I know that professor. Trust me, he isn't doing anything but being the team leader and gets to attach his name to everything. He's successful because he applies for grant money, hires quality staff and administers multiple projects thanks to his years of expertise. (He also likes shaking hands of politicians and appearing on TV) The quality work comes from his minions (post doc's, etc) and he basks in their collective glory. </jealous>
This sounds like a good way to filter journals which are lax with their standards. It might also weed out peers who are too lazy (or stupid) to contribute to the process. So I for one welcome our new document-producing computer overlords, which is just as well as they already seem to be used as part of Slashdot's editorial process.
I prefer to brown bread myself. As a physicist I don't see why computers aren't deterministic. After all, you just start with a spherically symmetric computer...
Thats far too large of a number to be sensible. A nanofortnight is only 1.2 ms whereas a fortnight is 1.2 Ms (megaseconds). I calculated the answer to be 1.74x10^-11 gigawatt-nanofortnights.
Jigawatts(sic) per nanofornight(sic) would be a measure of energy transfer not total energy.
If you are looking for Gigawatt Nanofortnights then the answer is 1.74x10^-11.
Slashdot Mirror
Can you buy a gun from Amazon? They seem to sell everything else nowadays.
but we're unlikely to know enough about the metrics used to make this claim to know.
You will find out in a couple of quarters time when it wont matter anymore.
Capitalism.
You're doing it wrong!!!
Sounds like a Bush plan to keep him in the Whitehouse as long as possible. Damn Republicans messing with our science.
Now that's one Christmas gift I'm happy to get!
I know that professor. Trust me, he isn't doing anything but being the team leader and gets to attach his name to everything.
He's successful because he applies for grant money, hires quality staff and administers multiple projects thanks to his years of expertise. (He also likes shaking hands of politicians and appearing on TV)
The quality work comes from his minions (post doc's, etc) and he basks in their collective glory.
</jealous>
This sounds like a good way to filter journals which are lax with their standards. It might also weed out peers who are too lazy (or stupid) to contribute to the process.
So I for one welcome our new document-producing computer overlords, which is just as well as they already seem to be used as part of Slashdot's editorial process.
1) Send humans into space ...
2) Redefine the boundary between space and atmosphere
3)
4) Profit!!
What about nothingofvaluewaslost?
Could even throw in a correlationisnotcausation or maybe vaporware.
Are you sure about that?
Impossible like "xor eax, eax" returning a non-zero value and crashing windows?
I prefer to brown bread myself.
As a physicist I don't see why computers aren't deterministic. After all, you just start with a spherically symmetric computer...
So you had a Pentium 3?
Warcraft sounds like witchery and the Christian nuts behind this won't allow that.
On second thoughts I'm going to go with 155.416667 GW nano-fortnights = 187 MJ.
52.2 kW hr = 187 MJ
:)
1 nanofortnight = 1.2 milliseconds
So 155 GW nFn = 187 GW ms = 187 MJ
So I agree with you
155.416667 GW nano-fortnights
Thats far too large of a number to be sensible.
A nanofortnight is only 1.2 ms whereas a fortnight is 1.2 Ms (megaseconds).
I calculated the answer to be 1.74x10^-11 gigawatt-nanofortnights.
Jigawatts(sic) per nanofornight(sic) would be a measure of energy transfer not total energy.
If you are looking for Gigawatt Nanofortnights then the answer is 1.74x10^-11.
We all know what the "in" in inflammable means.
You said Mao, that makes you a Marxist.
QED
Solar flares were popular in the 70's but the sun is getting old now and needs to turn the temperature up.
You can't spell environmentalism without mental.
1. Insult the religious.
2. Insult programmers.
3. ????
4. Prophet!
I don't believe in programming.
So you are saying he is new here?