> the radius of a neutron star is about 15 km > the surface is moving at 20% the speed of light
Aha, then my question arose from ignorance 1: I can't really grasp the immense speed of lightwaves, as i've never travelled at a speed anything close to that (well, maybe I have, but in relation to the Earth, I have not come close) 2: I didn't realize these things were so small
How dense are these things, say, compared to a black hole? If something w/ 15 Km diameter can be detected from so far away, I would think that it would have to have a great deal of mass in that small volume, correct?
> it is a neutron star spinning just under 100 times per second
I didn't read the second (Hubble) article. The entire star spins 100 times per second? I would think that this star (any star) would be pretty big, so is that possible? I would think that means it's surface would be going faster than light. Am I misunderstanding something?
(note: this is a lot of rambling & ranting, it won't necessarily all make sense to you.)
They don't seem too keen on people actually using their site. When I tried to get to it, it told me I don't have Flash 6 (which I do, unfortunately), and then I clicked "Continue" to go on anyway it came back to tell me again that I don't have Flash. Fucking brilliant. So I decided to see if I could find something else, just for the heck of it. (after this, too, for some reason, the rest of the site worked) I went to/images/ and got this:
> YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED! > AND WILL BE REPORTED TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES! > Your are attempting to illegally login into a secure server and may be breaking the electronic wire fraud laws. > We monitor all login attempts and report any violations to the FBI we find suspicious. > We will not tolerate any hacker attempts to this server. > We record your IP address and originating domain and much more information to track you down. We use advanced intrusion detection software that reports to our security department in real-time and will allow them to see any intrusion attempts. > Please be advised that we take this very seriously! We will take the full course of action in any occurrence! > To report anything contact: > security@infiniumlabs.com
I am not authorized? Authorized for what!? And they're going to report me to the authorities for going to the wrong page. Yeah, funny. And I like how they assume I am breaking into their server. Not to mention they'll have a pretty damned hard time trying to track me down. And of course, Going to an images directory = Advanced Cracking techniques, woo. So now I will be at the mercy of these people taking their full course of action against me (which is? Absolutely fucking nothing). *COWER*
That page is so silly that it makes me wonder if one or both of the following 2 are true: 1) Their webmaster is an idiot 2) This is a hoax/vaporware (there's probably a good reason it's called a phantom)
The article claims it isn't vaporware, but they give no reason to actually believe that, or why they say that. The company currently doesn't seem to sell anything other than hats, mugs, and shirts. The beta-testing application is pretty badly designed, especially compared to the rest of the site, but I guess that's not really a reason to doubt the existence of its product. Speaking of which, Why the HELL would they want my resume? WTF does that matter? After trying to sign up JFTFOI, the Sign Up button did nothing. Great.
> Isn't it a little weird for an essential component of this device (the OS) to be made by their primary competitor?
Maybe it's MS quietly funding this. They can sell the copies of the OS it runs to themselves pretty cheap, use similar ideas as the XBox that they've already developed, and then sell it for twice as much due to "limited production run." I do't really believe this, just a slim possibility
> By your interpretation 'antigravity' would also cancel out intertia.
I don't think it would, as inertia goes in a straight line. We are spinning at the same rate as the earth, and therefore have the same speed as the outside of the Earth. If we were no longer affected by the Earth's pull towards itself, we would still be going at that speed (minus wind resistance, etc of course) in a straight line (a tangent from the spot where we lost gravity, I think). At first, we would slowly lift from the ground, then due to wind resistance, the ground would start moving faster than us, effectively "moving" the person in the opposite direction of the Earth's spin. Eventually, you would get further away from that spot on Earth and from the Earth itself. But, of course, you also have to keep in mind that the Earth rotates around the sun, so the whole thing would be moving in another direction (probably away from us) as well.
What? Of course I know what I'm talking about! uh... err... hmm... yeah.
> somebody ought to turn one sideways and staple it to a matchbox car or something
That seems like a good idea, and it would help show that it's using Ionic Breeze (sorry, it's just an appropriate prase) and not anti-grav. Plus it might be more efficient at moving something perpendicular to gravity instead of trying to oppose it altogether.
This is definitely a government conspiracy or a hoax, since the whole idea is full of hole(s). It says no moving parts, but the whole thing moves, except the power source. SEE! I ask you, IF THEY'RE WILLING TO LIE ABOUT HAVING NO MOVING PARTS, WHAT ELSE WOULD THEY BE WILLING TO LIE ABOUT?!?!?! Maybe it not working at all, HMMMMMM??? Or maybe it really IS anti-gravity and the "vaccuum" test was all a coverup by NASA to keep us down! That's obviously the answer! AHA!
(FL: See, that's a joke, son. You're supposed to laugh.)
> It's actually pretty easy to prove to yourself. Consider the following facts (anal physics people, cut me some slack
Easy? I never got too far in Physics, but I have some understanding of very basic electronics. I wouldn't call this easy to understand. Maybe if I was an anal physics person I could, but that's not the intended audience, as you said.
Voltage wavefront? reflections? asymptotically? What the heck is that? PN semiconductor Junctions? Okay, I understand diodes.. diffusion gradients? I might be able to figure that one out with a few minutes of though (or a few seconds of googling)
How many people (who aren't physics geeks, mind you) own a multi-megaohm resistor? Even less, own two?
I'm not insulting you or anything, but if you say "pretty easy to prove," try explaining something that really is easy to prove.
> The point is that if you can accept that space-time can be bent by masses, there is nothing that conceptually prevents space-time from being bent the other direction by something else.
Maybe it could be bent the other way by having a very small object with an insanely large mass? I remember some extremely simple physics equation(s) saying that as something approaches the speed of light its mass goes way up. Well, maybe if we were to hit the speed of light the increased mass would jump to a point where the "space-time curve" would be pulled in the opposite direction due to the immense gravity coming from such a small object.
Of coure, IANAP, but you could probably tell that from any single sentence in this post. I feel insightful, but I'm sure that will change as soon as one person responds:)
> Neither python or perl are strongly typed, dumbass.
While you may be right (I don't know, I have to assume you are), I don't think it's necessary to call him a dumbass. If you're going to insult someone, make it worthwhile, like "Learn what the F*&ck you are talking about before posting, asshat!":)
Slashdot Mirror
> It fails to mention a name
Methuselah Planet, tho I might have misspelled it.
> DON'T try this at home kids - you'll burn your eyes out.
Why would looking at Jupiter through a telescope "burn your eyes out?"
> the radius of a neutron star is about 15 km
> the surface is moving at 20% the speed of light
Aha, then my question arose from ignorance
1: I can't really grasp the immense speed of lightwaves, as i've never travelled at a speed anything close to that (well, maybe I have, but in relation to the Earth, I have not come close)
2: I didn't realize these things were so small
How dense are these things, say, compared to a black hole? If something w/ 15 Km diameter can be detected from so far away, I would think that it would have to have a great deal of mass in that small volume, correct?
> Was it not purported as fact that the universe is x billion years old?
No, it was not. Here is a direct quote from the end of the article's third paragraph (emphasis mine):
It appears to have formed 12.7 billion years ago, within a billion years of the origin of the universe in the theorized Big Bang.
> it is a neutron star spinning just under 100 times per second
I didn't read the second (Hubble) article. The entire star spins 100 times per second? I would think that this star (any star) would be pretty big, so is that possible? I would think that means it's surface would be going faster than light. Am I misunderstanding something?
I love this article. There's all kinds of stupid crap being discussed, and it's all on-topic. Go figure.
> by wizard992 (176718)
:)
> this absolutely has to be the most useless discussion I have ever read on Slashdot
I can tell you're lieing just by looking at your UID! I've seen more worthless discussions here in the last 3 months
> you don't need to own a multimegaohm resister you just need a lot of 470k's..
Is that a joke? I don't get it. What's a 470k? Or do you mean a bunch of 470K resistors? Is there something special aout that resistor?
(love your handle, BTW, I used to be an Amigahead)
> My cat's breath smells like cat food." Should this really come as a surprise?
No, but if you're confused, it's a Simpsons quote.
> anything the butterfly would really block, they probably can't show on TV
:) Damn Censorship! They should show me what I'm trying not to see, to make sure I know that I really don't want to see it! hehe.
Good point.
> a guy in a goofy butterfly outfit putting you in a headlock if you try to show the info on an 'R' rated film
I saw one of those MSN commercials and it kinda' scared me what they block out as "harmful." Like rap music?
(note: this is a lot of rambling & ranting, it won't necessarily all make sense to you.)
/images/ and got this:
They don't seem too keen on people actually using their site. When I tried to get to it, it told me I don't have Flash 6 (which I do, unfortunately), and then I clicked "Continue" to go on anyway it came back to tell me again that I don't have Flash. Fucking brilliant. So I decided to see if I could find something else, just for the heck of it. (after this, too, for some reason, the rest of the site worked) I went to
> YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED!
> AND WILL BE REPORTED TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES!
> Your are attempting to illegally login into a secure server and may be breaking the electronic wire fraud laws.
> We monitor all login attempts and report any violations to the FBI we find suspicious.
> We will not tolerate any hacker attempts to this server.
> We record your IP address and originating domain and much more information to track you down. We use advanced intrusion detection software that reports to our security department in real-time and will allow them to see any intrusion attempts.
> Please be advised that we take this very seriously! We will take the full course of action in any occurrence!
> To report anything contact:
> security@infiniumlabs.com
I am not authorized? Authorized for what!? And they're going to report me to the authorities for going to the wrong page. Yeah, funny. And I like how they assume I am breaking into their server. Not to mention they'll have a pretty damned hard time trying to track me down. And of course, Going to an images directory = Advanced Cracking techniques, woo. So now I will be at the mercy of these people taking their full course of action against me (which is? Absolutely fucking nothing). *COWER*
That page is so silly that it makes me wonder if one or both of the following 2 are true:
1) Their webmaster is an idiot
2) This is a hoax/vaporware (there's probably a good reason it's called a phantom)
The article claims it isn't vaporware, but they give no reason to actually believe that, or why they say that.
The company currently doesn't seem to sell anything other than hats, mugs, and shirts.
The beta-testing application is pretty badly designed, especially compared to the rest of the site, but I guess that's not really a reason to doubt the existence of its product. Speaking of which, Why the HELL would they want my resume? WTF does that matter? After trying to sign up JFTFOI, the Sign Up button did nothing. Great.
> Isn't it a little weird for an essential component of this device (the OS) to be made by their primary competitor?
Maybe it's MS quietly funding this. They can sell the copies of the OS it runs to themselves pretty cheap, use similar ideas as the XBox that they've already developed, and then sell it for twice as much due to "limited production run." I do't really believe this, just a slim possibility
> Quit moaning, and drink your Tang.
I prefer to EAT tang, and I'm not the one moaning.
> IAMAS[...]
OH NO! Come get this guy, he's a terrorist! Oh, wait, that's HAMAS. Sorry, false alarm.
> By your interpretation 'antigravity' would also cancel out intertia.
I don't think it would, as inertia goes in a straight line. We are spinning at the same rate as the earth, and therefore have the same speed as the outside of the Earth. If we were no longer affected by the Earth's pull towards itself, we would still be going at that speed (minus wind resistance, etc of course) in a straight line (a tangent from the spot where we lost gravity, I think). At first, we would slowly lift from the ground, then due to wind resistance, the ground would start moving faster than us, effectively "moving" the person in the opposite direction of the Earth's spin. Eventually, you would get further away from that spot on Earth and from the Earth itself.
But, of course, you also have to keep in mind that the Earth rotates around the sun, so the whole thing would be moving in another direction (probably away from us) as well.
What? Of course I know what I'm talking about! uh... err... hmm... yeah.
> somebody ought to turn one sideways and staple it to a matchbox car or something
That seems like a good idea, and it would help show that it's using Ionic Breeze (sorry, it's just an appropriate prase) and not anti-grav. Plus it might be more efficient at moving something perpendicular to gravity instead of trying to oppose it altogether.
This is definitely a government conspiracy or a hoax, since the whole idea is full of hole(s). It says no moving parts, but the whole thing moves, except the power source. SEE! I ask you, IF THEY'RE WILLING TO LIE ABOUT HAVING NO MOVING PARTS, WHAT ELSE WOULD THEY BE WILLING TO LIE ABOUT?!?!?! Maybe it not working at all, HMMMMMM??? Or maybe it really IS anti-gravity and the "vaccuum" test was all a coverup by NASA to keep us down! That's obviously the answer! AHA!
(FL: See, that's a joke, son. You're supposed to laugh.)
> I read a story about a fellow who liked to eat his lunch in front of a microwave horn on an aerial somewhere
That is a hoax, although a very widely believed one.
> It's actually pretty easy to prove to yourself. Consider the following facts (anal physics people, cut me some slack
Easy? I never got too far in Physics, but I have some understanding of very basic electronics. I wouldn't call this easy to understand. Maybe if I was an anal physics person I could, but that's not the intended audience, as you said.
Voltage wavefront? reflections? asymptotically? What the heck is that? PN semiconductor Junctions? Okay, I understand diodes.. diffusion gradients? I might be able to figure that one out with a few minutes of though (or a few seconds of googling)
How many people (who aren't physics geeks, mind you) own a multi-megaohm resistor? Even less, own two?
I'm not insulting you or anything, but if you say "pretty easy to prove," try explaining something that really is easy to prove.
> The point is that if you can accept that space-time can be bent by masses, there is nothing that conceptually prevents space-time from being bent the other direction by something else.
:)
Maybe it could be bent the other way by having a very small object with an insanely large mass? I remember some extremely simple physics equation(s) saying that as something approaches the speed of light its mass goes way up. Well, maybe if we were to hit the speed of light the increased mass would jump to a point where the "space-time curve" would be pulled in the opposite direction due to the immense gravity coming from such a small object.
Of coure, IANAP, but you could probably tell that from any single sentence in this post. I feel insightful, but I'm sure that will change as soon as one person responds
> *going out with a smash for the door and a finger for the person* ...or is it too girly???
>
Yes, it's too girly. Which makes it perfect! hehe
> Neither python or perl are strongly typed, dumbass.
:)
While you may be right (I don't know, I have to assume you are), I don't think it's necessary to call him a dumbass. If you're going to insult someone, make it worthwhile, like "Learn what the F*&ck you are talking about before posting, asshat!"
> So we can be desensitised to sensational journalism?
Good point: maybe that's why journalism has become such obvious off-the-wall bullshit.
> watch a real human life disappear before their eyes, then come out smiling
I saw my grandmother die, and while not smiling, I wasn't really upset by it. It's a thing that happens. "Death is just another part of life."