. The beginning, emphasis mine:

Ominous reports are leaking past the BP Gulf salvage operation news blackout that the disaster unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico may be about to reach biblical proportions.

251 million years ago a mammoth undersea methane bubble caused massive explosions, poisoned the atmosphere and destroyed more than 96 percent of all life on Earth. [1] Experts agree that what is known as the Permian extinction event was the greatest mass extinction event in the history of the world. [2]

55 million years later another methane bubble ruptured causing more mass extinctions during the Late Paleocene Thermal Maximum (LPTM).

The LPTM lasted 100,000 years. [3]

Those subterranean seas of methane virtually reshaped the planet when they explosively blew from deep beneath the waters of what is today called the Gulf of Mexico.

Here's a pic of the world's land masses around 255 mya, and another of around 237 mya. Here's a pic from close to the 55 million years later mentioned in the article above, around 195 mya.

In none of these scenarios is the current Gulf of Mexico a body of water. This would seem to rule out any sort of clathrate-based "sea fart", at least from that specific region.

Moreover, the two events the article mentions aren't quite right. The first is the Permian-Triassic extinction, indeed around 251 mya, but the cause is still debated, with one of the leading explanations being a combination of factors that include one or more impact events.

The second event is dated in the article at 55 million years after the Permian-Triassic extinction, or around 196 mya. However, the Paleocene didn't even begin until around 65 mya. What the article author was probably thinking about was the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, dated to around 55 mya. One of the theories for the cause of the PETM is indeed that methane clathrates may have destabilized, causing a runaway greenhouse effect, until the poles were warm enough for palm trees and sea turtles. However, the PETM isn't associated with any mass extinction -- the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction happened 65 mya when the geologic K-T boundary was laid down in the rock, and is again theorized to be due mainly to one or more impact events. Note in the pic here that the Gulf of Mexico is indeed a body of water by this time, but rather than being the source of any clathrate fart, it is instead noted as the location of the Chicxulub crater, theorized to be the kicker that killed the dinosaurs.

So basically, as disruptive as any sustained "sea fart" might be, the article you linked is full of bunkum and misinformation. And that's just in the intro.

Cheers,

Well, according to one article, at least, we're all doomed. To extinction. By an eruption of methane gas that will generate "a towering supersonic tsunami annihilating everything along the coast and well inland".

I hesitate to even post the URL, but I'm sure the Slashdot folks will give this "ominous report" the debunking it so thoroughly needs:
Doomsday: How BP Gulf disaster may have triggered a 'world-killing' event

Perhaps I'm jaded... I grew up in Reagan's 1980s and never ONCE did I see the nuclear annihilation we were all expecting. Promises, promises... I'll believe it when I see the wall of water approaching Dallas.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-7K-ZPaLa8 Check out this sea flight view of the gulf. This is what the blimp will see

http://gizmodo.com/5547548/the-gulf-disaster-video-that-bp-doesnt-want-you-to-see Maybe they should send some subs for more pics like this?

http://gizmodo.com/5542969/gulf-oil-disaster-looks-very-scary-says-astronaut Hey, we already have space pics.....the blimp is really going to help

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ALAvTeRMYc&feature=related Ex Shell CEO saying "Its not going to stop"

http://www.helium.com/items/1864136-how-the-ultimate-bp-gulf-disaster-could-kill-millions Now this is an interesting theory. The probability of course is unknown. Any thoughts from geologists who are experts on the gulf sea floor or with enough knowledge they could call themselves an expert witness, might shed some light. And, well Sarah Palin is calling for "divine intervention" on her twitter feed....damn if only she were president things would really be moving along....hah.

This is pretty scary...um http://www.helium.com/items/1864136-hohttp://www.helium.com/items/1864136-how-the-ultimate-bp-gulf-disaster-could-kill-millionsw-the-ultimate-bp-gulf-disaster-could-kill-millions

For Christ sake if exhaling can destroy earth's environment, how could de-orbiting a trillion tons do the planet any good?

The only way to gain the riches of mars is to live there. You can't bring it home.

And yet the earth gets hit by tens of thousands of tons of meteors annually, with no apparent adverse effects. Thats not to say that all will be well if we escalate that to millions of tons per year, but since we can control the manner of entry its quite likely that significant reductions in temperatures or emissions as a result of deorbiting can be achieved.

In any case, I think you are quite right in saying that for example raw materials from asteroids will probably not be sent directly back to earth, at least not past the initial stages. The real wealth of space (and what wealth it is!) lies in orbital or deep space factories, returning finished products to earth, and the more automated the better.

While we can't control climate change we still must develop alternate means of energy production or we will learn to freeze! Please see: http://www.helium.com/items/1552529-alternative-energy Thanks for reading another starving writer article!

Great! They should be doing their nuclear stuff (fission) but now they want to do fusion! NRC needs to stick to their core mission and educate their nukes about getting nookie at the work place! Please see: http://www.helium.com/items/1621384-dating-a-coworker and: http://www.helium.com/items/876196-should-a-manager-date-an-employee Thanks for reading and please share the link as part of the Starving Writer Experiment!

Great! They should be doing their nuclear stuff (fission) but now they want to do fusion! NRC needs to stick to their core mission and educate their nukes about getting nookie at the work place! Please see: http://www.helium.com/items/1621384-dating-a-coworker and: http://www.helium.com/items/876196-should-a-manager-date-an-employee Thanks for reading and please share the link as part of the Starving Writer Experiment!

So, now that he is out of a job, perhaps he has need of the following hints on how to get a new job: http://www.helium.com/items/1556072-job-loss Another starving writer experiment post! Thanks!

...Angelina Jolie. I think she's got no class.

I thought, Angelina was hot, until I learned, she has a Che Guevara tattoo... Eeeewww...

So, the man that is considered by Islam to be the ideal role model, capable only of 'human errors in judgment in minor things with good intentions', was also a child rapist.

Careful here. The burden of what is appropriate or inappropriate to do with a child changed over time. Yes, we now think that it is abhorrent, and it is a crime, but 100, 200 years ago, a woman was ready for sex the moment she had her period, after all, now she could bear a child, and that means she is a woman.

So, during his time, for Mohammad to have sex with an 9 years old, it was perfect normal. Come one, on the western world, about 100 years ago it was common for girls to get married at age 12. You may have all the problems you want with Islam, I don't care (I do have mines), but never let those get in front of critical thinking, that is the path of bigotry. Do you want to become one of them?

A Finnish MP is being prosecuted because he had the temerity to point out that Mohammed had sex with a nine-year old girl called Aisha, whom he married when she was aged six - details here.

The fact is, he's right. From the JihadWatch article:

The collection of traditions of Muhammad that Muslims consider most reliable, Sahih Bukhari, affirms in no less than five places that Aisha was six when Muhammad took her and nine when he consummated the marriage (vol. 5, bk. 58, no. 234; vol. 5 bk. 58 no. 236; vol. 7 bk. 62 no. 64; vol. 7 bk. 62 no. 65; and vol. 7 bk. 62 no. 88). It is also in Sunan Abu Dawud (bk. 41 no. 4915), another of the Sahih Sittah, the six hadith collections Muslims accept as most reliable.

So, the man that is considered by Islam to be the ideal role model, capable only of 'human errors in judgment in minor things with good intentions', was also a child rapist.

The reason that Islamic groups worldwide are pushing for blasphemy laws - and using them when they're available - is to silence people who point out facts like that.

The Metric System is for vureaucrats and is made to keep the ordinary people down: http://www.helium.com/items/1219927-why-wont-america-adopt-the-metric-system

Oh, okay. That makes sense. Too bad those law changes were very much bipartisan. Also, it's likely inconvienent to your argument that nearly every rule change that played a part in the ecenomic downturn happened in the 2000s, which republicans have been in power for all but 3 of now.

The longest word you can type with only the left-hand letters on a keyboard is "devertebrated".

A much better answer isn't, so don't bother clicking it...

This is such an obvious blog spam by this guy that it is painful.

Both blog entries (one completely redundant to mask the referrals), are authored by "Moe Zilla" (painfully lame pseudonym, btw) whose "ultimate goal is to earn money online while writing about whatever I want," and whose writing style has the exact same defects as those in the summary.

Give up dude, your high school English teach was right: you suck.

I was taught that you could in general analytically work out whether the verbs were 'être' or 'avoir' by asking, in the intended sentence context:

What does/did the person [verb]?

eg. What does/did the person buy? - Avoir, because it makes some kind of sense.

What does/did the person go/born/fall? What? Must be être.

The heuristic has a good enough success rate to be worth recalling. When it fails it is generally though not always because the sentence context is not understood... and this mnemonic is, now that I think about it, just an easy way of making use of the property you note (that the verbs are intransitive). You're absolutely right that this is the important property - or in fact I think it's the somewhat related passive vs active voice in French. Take for example 'je suis descendu par l'escalier', approximately, I went downstairs using the stairs. If you go down the stairs specifically, it apparently becomes 'j'ai descendu l'escalier', I descended the stairs (what does/did the person descend? the stairs). I understand that there are also some very subtle cases of 'etre' vs 'avoir' out there as well. In some cases the distinction is really stylistic and nuanced, which is just what one needs when trying to learn a foreign language in finite time :-)

A decent page on the topic: http://www.french-linguistics.co.uk/grammar/avoir_or_etre.shtml
There's a page linked on from there that describes some subtle cases, too.

But I digress.

correct, they do not equal real life. but nearly anyone with any training in psychology and how the mind works, will tell you that we are products of our environment. What that means is that Books, Games, Movies do have an influence on us, especially kids. http://www.helium.com/knowledge/41496-products-environment

Motown records from the 60's were engineered for the limitations of AM and compressed onto 45-rpm records using the same techniques people complain about now. Take a look at http://www.helium.com/tm/293860/movie-spinal-guitarist-titular and you can see Barry Gordon was decades ahead of the current "loudness wars".

See here... http://www.helium.com/tm/570058/unlike-countries-tradition-identity "A 54 year old dry cleaner named Clarence Willock was stopped by police while driving in London in December 1950. He was ordered to produce his ID card at his local police station within 48 hours. He refused point blank, saying he would not produce it at any police station at all. He was prosecuted and the case eventually went all the way to the High Court and the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Goddard. He remarked that the continuance of the ID card was an 'annoyance' and 'tended to turn law abiding subjects into law breakers'."

It sounds identical to the model that Helium is using (multiple articles, single author, ad-based reward). Sounds like it'll be prone to the same problems like you describe.

This article says that Hip Hop and Grunge killed the music inustry.
http://www.helium.com/tm/483285/music-industry-thr oatthroughout-major

I actually had not been to Helium in several months, because although I too liked the idea, the content there was dominated by foreign writers looking to make a quick $.35, which probably went a long way in their native land. The problem with that was that they were flooding the site with very poor content.

I was pleasantly surprised to follow your link and see that things have changed quite dramatically. I actually may send the basic computer security article to some people as a first line of answer their questions (seeing as I'm IT to everyone who even remotely knows me).

Helium has a pretty unique formula, as well as paying people based on peer review of their answers. I've been there for about a month, and made $1.50. Of course if I can lure more readers there, I'll make more $$. Specifically though, I like the way the answers "battle" against each other, so when you go there you can see the answers ranked in order of "goodness."