Is there a way in which this could be interpreted to give relativistic mass to distant objects? To put it another way, with some creative thinking can this be applied to help account for the missing mass of the universe as we "see" it? The result essentially implicates virtual particles as the source of most of the local mass we see, and I'm missing enough theoretical physics to figure out if this would create mass at relativistic distances as well. Any one know?
Sadly it's been done. Boondock Saints:
Rocco: Fuckin'- What the fuckin'. Fuck. Who the fuck fucked this fucking... How did you two fucking fucks...
[shouts]
Rocco: Fuck!
Connor: Well, that certainly illustrates the diversity of the word.
Actually, that's not as bad an idea as it seems. Realistically, what better way to demonstrate that in fact intellectual property is not, and can never be, real property, restricted to a single owner? Throw it in the damn harbor, and no one has lost anything (except a few CDs, which cost pennies).
Seriously, who wants to organize this?
Yeah, ever since they sued me in their Napster dragnet I have zero tolerance for these f**k-sticks. If ever a band deserved to die and rot in hell, they're pretty high on that list. I will not be purchasing anything from them. I may even promote illegal copying (not that I'd want their music...) just to keep the money out of their hands.
I'm amazed at the sheer number of people who came up with ridiculous technical limitations. Focal issues? You think given that you have unlimited control over LEDs that it can't display an image that when actually VIEWED will appear correctly? You think we don't already do this with normal displays? Same goes for resolution issues; all it takes is adaptive control software. Power? Come on, article on bio-power not 3 months ago. And seriously, closing your eyes would make it better, not worse, just given lighting conditions.
Everyone seems to forget the immense amount of control work that goes into a lot of our simple, everyday gadgets to make them appear to work seamlessly. I suspect the exact same principles will be applied here. This was announcement of a cool concept, not a finished object with all the kinks worked out. Sheesh...
Actually it's way more complicated than that. Only non-rotating black holes could ever truly be point masses. Any angular momentum creates complicated tidal effects near the center, resulting in a non-point-mass. Carried further, the "singularity" expands until the point where it would effectively reach the event horizon itself, resulting in a naked singularity, which some calculations have shown can have actual size. Adding further rotation will (to a point), actually change the size of the "singularity". Of course, this is all moot, since that's not at all what the article was talking about, but that's my.02$.
Slashdot Mirror
Is there a way in which this could be interpreted to give relativistic mass to distant objects? To put it another way, with some creative thinking can this be applied to help account for the missing mass of the universe as we "see" it? The result essentially implicates virtual particles as the source of most of the local mass we see, and I'm missing enough theoretical physics to figure out if this would create mass at relativistic distances as well. Any one know?
Sadly it's been done. Boondock Saints: Rocco: Fuckin'- What the fuckin'. Fuck. Who the fuck fucked this fucking... How did you two fucking fucks... [shouts] Rocco: Fuck! Connor: Well, that certainly illustrates the diversity of the word.
Actually, that's not as bad an idea as it seems. Realistically, what better way to demonstrate that in fact intellectual property is not, and can never be, real property, restricted to a single owner? Throw it in the damn harbor, and no one has lost anything (except a few CDs, which cost pennies). Seriously, who wants to organize this?
Yeah, ever since they sued me in their Napster dragnet I have zero tolerance for these f**k-sticks. If ever a band deserved to die and rot in hell, they're pretty high on that list. I will not be purchasing anything from them. I may even promote illegal copying (not that I'd want their music...) just to keep the money out of their hands.
I'm amazed at the sheer number of people who came up with ridiculous technical limitations. Focal issues? You think given that you have unlimited control over LEDs that it can't display an image that when actually VIEWED will appear correctly? You think we don't already do this with normal displays? Same goes for resolution issues; all it takes is adaptive control software. Power? Come on, article on bio-power not 3 months ago. And seriously, closing your eyes would make it better, not worse, just given lighting conditions. Everyone seems to forget the immense amount of control work that goes into a lot of our simple, everyday gadgets to make them appear to work seamlessly. I suspect the exact same principles will be applied here. This was announcement of a cool concept, not a finished object with all the kinks worked out. Sheesh...
Actually it's way more complicated than that. Only non-rotating black holes could ever truly be point masses. Any angular momentum creates complicated tidal effects near the center, resulting in a non-point-mass. Carried further, the "singularity" expands until the point where it would effectively reach the event horizon itself, resulting in a naked singularity, which some calculations have shown can have actual size. Adding further rotation will (to a point), actually change the size of the "singularity". Of course, this is all moot, since that's not at all what the article was talking about, but that's my .02$.