Yes, I didn't mention these but if you think about it, this is transfering the pump action to the bottom of the well. The draw is created at the
foot valve and the column is not supported by air pressure but rather by the strengh of the pipes.
This is a bad idea if the idea is revenue. As George Monbiot points out, the whole road culture is based on the illusion of freedom. So, a big brother system is going
to reduce revenue.
A better system is to build road maintenance into road financing (allocate-in-advance) for roads where trucks are not allowed. This puts it on income, property and sales taxes and basically acknowledges that the benefits accrue most to those who profit most by the development. For roads where trucks are allowed, trucks are
the main cause of wear because this goes as the 4th power of axle weight. In this case, since it is a commercial activity, monitoring can make sense (short hairs situation) and
a pay-as-you-go system can work using the fourth power of the axle weight together with regulations such as requiring dump truck tires to be clean
when they hit the pavement and their loads fully covered.
For revenue purposes, you want to keep the mall parking lots full and have lots more trips than actually needed so you want to hide the cost of driving
as much as you can. The question of why a state's primary concern is revenue is another matter. -- Get ready to go electric: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html
On number 2 you are correct. A mercury (density about 13 g/cc) column is a familiar 29 inches or so. On number 2, if the straw is verrrry thin, you can
get surface tension effects that can increase the column for water (capillary action). Redwoods push the limit for this. But, for typical straws/pipes the diameter does not matter. We are looking at pressure so it is mass per unit area that matters and this is the same with a thick or thin straw.
That should not have been any more than a three story building. The atmosphere can only support a column of water about 32 feet high. This is
why you have to put a pump at the bottom of a deep well (force pump) rather than using suction from the top.
-- Rent solar power with no installation cost: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html
You've got that right. Even when Moses was getting letter by letter instruction, you can kind of tell that the One doing the dictation was saying
"no matter how simple I make this, they'll still get it wrong.... Ten laws for ten fingers, they'll still forget numbers nine and ten.... There are no
'excepts' in here at all, but they'll have that 'kill' one messed up right after they play with that golden calf.... And... HOW OFTEN DO I HAVE TO SAY
CLOSE THE DOOR, WE'RE NOT HEATING THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD!!! GO TO YOUR ROOM RIGHT NOW!..."
We can expect up to 11 billion people coming up. We need to figure out how to make all of them welcome and at the same time, and this is very important, support and sustain the ecosystem. At a billion people, there was no paradise, at 11 billion there will have to be. See http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/05/scrooge.html for more on this.
Humm... There is a bit less there for the natural predators I suppose. But I have to disagree with your characterization that the high rate of
malformation is fine. Animal reproduction is actually suppose to be pretty high fidelity, this retains adaptive traits. There is a problem
with basic function here whereas predation is normal. --
Get electricity from the Sun at competitive rates: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html
Souldn't an adaptive mutation do better in a larger pool? Since reproduction is attenuated in the smaller pool, the first propogation is less
likely as would be the next few I think. -- Fission free nuclear power: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html
The article reports that one third of nestlings are malformed. What we have is a fairly natural cut: If the offspring is viable, it will
end up being observed as behaving normally, it if is not then it won't be observed since it will be dead from, say, having the wrong shaped
beak for its niche. It will be absent from counting surveys, making them biased. Most mutations are harmful so they do not survive. But,
so long as less corrupted genetic material can migrate in, you'll get a superfical appearance of normalcy.
The reason for preserving wilderness is to preserve biodiversity which is essential to maintaining a strong ecosystem. This accidental wilderness
has many counts against it in that context.
On the other hand, NMCI was always used a threat to make peole go with Enterprise versions and such. There is nothing that boost security about
a new version number for the gcc libraries, but it does lead to a month's effort to get previously working software working again.
External IT security attacks happen all the time but they are pretty ineffective because the network can be monitored, CERT alerts are acted on promptly,
patches applied as they are released and such. The damaging attacks come from people carrying data out on disks for pay. Those are hard to detect
and also quite demoralizing, in part because trust is broken and in part because of the pompous zenophobic lectures from the folks who didn't do their
job well enough. Resorting to name calling is unprofessional.
The Navy Marine Corp Intranet http://www.eds.com/sites/nmci/ is controlled by EDS, Ross Perot's old company. It is very restrictive and last I knew only allowed windows
on it. Only selected applications can be installed on a computer on this network and it is tough to make the list. This could be good for some
software that runs on windows to show it is ready for prime time, but it is going to be tough to get managers to go through the hassle of getting
it approved. The Navy and Marine Corps have put themselves in a Microsoft box on this one I think. -- Rent Solar Power, no installation cost: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html
However, they are reflections of the original turtle as when you have two mirrors face each other. In other words, self-similarity allows a kind
of rolled out recursion that likely resolves your paradox.
But, you are treading on dangerous theological ground. You would equate the creation with the act of creation (logos) and you are not up to
comprehending the act. If you take, say, designing and building a house as an analogy, you ultimately find that there is no unique creation that
has occured because the idea of an artifical cave is a very old one. Creativity is innate in humans but not comprehended by them. There is something new
under the Sun every day but it is unrecognized and not appreciated immediately. The act of creation is diffuse; a tuning in to something larger.
Because of this, perfect physics does not provide explanatory power and cannot sustitute for core theological mysteries. Your question looks to find
room for God in a remote place (the physical law originator) but theologically this just flows out as a minor consequence of the original Word and
is not some hideaway.
Reread the definition. You'll see we're congruent. You may also research Milloy since you have not and find that his information turns out to be unverifiable or provably false. Again, intentional misrepresentation, when identified, is germaine, and it is not ad hominem to point it out. It is
a little unseemly though to continue cling to your position.
You are incorrect. His MO is to lie on these specific topics. This is specifically about his reasoning. Ad Hominem is about using unrelated aspects
to discredit the messanger rather than looking at the message dispassionately. Once it is known that the messanger's unterior motives cause him
to dissemble, one is simply clearing the air by disregarding him. Giving any credence to Milloy sourced material is a distraction and reduces the
value of debate.
Note that you have engaged in a strawman: you generalize that this treatment is general while it is not. There is one particular instance of a liar
under discussion. And, he is not a researcher since he is not after truth. You are rationalizing rather than participating in reason.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I didn't mention these but if you think about it, this is transfering the pump action to the bottom of the well. The draw is created at the foot valve and the column is not supported by air pressure but rather by the strengh of the pipes.
This is a bad idea if the idea is revenue. As George Monbiot points out, the whole road culture is based on the illusion of freedom. So, a big brother system is going to reduce revenue.
s -selling-solar.html
A better system is to build road maintenance into road financing (allocate-in-advance) for roads where trucks are not allowed. This puts it on income, property and sales taxes and basically acknowledges that the benefits accrue most to those who profit most by the development. For roads where trucks are allowed, trucks are the main cause of wear because this goes as the 4th power of axle weight. In this case, since it is a commercial activity, monitoring can make sense (short hairs situation) and a pay-as-you-go system can work using the fourth power of the axle weight together with regulations such as requiring dump truck tires to be clean when they hit the pavement and their loads fully covered.
For revenue purposes, you want to keep the mall parking lots full and have lots more trips than actually needed so you want to hide the cost of driving as much as you can. The question of why a state's primary concern is revenue is another matter.
--
Get ready to go electric: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
The cracks that allow the water in come from wear. This goes as the fourth power of the axle weight http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road#Maintenance. If you don't weaken the road surface, you don't get potholes as frequently.s -selling-solar.html
--
Convert to solar power for what you pay now: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
Thanks. I thought the use tax was the fuel tax. Do all of these go into the general fund?
I did. Do you know who sets the price for oil?
I kind of think those cars will be lighter and won't be grinding up potholes so the costs for road maintenance will be lower.s -selling-solar.html
--
Sign up for the solar part now: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
It looks like the fuel is tax exempt in any case: http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/progs/view_ind.cgi ?afdc/5664/0. So, the tax guys didn't know their own law! OMG PONIES LOL!!!!!
s -selling-solar.html
--
If you don't pay tax to rent a generator, then don't pay tax for electricity (no fuel so no tax): http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
NC has a 20.2 cpg subsidy for B20 http://www.globalsubsidies.org/IMG/pdf/biofuels_su bsidies_us.pdf which he is not getting since he is buying his oil at the store. Since he is basically using B100, the state
should be paying him 5*20.2-29.9(use tax)=71.1 cpg. So, fining him for this seems about as funny as it gets.s -selling-solar.html
--
No Joke! Rent solar power and fix your electric rates for 25 years: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
On number 2 you are correct. A mercury (density about 13 g/cc) column is a familiar 29 inches or so. On number 2, if the straw is verrrry thin, you can get surface tension effects that can increase the column for water (capillary action). Redwoods push the limit for this. But, for typical straws/pipes the diameter does not matter. We are looking at pressure so it is mass per unit area that matters and this is the same with a thick or thin straw.
That should not have been any more than a three story building. The atmosphere can only support a column of water about 32 feet high. This is why you have to put a pump at the bottom of a deep well (force pump) rather than using suction from the top.s -selling-solar.html
--
Rent solar power with no installation cost: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
You've got that right. Even when Moses was getting letter by letter instruction, you can kind of tell that the One doing the dictation was saying "no matter how simple I make this, they'll still get it wrong.... Ten laws for ten fingers, they'll still forget numbers nine and ten.... There are no 'excepts' in here at all, but they'll have that 'kill' one messed up right after they play with that golden calf.... And... HOW OFTEN DO I HAVE TO SAY CLOSE THE DOOR, WE'RE NOT HEATING THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD!!! GO TO YOUR ROOM RIGHT NOW!..."
It is not too suprising to find pretty good adaptation to a radiation environment among bacteria. They started earlier when natural radiation levels were higher. Some http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/10/06101 9192814.htm are adapted to using remaining radioactivity as an energy source.
The ruggedness of bacteria was one of the motivations of the panspermia theory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia.s -selling-solar.html
--
Rent solar power at 2005 electric rates: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
We can expect up to 11 billion people coming up. We need to figure out how to make all of them welcome and at the same time, and this is very important, support and sustain the ecosystem. At a billion people, there was no paradise, at 11 billion there will have to be. See http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/05/scrooge.html for more on this.
Is this reported elsewhere? It is not clear from the article. In this link http://cricket.biol.sc.edu/chernobyl/papers/moller -et-al-2007-chernobyl-abnormalities.pdf they do not say they are working on the reactor itself, just with in a km of the excusion zone or closer.
Humm... There is a bit less there for the natural predators I suppose. But I have to disagree with your characterization that the high rate of malformation is fine. Animal reproduction is actually suppose to be pretty high fidelity, this retains adaptive traits. There is a problem with basic function here whereas predation is normal.s -selling-solar.html
--
Get electricity from the Sun at competitive rates: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
Souldn't an adaptive mutation do better in a larger pool? Since reproduction is attenuated in the smaller pool, the first propogation is less likely as would be the next few I think.s -selling-solar.html
--
Fission free nuclear power: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
The article reports that one third of nestlings are malformed. What we have is a fairly natural cut: If the offspring is viable, it will end up being observed as behaving normally, it if is not then it won't be observed since it will be dead from, say, having the wrong shaped beak for its niche. It will be absent from counting surveys, making them biased. Most mutations are harmful so they do not survive. But, so long as less corrupted genetic material can migrate in, you'll get a superfical appearance of normalcy.
The reason for preserving wilderness is to preserve biodiversity which is essential to maintaining a strong ecosystem. This accidental wilderness has many counts against it in that context.
That's a relief. Legacy networks seem to be the only way to keep out of NMCI but that may also be the only on-shore model.
On the other hand, NMCI was always used a threat to make peole go with Enterprise versions and such. There is nothing that boost security about a new version number for the gcc libraries, but it does lead to a month's effort to get previously working software working again.
External IT security attacks happen all the time but they are pretty ineffective because the network can be monitored, CERT alerts are acted on promptly, patches applied as they are released and such. The damaging attacks come from people carrying data out on disks for pay. Those are hard to detect and also quite demoralizing, in part because trust is broken and in part because of the pompous zenophobic lectures from the folks who didn't do their job well enough. Resorting to name calling is unprofessional.
The Navy Marine Corp Intranet http://www.eds.com/sites/nmci/ is controlled by EDS, Ross Perot's old company. It is very restrictive and last I knew only allowed windows on it. Only selected applications can be installed on a computer on this network and it is tough to make the list. This could be good for some software that runs on windows to show it is ready for prime time, but it is going to be tough to get managers to go through the hassle of getting it approved. The Navy and Marine Corps have put themselves in a Microsoft box on this one I think.s -selling-solar.html
--
Rent Solar Power, no installation cost: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
However, they are reflections of the original turtle as when you have two mirrors face each other. In other words, self-similarity allows a kind of rolled out recursion that likely resolves your paradox.
But, you are treading on dangerous theological ground. You would equate the creation with the act of creation (logos) and you are not up to comprehending the act. If you take, say, designing and building a house as an analogy, you ultimately find that there is no unique creation that has occured because the idea of an artifical cave is a very old one. Creativity is innate in humans but not comprehended by them. There is something new under the Sun every day but it is unrecognized and not appreciated immediately. The act of creation is diffuse; a tuning in to something larger.
Because of this, perfect physics does not provide explanatory power and cannot sustitute for core theological mysteries. Your question looks to find room for God in a remote place (the physical law originator) but theologically this just flows out as a minor consequence of the original Word and is not some hideaway.
Actually no, civilization progressed in three stages: 1) How can we eat?, 2) Why do we eat?, and 3) Where shall we have lunch?
The lack of space aliens is owing to the lack of eight star restaurants. They cannot abide hearing "Do you want fries with that?"
SETI requires closing down McDonalds which is why Clinton refused to fund it.
Reread the definition. You'll see we're congruent. You may also research Milloy since you have not and find that his information turns out to be unverifiable or provably false. Again, intentional misrepresentation, when identified, is germaine, and it is not ad hominem to point it out. It is a little unseemly though to continue cling to your position.
You are incorrect. His MO is to lie on these specific topics. This is specifically about his reasoning. Ad Hominem is about using unrelated aspects to discredit the messanger rather than looking at the message dispassionately. Once it is known that the messanger's unterior motives cause him to dissemble, one is simply clearing the air by disregarding him. Giving any credence to Milloy sourced material is a distraction and reduces the value of debate.
Note that you have engaged in a strawman: you generalize that this treatment is general while it is not. There is one particular instance of a liar under discussion. And, he is not a researcher since he is not after truth. You are rationalizing rather than participating in reason.