If you buy a house in the UK, you register it with the Land Registry. If you buy a car in the UK you register it with the DVLA. If you have a child in the UK you register it with the Register of Births, Deaths and Marriages. If you get married in the UK you register it with the Register of Births, Deaths and Marriages.
What you are NOT doing is *anything beneficial to you*. What you're doing is signing away title and ownership of the house/car/marriage/child to the STATE. YOU ARE SIGNING MATERIAL POSSESSIONS OVER AND RECEIVING A CERTIFICATE OF CUSTODY IN RETURN ("registered keeper"? The DVLA Registration is what gives State authorities the right to take "your" car and turn it into a paperweight without there being a DAMN THING you can say about it!). In the case of legal marriage (as opposed to Common Law Lawful marriage which is an AUTOMATIC RIGHT after cohabiting for twenty six weeks), you are giving the STATE the right to annul the union AT ITS OWN WHIM. In the case of a child you are GIVING THE STATE THE IRREVOCABLE RIGHT TO TAKE THAT CHILD IF THEY FEEL THAT YOU ARE NOT BRINGING UP THAT CHILD IN A MANNER CONDUCIVE TO THE PROFIT MARGIN OF THE CROWN CORPORATION - OR THEY HAVE A BUYER FOR YOUR BLONDE HAIRED BLUE EYED OFFSPRING.
wait a second. How much fuel does the 747 use in taxiing? How come the comparison is made between Concorde on the GROUND (where ANY aircraft is horribly inefficient!) and a BEHEMOTH IN THE AIR!?
Pre-September 11 2001, Concorde almost consistently made operating profit on every flight. The aircraft only had to be half full to break even on all costs, INCLUDING FUEL.
(In The Line Of Fire, as a reminder): that was a one-shot deal. Custom built prop for the movie that fired blanks. The assembled prop was a one-piece mould, since the assembled kit form would have exploded even with a half-load blank.
In fact, a fair few are made almost entirely of plastics and ceramics. One such example is the GLOCK 17 "Parabellum". This isn't truly an all-ceramic gun (and there is no commercially available firearm that can get past a metal detector so forget the Die Hard references!), since the barrel and hammer spring need to be highly heat resistant and hard wearing - no ceramic or plastic can withstand the stresses of being fired through or repeatedly compressed quite like tenifer steel. Therefore only the frame and certain nonmoving or low stress parts (stock, trigger mechanism, sear assembly, sights, lower receiver, slide, chamber and ejector) are plastic or ceramic. This is done only to save weight, and has made the Parabellum a very popular sidearm for Government and private security contractors in Israel particularly, where they outsell any other firearm.
addendum: think of a toy gyro. When you spin it, the pole (axis) starts to describe a circle in the air. Ignore that bit, look at the plane of the gyro - the edge represents the orbital plane relative to a fixed point in space (your eye). It is not only spinning, it is also describing an oscillation such that a fixed point in its orbit is moving in a sinusoidal motion. The wider the gyro, the slower this oscillation, but it is there.
Even assuming that the orbital inclination of both planets were identical, those orbits undergo what's known as apsidal precession. This is the movement of apoapsis (the furthest point of the orbit) around the primary over time - the orbit orbits. For Earth this varies between 100,000-400,000 years, and is tidally dependent. Ergo, the relative angle of inclination between planets changes and while Earth is below the ecliptic, the orbit of Venus at that point, even if the planet was in the same orbital position (ie between Earth and Sol), may be above the ecliptic hence no transit occurs.
This also happens with the Moon. Fortunately the systems are stable enough that we can predict when transits and eclipses will occur by concentrating only on dates and times where ascending and descending nodes of their orbits intersect the ecliptic. The great thing about the Moon is that it crosses the ecliptic exactly twenty six times per year, so we can predict with reasonable certainty from the off that solar and lunar eclipse patterns will repeat with fair precision every 6585 days, or every 223 Lunar orbits. (approximately 18 years).
...a not so serious one: delivering rack solutions without the aid of a forklift....and a slightly more serious one: if you're tied to a desk, switch out your chair for an exercise ball. Trust me, it's uber comfy and you get to exercise your calves and thighs as well as keeping your back balanced. I'm using one now.
no, it's more like the tip of a helicopter rotor at extreme velocities - rather than describe complete ellipses through space, as they would if they were flat onto the plane of travel, they describe a sort of mutant helix, with a cutting angle of about 60 degrees - so for part of its orbit, the Earth is actually travelling in the opposite direction in relation to the cosmic microwave background to the Sun. At one point during its orbit, the Earth actually slows down.
The moon orbits at a mean inclination of 5.something degrees to the ecliptic. If it were synchronised to the equatorial plane we wouldn't have nearly as many eclipses (lunar or solar) as we do. In fact, we'd have about 1/50 the number.
if the universe is infinite, then there are an infinite number of stars. It follows that orbiting those infinite stars is an infinite number of planets. HOWEVER, and here's the paradox: if not all stars have orbiting planets, then the number of stars with orbiting planets is less than infinite, ie, finite. There are two countering assumptions right there: there is an infinite number of planets in the universe, there is a finite number of planets in the universe.
Statistically speaking, this is significant, as there are now a finite number of systems with similar orbital layouts (ie flat vs cloudy/chaotic). Since we can't put numbers on the previous assumptions, I could say with as much authority as the guy who says that there lots of flat solar systems, that there are only two: the one we live in, and the one spotted around Kepler 80.
Slashdot Mirror
that and turning cities into giant bonfires. One word: Dresden.
all Texas has to do is tear up the 1844 Treaty of Annexation, and they're an independent republic again.
If you buy a house in the UK, you register it with the Land Registry.
If you buy a car in the UK you register it with the DVLA.
If you have a child in the UK you register it with the Register of Births, Deaths and Marriages.
If you get married in the UK you register it with the Register of Births, Deaths and Marriages.
What you are NOT doing is *anything beneficial to you*. What you're doing is signing away title and ownership of the house/car/marriage/child to the STATE. YOU ARE SIGNING MATERIAL POSSESSIONS OVER AND RECEIVING A CERTIFICATE OF CUSTODY IN RETURN ("registered keeper"? The DVLA Registration is what gives State authorities the right to take "your" car and turn it into a paperweight without there being a DAMN THING you can say about it!). In the case of legal marriage (as opposed to Common Law Lawful marriage which is an AUTOMATIC RIGHT after cohabiting for twenty six weeks), you are giving the STATE the right to annul the union AT ITS OWN WHIM. In the case of a child you are GIVING THE STATE THE IRREVOCABLE RIGHT TO TAKE THAT CHILD IF THEY FEEL THAT YOU ARE NOT BRINGING UP THAT CHILD IN A MANNER CONDUCIVE TO THE PROFIT MARGIN OF THE CROWN CORPORATION - OR THEY HAVE A BUYER FOR YOUR BLONDE HAIRED BLUE EYED OFFSPRING.
I hear there's a very nice little commune in Guyana.
wait a second. How much fuel does the 747 use in taxiing? How come the comparison is made between Concorde on the GROUND (where ANY aircraft is horribly inefficient!) and a BEHEMOTH IN THE AIR!?
THIS DOES NOT MAKE A LICK OF SENSE!
Fuel costs didn't kill Concorde, the death of first class flight did.
Pre-September 11 2001, Concorde almost consistently made operating profit on every flight. The aircraft only had to be half full to break even on all costs, INCLUDING FUEL.
(Source)
Respect for others STARTS AND ENDS with THEIR right to say what the fuck they want to say. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO NOT BE OFFENDED.
bring it on, sailor - I'll bet you love a bear hole round your tool
Mod parent UP!
Remington 1959, actually. Frame made of doped nylon.
It's what normal, mature human beings do - they handle the situation themselves instead of crying fucking mental rape.
(In The Line Of Fire, as a reminder): that was a one-shot deal. Custom built prop for the movie that fired blanks. The assembled prop was a one-piece mould, since the assembled kit form would have exploded even with a half-load blank.
I tried this, just forgot about the coil... had the BB at the base of a pair of bare wires... now there's a hole in the planet. Mars.
I think I just invented a man-portable railgun...
In fact, a fair few are made almost entirely of plastics and ceramics. One such example is the GLOCK 17 "Parabellum". This isn't truly an all-ceramic gun (and there is no commercially available firearm that can get past a metal detector so forget the Die Hard references!), since the barrel and hammer spring need to be highly heat resistant and hard wearing - no ceramic or plastic can withstand the stresses of being fired through or repeatedly compressed quite like tenifer steel. Therefore only the frame and certain nonmoving or low stress parts (stock, trigger mechanism, sear assembly, sights, lower receiver, slide, chamber and ejector) are plastic or ceramic. This is done only to save weight, and has made the Parabellum a very popular sidearm for Government and private security contractors in Israel particularly, where they outsell any other firearm.
DISCLAIMER: I handle firearms on a daily basis.
love one.
addendum: think of a toy gyro. When you spin it, the pole (axis) starts to describe a circle in the air. Ignore that bit, look at the plane of the gyro - the edge represents the orbital plane relative to a fixed point in space (your eye). It is not only spinning, it is also describing an oscillation such that a fixed point in its orbit is moving in a sinusoidal motion. The wider the gyro, the slower this oscillation, but it is there.
Actually, I can.
Even assuming that the orbital inclination of both planets were identical, those orbits undergo what's known as apsidal precession. This is the movement of apoapsis (the furthest point of the orbit) around the primary over time - the orbit orbits. For Earth this varies between 100,000-400,000 years, and is tidally dependent. Ergo, the relative angle of inclination between planets changes and while Earth is below the ecliptic, the orbit of Venus at that point, even if the planet was in the same orbital position (ie between Earth and Sol), may be above the ecliptic hence no transit occurs.
This also happens with the Moon. Fortunately the systems are stable enough that we can predict when transits and eclipses will occur by concentrating only on dates and times where ascending and descending nodes of their orbits intersect the ecliptic. The great thing about the Moon is that it crosses the ecliptic exactly twenty six times per year, so we can predict with reasonable certainty from the off that solar and lunar eclipse patterns will repeat with fair precision every 6585 days, or every 223 Lunar orbits. (approximately 18 years).
...a not so serious one: delivering rack solutions without the aid of a forklift. ...and a slightly more serious one: if you're tied to a desk, switch out your chair for an exercise ball. Trust me, it's uber comfy and you get to exercise your calves and thighs as well as keeping your back balanced. I'm using one now.
no, it's more like the tip of a helicopter rotor at extreme velocities - rather than describe complete ellipses through space, as they would if they were flat onto the plane of travel, they describe a sort of mutant helix, with a cutting angle of about 60 degrees - so for part of its orbit, the Earth is actually travelling in the opposite direction in relation to the cosmic microwave background to the Sun. At one point during its orbit, the Earth actually slows down.
Disclaimer: IAAAA (I am an amateur astronomer).
The moon orbits at a mean inclination of 5.something degrees to the ecliptic. If it were synchronised to the equatorial plane we wouldn't have nearly as many eclipses (lunar or solar) as we do. In fact, we'd have about 1/50 the number.
if the universe is infinite, then there are an infinite number of stars. It follows that orbiting those infinite stars is an infinite number of planets. HOWEVER, and here's the paradox: if not all stars have orbiting planets, then the number of stars with orbiting planets is less than infinite, ie, finite. There are two countering assumptions right there: there is an infinite number of planets in the universe, there is a finite number of planets in the universe.
Statistically speaking, this is significant, as there are now a finite number of systems with similar orbital layouts (ie flat vs cloudy/chaotic). Since we can't put numbers on the previous assumptions, I could say with as much authority as the guy who says that there lots of flat solar systems, that there are only two: the one we live in, and the one spotted around Kepler 80.
we'll show those blue freaks that unobtainium isn't fer plantin' trees on!
if you want a "kaboom" try an illudium Pu-36 explosive space modulator.
Condensed version:
That's no moon... it's a space station.