You don't feel the electric field of the electron, for instance, but it does produce EM waves which carry energy away.
But that is what EM waves are: oscillatory field lines. Take two point charges separated a certain distance; they feel a force between them. Now wiggle one charge up and down thus putting wiggles into the field lines. The other charge feels these changes and starts to wiggle up and down too. Increase the wiggle rate to a megacycle or so and you can talk to each other via radio. See cool applet here. Exercise for the student: pretend that charge in the applet is a mass...
You are correct (something about electrocution if I remember correctly). Now what bothers me is that, is it true that if you take lots of iron in your diet that your blood becomes conductive (or at least much more than it normally is)? It doesn't seem believable to me. In that particular show, to prove their point, they did the electric pickle experiment (running a current through a pickle and watching it light up), which works because of the salt and acid in the pickle and not anything to do with iron and conductivity.
My wife sometimes gets annoyed with me when I analyze TV shows too much, but I guess that is the whole point of this/. post. If you're going to do it, don't try to fake it and just do it correct. How much would it really cost to have a chemist, biologist and a physicist used as part-time script consultants? Heck, they can even use grad students if they want to do it cheap. On the other hand, there is probably a unionized pay scale for consultants, so maybe it wouldn't be cheap.
I don't watch the show much, but one snippet I caught involved someone who fell out of a window (was it murder? was it suicide? hmmmm..). A couple of the CSI guys were talking about the fall and one wondered how long it took for the body to hit the ground. The other says, "Well, considering that terminal velocity is 9.8 meters per second per second, it took about three seconds."
When you hear something like that, how am I supposed to buy into the biochem stuff (an area I am not too familiar with) they toss around?
I'm curious, how did you measure the energy spectrum? What did you use for a calorimeter? The cosmic rays that you would see in that building would be almost all minimum-ionizing muons which would all deposit about the same amount of energy in a relatively small (physics demo-sized) detector. To really measure the energy spectrum you'd need a calorimeter along the way.
The atmosphere is not a good shield at 80kft because at that atmosphere you are above about 96.5-percent of the atmosphere.
To further complicate the issue, without going into all the qualifiers and conditions, is that the maximum cosmic ray flux in the atmosphere occurs around 70kft (due to secondary particle generation), so in some instances you are worse off at 70kft than you are above the atmosphere (again, that statement glosses over a lot of different factors).
Damn, you beat me to the comment. I was going to add that though these periodicals are very good, it is like calling National Geographic a respected anthrpology journal.
That site also tells us that "Venus is the only song in the history of the Billboard charts to hit number one three times
Didn't Dolly Parton's I will always love you do that as well? I'm thinking like '74, '82, '92, and '95? I'm not sure if it hit #1 all those times, but I thought it got there at least three times.
This isn't my field of study, but why do you suppose these guys want to put the microphones so close to the fan? The feedback into your control system is going to come from those microphones, so wouldn't you want to put them out near where someone will be? It seems to me that otherwise you'll do a great job making the area close to the fan quiet, but it won't help you anywhere else.
After a bit of Googling, I must concede your point that it was Tarkin. I still don't like the full redemption part, though.
I don't have strong feelings for all the movies one way or another. I saw the first three in the theaters when they came out and enjoyed them very much, except the ending of the third as I have mentioned, and then suffered the Ewoks toys, cartoons, etc.
And no matter what anyone says, I'll never recant my comment about Carrie Fisher!
You are, of course correct regarding the buzz when it first came out. The marketing machine was in full gear (somewhere I still have some Burger King Star Wars drinking glasses), but I don't know if, in the end (for the first movie, at least), the marketing was worse than Planet of the Apes (somewhere in an attic I probably still have a Planet of the Apes treefort). The cultish/nerdish following certainly was bigger though.
I don't know about you, but I was rather disappointed with the third one (us old-timers still refer to the order when they came out and not this "New Hope" or prequel nonsense). The Ewoks really killed it for me. They served no purpose in the movie other than commercial tie-ins. I found them as annoying as Jar Jar. It also really bothered me that Darth Vader, the guy who blew up a billion people, was absolved of his sins and was able to enter the glowing Valhalla-state with Obi Wan and Yoda at the very end of the movie. That was way too cheesy for me, though it did prove out the Bart Simpson plan to do what you want and recant on your deathbed.:)
Oh, and I don't know if it is the differences in age from then and now, but I'd take Carrie Fisher in that harem outfit over Natalie Portman any day.:)
You are correct about the spy extaction. It used Robert Fulton's SKYHOOK (he was the grandson of the fameous Robert Fulton). It was used in Thunderball as well as John Wayne's The Green Berets.
The most exciting use of it, in my opinion, was in the Arctic for Operation COLD FEET. A summary is given here, and a good book on it is here (or at least a review of the book---I've read the book, by the way, and I couldn't put it down until I finished it).
Of course you are using "width" rather loosely. It is better described as the spread of the data (or, for the advanced student, the std is the square root of the second moment of the distribution). It describes the width of the data if your distribution is symmetric about the mean.
Fortunately, due to such things as the Central Limit Theorem, you mainly run into normal-shaped distributions. That is why, to the mathematician's chagrin, the physicist or engineer can usually get away with calculating the std and slapping it on as the error bars (or better still, perform least squares fits and claim to know the errors).
FORTRAN does not require integers to begin with I-N. That is the variable type the compiler assumes if the variable is not explicitly defined.
You can easily get around it with "IMPLICIT NONE," though that might be a DEC extension. I worked so long on a VAX that I can't tell you what is a DEC extension anymore without looking it up.
The problem might be taken care of in Linux before Windows because of SELinux. If I understand it correctly, the security policy implementation is far more flexible and sophisticated. I know the basics for it are rolled into the 2.6 kernel, but there is a lot of work that needs to be done implementing the access controls.
However, don't forget that NEAR was not designed for landing, so it didn't have landing gear, contact sensors, etc.
Both the asteroid and the comet are both going around in elliptical orbits, where the comet orbit has a larger eccentricity, but getting to each one is basically the same. Getting to the comet will have a more complicated trajectory, but the orbital guys have that problem pretty well licked. If you can do ISEE-3/ICE you can do just about anything.
I first heard the comment about Superman ducking probably in 1986 or 1987 when some generic comic came to our college coffee house and used it in his routine (I'm not sure where he got it from, but I doubt it was origninal material. The caliber of comic we got was basically covering better known comics (about every other one would do a Steven Wright-style routine)). It stuck with me because at the time it was one of the funnier things I had heard, since I had seen pretty much all of the George Reeves shows that were in syndication in the 70's (growing up in the late 70's means that I've seen quite a large number of 50's and 60's reruns--we had to waste our time either playing outside or watching TV because of no Gameboys and such (come on, it wasn't like I was going to read! (boy, I noticed that I tend to use an awful lot of parenthetical statements))).
What I liked better is in the TV series, (the old one with George Reeves, not that sappy Lois and Clark), the bad guy shoots at Superman and he stands there with his chest out smiling as the bullets bounce off. The bad guy empties his gun, and with no other options in front of him he throws the gun at Superman, who then ducks so he doesn't get hit.
You forgot to mention the reason for using Aerogels as Cherenkov detectors: they present very little mass, so low-mass particles will not interact and/or deposit much energy in them (e.g., for electrons the Aerogel will act only as a Cherenkov detector and not a calorimeter). The only other real alternative for getting indices of refraction barely over 1.0 is to use pressurized gases, which present a whole series of their own problems.
The most important thing in a telescope is the optical alignment. You can have outstanding optics and have it all go to hell if the optics are not properly aligned and collimated. This is especially true of telescope designs with multiple powered optics (such as catadioptrics), but even with Dobsons you still have tip, tilt, and focus to worry about (those Cassegrain designs are very sensitive to errors in alignment of the secondary mirror because you quickly introduce all sorts of higer-order abberations).
The most useful thing anyone who owns a telescope should know is how to perform and analyze a star test. A very thorough treatment can be found in this book.
By the way, the Willmann-Bell web site has a number of outstanding amateur astronomer books at very good prices.
Most people have mentioned the need for WEP, WAP, MAC filters, etc., but some of the access points/routers have the capability of doing 802.1x authentication.
Has anyone set up their wireless access point this way, and if so, is it straight-forward? I assume one can do it with OpenRadius?
Slashdot Mirror
Good God! We now have Politically Correct distributed computation projects?
Ah yes, that brings back good memories of breadboards and controlable leds.
My wife sometimes gets annoyed with me when I analyze TV shows too much, but I guess that is the whole point of this /. post. If you're going to do it, don't try to fake it and just do it correct. How much would it really cost to have a chemist, biologist and a physicist used as part-time script consultants? Heck, they can even use grad students if they want to do it cheap. On the other hand, there is probably a unionized pay scale for consultants, so maybe it wouldn't be cheap.
When you hear something like that, how am I supposed to buy into the biochem stuff (an area I am not too familiar with) they toss around?
I'm curious, how did you measure the energy spectrum? What did you use for a calorimeter? The cosmic rays that you would see in that building would be almost all minimum-ionizing muons which would all deposit about the same amount of energy in a relatively small (physics demo-sized) detector. To really measure the energy spectrum you'd need a calorimeter along the way.
To further complicate the issue, without going into all the qualifiers and conditions, is that the maximum cosmic ray flux in the atmosphere occurs around 70kft (due to secondary particle generation), so in some instances you are worse off at 70kft than you are above the atmosphere (again, that statement glosses over a lot of different factors).
Damn, you beat me to the comment. I was going to add that though these periodicals are very good, it is like calling National Geographic a respected anthrpology journal.
A more interesting read is in The Inklings. There are many web sites about the group as well.
This isn't my field of study, but why do you suppose these guys want to put the microphones so close to the fan? The feedback into your control system is going to come from those microphones, so wouldn't you want to put them out near where someone will be? It seems to me that otherwise you'll do a great job making the area close to the fan quiet, but it won't help you anywhere else.
I don't have strong feelings for all the movies one way or another. I saw the first three in the theaters when they came out and enjoyed them very much, except the ending of the third as I have mentioned, and then suffered the Ewoks toys, cartoons, etc.
And no matter what anyone says, I'll never recant my comment about Carrie Fisher!
I don't know about you, but I was rather disappointed with the third one (us old-timers still refer to the order when they came out and not this "New Hope" or prequel nonsense). The Ewoks really killed it for me. They served no purpose in the movie other than commercial tie-ins. I found them as annoying as Jar Jar. It also really bothered me that Darth Vader, the guy who blew up a billion people, was absolved of his sins and was able to enter the glowing Valhalla-state with Obi Wan and Yoda at the very end of the movie. That was way too cheesy for me, though it did prove out the Bart Simpson plan to do what you want and recant on your deathbed. :)
Oh, and I don't know if it is the differences in age from then and now, but I'd take Carrie Fisher in that harem outfit over Natalie Portman any day. :)
The most exciting use of it, in my opinion, was in the Arctic for Operation COLD FEET. A summary is given here, and a good book on it is here (or at least a review of the book---I've read the book, by the way, and I couldn't put it down until I finished it).
You might find this interesting.
Fortunately, due to such things as the Central Limit Theorem, you mainly run into normal-shaped distributions. That is why, to the mathematician's chagrin, the physicist or engineer can usually get away with calculating the std and slapping it on as the error bars (or better still, perform least squares fits and claim to know the errors).
You can easily get around it with "IMPLICIT NONE," though that might be a DEC extension. I worked so long on a VAX that I can't tell you what is a DEC extension anymore without looking it up.
The problem might be taken care of in Linux before Windows because of SELinux. If I understand it correctly, the security policy implementation is far more flexible and sophisticated. I know the basics for it are rolled into the 2.6 kernel, but there is a lot of work that needs to be done implementing the access controls.
Both the asteroid and the comet are both going around in elliptical orbits, where the comet orbit has a larger eccentricity, but getting to each one is basically the same. Getting to the comet will have a more complicated trajectory, but the orbital guys have that problem pretty well licked. If you can do ISEE-3/ICE you can do just about anything.
I first heard the comment about Superman ducking probably in 1986 or 1987 when some generic comic came to our college coffee house and used it in his routine (I'm not sure where he got it from, but I doubt it was origninal material. The caliber of comic we got was basically covering better known comics (about every other one would do a Steven Wright-style routine)). It stuck with me because at the time it was one of the funnier things I had heard, since I had seen pretty much all of the George Reeves shows that were in syndication in the 70's (growing up in the late 70's means that I've seen quite a large number of 50's and 60's reruns--we had to waste our time either playing outside or watching TV because of no Gameboys and such (come on, it wasn't like I was going to read! (boy, I noticed that I tend to use an awful lot of parenthetical statements))).
Where did Wuhl say it?
What I liked better is in the TV series, (the old one with George Reeves, not that sappy Lois and Clark), the bad guy shoots at Superman and he stands there with his chest out smiling as the bullets bounce off. The bad guy empties his gun, and with no other options in front of him he throws the gun at Superman, who then ducks so he doesn't get hit.
You forgot to mention the reason for using Aerogels as Cherenkov detectors: they present very little mass, so low-mass particles will not interact and/or deposit much energy in them (e.g., for electrons the Aerogel will act only as a Cherenkov detector and not a calorimeter). The only other real alternative for getting indices of refraction barely over 1.0 is to use pressurized gases, which present a whole series of their own problems.
The most useful thing anyone who owns a telescope should know is how to perform and analyze a star test. A very thorough treatment can be found in this book.
By the way, the Willmann-Bell web site has a number of outstanding amateur astronomer books at very good prices.
Has anyone set up their wireless access point this way, and if so, is it straight-forward? I assume one can do it with OpenRadius?