How does destroying targets while being safe make you a poor combat vehicle? The primary goal of a combatant is "destroy enemy targets and not be destroyed yourself".
F-22 is and will remain a great long-range air superiority fighter. It can carry more anti-aircraft missiles and get into battle faster. But F-35 can carry larger ground-attack weaponry without ruining its (superb) radar cross section and can be operated from a smaller basing footprint. There's a role for both of them.
The whole debate seems to me to be missing the point. The main driving design principles of the F-35 were to have it to detect and destroy from longer distances while reducing the distance in which it can be detected and destroyed. No, you can't just discount dogfighting and everything else, but the whole point is to avoid dogfights in the first place by taking down the opponent from long before they'd have a chance to do the same to you. It's particularly designed to be effective at taking out antiaircraft systems.
Basically, if they wanted to make New Shepard comparable, they'd have to get the payload fraction inline by cutting its mass down to, what, a third of its current mass? Then they'd have to eliminate the ability to hover (because the engines need too much thrust in an actual orbital rocket - Falcon 9 shuts down all but one of their engines and throttles it down to 70%, and it's still too much thrust), and have it attempt its landing from a far higher delta V, onto a tiny platform in the ocean.
Yeah, good luck with that, Blue Origin. Maybe some day. Until then, they're just patting themselves on the back for winning a plastic trophy in the Little Leagues.
Are there still people here who don't know the difference between an orbital and a suborbital rocket? I thought we were past that.
AmiMoJo: the difference between landing a suborbital rocket and landing an orbital rocket is the difference between jumping off your couch and landing on your feet without falling over, and jumping off a ladder and landing on a pogo stick without falling over.
But he didn't land a nearly empty 70 meter rocket on a boat in the middle of the ocean. That makes him a failure. I don't know about you, but I've never once crashed a 70 meter rocket on a boat landing - like most people, my rockets have a perfect record.
Does adding the word "3d" to the word "printer" change the story at all? Doesn't the "whirring" of ink printers also give a clue as to what they're doing? Even to my non-computerized ears I can hear a clear difference between when it's printing a lot per line and little per line, whether it's printing colour or text, etc.
What an individual experiences during their lifetime - such as being infected by and then fighting off a disease - can be passed on to their offspring! Next up, they just need to prove that giraffes that stretch their necks the most when feeding produce the longest-necked offspring, and his acquittal will be complete; take that, Darwin!
These things can have unintended consequences, however. Anyone else remember the DIME explosives Israel's been using? Small explosive radius! High lethality within that radius, but the fragments slow down rapidly outside it! Peppers the people around it with countless bits of inoperable, highly carcinogenic shrapnel! Wait, forget that last one.... Small but effective blast radius!
That's of course not what they meant. Many of today's EVs like the leaf are kind of weird in that almost all of their electronics - except the drive motor - still run on 12V. So the Leaf has a 12V battery. And sometimes its 12V can run down. And when that happens its' computers - including those that run the self-test on the battery pack and enable it - don't come on. So you can't drive it if the 12V system is dead. Kind of silly how it can have vast amounts of energy stored in a HV pack but not start because it's missing a few watt hours in a lead acid battery, but hey...
That said, the concept of "jumping" the HV pack from another vehicle isn't actually that ridiculous. A typical car battery can put out something like 5kW. I don't know if the Leaf's DC-DC converter can take power *from* 12V to HV, but if it can, then you could actually get a fairly decent charging rate from another car - something like a kilometer of range for every 2 minutes of charging. So no, it's not going to rescue you from some remote area (you'd just drain the other person's battery, and an alternator certainly couldn't keep up with that rate; eventually the charge rate coming from the other car would slow to a tenth of that much, if it didn't die altogether) - but if you're in town and just need to limp to a nearby charging space, then you certainly could (again, see the caveat about the DC-DC converter).
Seriously? Right now, when Amnesty International is complaining that Russia is committing some of the most egregious war crimes that the world has seen in decades, you're going to complain about the US killing people? The US, the country that sat out the whole conflict until Daesh started committing genocide, and has thusfar resisted pressure from all of its allies in the region to send in ground troops or even establish a no-fly zone?
Really?
Sometimes the double standards amaze me. The US takes out one MSF hospital in Afghanistan and the world is aghast and enraged. Russia takes out four hospitals in a single day, including coming back to double-tap an MSF one later in the day, adding to the near obliteration of the hospital system they've nearly conducted in Syria thusfar. And most people's reaction? Crickets.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of the US. I was out there protesting both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. But seriously people, the hypocrisy here can be cut with a knife.
Exactly. It's perfectly normal that our theories are built around the limits of our knowledge. A theory may work great until we start gathering new data in new ways which shows that there are problems in it... and then the theory needs to be expanded. That doesn't mean that the previous theory was wrong - just limited.
Honestly, there's enough problems with event horizons and singularities that I really think it's about time that we accept that they may well just not exist. We have a known force of the universe, inflation, that when the universe was packed into a very energy dense state led to the dilation of space until the universe reached a less energy-dense state. Why should we assume that this is something only applicable to the Big Bang, rather than a general rule of the universe? When you apply a dilation-driven inflation gravity to the environment of a black hole, suddenly singularities and event horizons disappear. A black hole is often described as a waterfall of spacetime rushing in; inflation is like a flood of spacetime rushing out. Infalling particles are shifted to a tangential path; all of the energy of the black hole exists at the event horizon in a quasi-2d state. In such a scenario, black holes are - from an infinite-observer's perspective - basically nothing more than a frozen store of spacetime, ever so slowly leaking out, until - unthinkably long in the future, when they sit all alone in an empty void - they catastrophically explode in an inflationary flood of energy from which new matter can ultimately condense. Miniature versions of the Big Bang itself.
No naked singularities. No information paradox. No firewall. Explanatory power for the Big Bang. Why isn't this a theoretical route worth pursuing more?
Again, you're confusing baseload and peaking. Intermittent sources don't need baseload, they need peaking. And the amount of peaking needed is based on the reliability of the intermittent source, which is affected by the above-discussed issues.
And, of course, without base generation like nuclear, wind would not yet even be a realistic option.
Actually, nuclear pairs pretty poorly with wind. Nuclear isn't very responsible to rapid changes. Natural gas and hydro are what usually pair with wind.
It's possible to make rapid response nuclear plants, but most aren't.
Basically, you're confusing baseload power and peaking. Peaking has of course always been with us, and always will, regardless of generation type, because even without supply fluctuations, there's also demand fluctuations (rather major ones, actually). Note that there's a number of ways to reduce supply fluctuations and to better fit the demand curve. Long distance power transmission spreads out demand peaks and evens out supply intermittency. Mixing different types of intermittent power makes a much more stable overall power. And of course there's also storage, of a wide variety of types, including some built into plants themselves (such as solar plants with thermal storage).
To be more specific (FDIA is another name for the condition): Link
What are the complications of factitious disorder imposed on another?
This disorder can lead to serious short- and long-term complications, including continued abuse, multiple hospitalizations, and the death of the victim. (Research suggests that the death rate for victims of FDIA is about 10 percent.) In some cases, a child victim of FDIA learns to associate getting attention to being sick and develops factitious disorder imposed on self. Considered a form of child abuse, FDIA is a criminal offense.
What is the prognosis (outlook) for people with factitious disorder imposed on another?
Generally, FDIA is a very difficult disorder to treat and often requires years of therapy and support. Social services, law enforcement, children's protective services, and physicians must function as a team to stop the behavior.
No, they were not "likely in the wrong for what they did". Do you think it's just a coincidence that she was "in desperate need of hospitalization" when they separated her from her parents, then during the time away from them she became healthy enough to be going out and playing, going from interview to interview, going on trips, etc... then a couple months later after living with her parents ended up back in the hospital on an IV drip?
It amazes me how everyone took the parents statements at face value in this case. According to the hospital, they didn't just rush off and try to get her declared a ward of the state - after the parents refused to listen, they tried to convene a meeting with all of her past caretakers, other people who knew her, etc, but the parents derailed their efforts. They basically had no choice but to either let the parents continue to do what they were convinced was medical child abuse, or step in. And the judge didn't just defer to the hospital's diagnosis in his ruling to put her in protective custody, but also blasted the parents for their erratic behavior and for trying to derail all attempts at compromise. There were many proposals laid out that would have left them with custody of her, but "Rather, the parents, either directly or indirectly, continue to engage in very concerning conduct that does not give this court any confidence they will comply with conditions of custody.'
The case was accused of basically being Munchhausen Syndrome by proxy - that is, the caretaker lies to or otherwise misleads the child and doctors about their child's condition, and often seeks treatment that actually cause the child to develop real symptoms which they then play into their dealings with the child and with doctors. They often engage extensively in doctor shopping, staying only with a doctor so long as he agrees to continue doing whatever treatments they feel are necessary for the child. Kids are very suggestible to begin with, even without parents doing that sort of thing. In the case of Justina, when they brought in a psychologist, the psychologist immediately noticed that the severity of Justina's symptoms was highly dependent on whether her mother was around, and the mother was constantly playing up everything.
It's easy to get concerned about the seriousness of taking a child out of their parents' custody - it's a massive blow to both the parents and the child. But let's also not forget the seriousness of what medical child abuse is all about. In the case of Justina, her parents had taken her for all kinds of surgeries and invasive procedures, some risky and experimental, such as installing a flush port to her digestive tract in her abdomen. She was said to have "mito", but her metabolic workup showed perfectly normal results. She had never had a muscle biopsy. While she was at the hospital her parents were trying to have a feeding tube installed. She was taking a wide range of medications, some with harmful side effects. If you were concerned that this was a case of MSP and were looking at what these parents had done and what they were trying to do, wouldn't you be concerned?
This isn't E-voting. Everyone who keeps thinking this is about elections, please read the patent. They've patented a particular (uncreative) implementation of a webpoll, nothing more.
Read the patent. It's not about voting for presidents or anything like that; it's not about elections. It's literally for people voting on things like "Top American Singer" on social networks and such. It's not designed to prevent voting fraud or anything of that nature... it's really just a fancy description of a webpoll.
Exactly. To ask Sweden and the UK to ignore actual binding rulings in order to enforce nonbinding rulings is basically saying, "Hey, Rule of Law? Go f*** yourself!"
Some people seem to want to live in a world where the concept of rule of law is thrown out for "People We Like". The cases we should be going after are those where people manage to avoid the rule of law.
Or, for actually approvable/implementable ideas: develop (if not already on the market) and install a film that filters out the most common laser frequencies.
That said, automatic direction finding and reporting (doesn't this already exist? if not, it should) would be nice to assist local police. Maybe with a nice telephoto camera to give them a picture of the suspect.
Such a person would be terrible trapped inside a spacecraft - and later, habitat - with a bunch of other people that they have no possibility to escape.
They wouldn't even be allowed to go out walking alone - that would be too dangerous.
I'm sure (s)he's now totally changed their opinion on the nature of the political right after reading your well thought out and well argued post.
Anyway, can we stop with all of the anger for a minute and remember that a human being just died here? Show some respect. Regardless of whether or not we agree with his positions, there are people out there who loved and cared about this man. My condolences go out to the Koch brothers for their loss.
Slashdot Mirror
How does destroying targets while being safe make you a poor combat vehicle? The primary goal of a combatant is "destroy enemy targets and not be destroyed yourself".
F-22 is and will remain a great long-range air superiority fighter. It can carry more anti-aircraft missiles and get into battle faster. But F-35 can carry larger ground-attack weaponry without ruining its (superb) radar cross section and can be operated from a smaller basing footprint. There's a role for both of them.
The whole debate seems to me to be missing the point. The main driving design principles of the F-35 were to have it to detect and destroy from longer distances while reducing the distance in which it can be detected and destroyed. No, you can't just discount dogfighting and everything else, but the whole point is to avoid dogfights in the first place by taking down the opponent from long before they'd have a chance to do the same to you. It's particularly designed to be effective at taking out antiaircraft systems.
Basically, if they wanted to make New Shepard comparable, they'd have to get the payload fraction inline by cutting its mass down to, what, a third of its current mass? Then they'd have to eliminate the ability to hover (because the engines need too much thrust in an actual orbital rocket - Falcon 9 shuts down all but one of their engines and throttles it down to 70%, and it's still too much thrust), and have it attempt its landing from a far higher delta V, onto a tiny platform in the ocean.
Yeah, good luck with that, Blue Origin. Maybe some day. Until then, they're just patting themselves on the back for winning a plastic trophy in the Little Leagues.
Are there still people here who don't know the difference between an orbital and a suborbital rocket? I thought we were past that.
AmiMoJo: the difference between landing a suborbital rocket and landing an orbital rocket is the difference between jumping off your couch and landing on your feet without falling over, and jumping off a ladder and landing on a pogo stick without falling over.
But he didn't land a nearly empty 70 meter rocket on a boat in the middle of the ocean. That makes him a failure. I don't know about you, but I've never once crashed a 70 meter rocket on a boat landing - like most people, my rockets have a perfect record.
Does adding the word "3d" to the word "printer" change the story at all? Doesn't the "whirring" of ink printers also give a clue as to what they're doing? Even to my non-computerized ears I can hear a clear difference between when it's printing a lot per line and little per line, whether it's printing colour or text, etc.
What an individual experiences during their lifetime - such as being infected by and then fighting off a disease - can be passed on to their offspring! Next up, they just need to prove that giraffes that stretch their necks the most when feeding produce the longest-necked offspring, and his acquittal will be complete; take that, Darwin!
We've always been at war with Eastasia.
These things can have unintended consequences, however. Anyone else remember the DIME explosives Israel's been using? Small explosive radius! High lethality within that radius, but the fragments slow down rapidly outside it! Peppers the people around it with countless bits of inoperable, highly carcinogenic shrapnel! Wait, forget that last one.... Small but effective blast radius!
That's of course not what they meant. Many of today's EVs like the leaf are kind of weird in that almost all of their electronics - except the drive motor - still run on 12V. So the Leaf has a 12V battery. And sometimes its 12V can run down. And when that happens its' computers - including those that run the self-test on the battery pack and enable it - don't come on. So you can't drive it if the 12V system is dead. Kind of silly how it can have vast amounts of energy stored in a HV pack but not start because it's missing a few watt hours in a lead acid battery, but hey...
That said, the concept of "jumping" the HV pack from another vehicle isn't actually that ridiculous. A typical car battery can put out something like 5kW. I don't know if the Leaf's DC-DC converter can take power *from* 12V to HV, but if it can, then you could actually get a fairly decent charging rate from another car - something like a kilometer of range for every 2 minutes of charging. So no, it's not going to rescue you from some remote area (you'd just drain the other person's battery, and an alternator certainly couldn't keep up with that rate; eventually the charge rate coming from the other car would slow to a tenth of that much, if it didn't die altogether) - but if you're in town and just need to limp to a nearby charging space, then you certainly could (again, see the caveat about the DC-DC converter).
Seriously? Right now, when Amnesty International is complaining that Russia is committing some of the most egregious war crimes that the world has seen in decades, you're going to complain about the US killing people? The US, the country that sat out the whole conflict until Daesh started committing genocide, and has thusfar resisted pressure from all of its allies in the region to send in ground troops or even establish a no-fly zone?
Really?
Sometimes the double standards amaze me. The US takes out one MSF hospital in Afghanistan and the world is aghast and enraged. Russia takes out four hospitals in a single day, including coming back to double-tap an MSF one later in the day, adding to the near obliteration of the hospital system they've nearly conducted in Syria thusfar. And most people's reaction? Crickets.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of the US. I was out there protesting both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. But seriously people, the hypocrisy here can be cut with a knife.
*sigh*.
Please look up "peaking power plant", then come back here.
Exactly. It's perfectly normal that our theories are built around the limits of our knowledge. A theory may work great until we start gathering new data in new ways which shows that there are problems in it... and then the theory needs to be expanded. That doesn't mean that the previous theory was wrong - just limited.
Honestly, there's enough problems with event horizons and singularities that I really think it's about time that we accept that they may well just not exist. We have a known force of the universe, inflation, that when the universe was packed into a very energy dense state led to the dilation of space until the universe reached a less energy-dense state. Why should we assume that this is something only applicable to the Big Bang, rather than a general rule of the universe? When you apply a dilation-driven inflation gravity to the environment of a black hole, suddenly singularities and event horizons disappear. A black hole is often described as a waterfall of spacetime rushing in; inflation is like a flood of spacetime rushing out. Infalling particles are shifted to a tangential path; all of the energy of the black hole exists at the event horizon in a quasi-2d state. In such a scenario, black holes are - from an infinite-observer's perspective - basically nothing more than a frozen store of spacetime, ever so slowly leaking out, until - unthinkably long in the future, when they sit all alone in an empty void - they catastrophically explode in an inflationary flood of energy from which new matter can ultimately condense. Miniature versions of the Big Bang itself.
No naked singularities. No information paradox. No firewall. Explanatory power for the Big Bang. Why isn't this a theoretical route worth pursuing more?
Again, you're confusing baseload and peaking. Intermittent sources don't need baseload, they need peaking. And the amount of peaking needed is based on the reliability of the intermittent source, which is affected by the above-discussed issues.
Actually, nuclear pairs pretty poorly with wind. Nuclear isn't very responsible to rapid changes. Natural gas and hydro are what usually pair with wind.
It's possible to make rapid response nuclear plants, but most aren't.
Basically, you're confusing baseload power and peaking. Peaking has of course always been with us, and always will, regardless of generation type, because even without supply fluctuations, there's also demand fluctuations (rather major ones, actually). Note that there's a number of ways to reduce supply fluctuations and to better fit the demand curve. Long distance power transmission spreads out demand peaks and evens out supply intermittency. Mixing different types of intermittent power makes a much more stable overall power. And of course there's also storage, of a wide variety of types, including some built into plants themselves (such as solar plants with thermal storage).
To be more specific (FDIA is another name for the condition): Link
After 14 years of it, no, that's not really expected. As was stated by the medical team.
And anyone who heroizes attacks on childrens' hospitals is horrible.
No, they were not "likely in the wrong for what they did". Do you think it's just a coincidence that she was "in desperate need of hospitalization" when they separated her from her parents, then during the time away from them she became healthy enough to be going out and playing, going from interview to interview, going on trips, etc... then a couple months later after living with her parents ended up back in the hospital on an IV drip?
It amazes me how everyone took the parents statements at face value in this case. According to the hospital, they didn't just rush off and try to get her declared a ward of the state - after the parents refused to listen, they tried to convene a meeting with all of her past caretakers, other people who knew her, etc, but the parents derailed their efforts. They basically had no choice but to either let the parents continue to do what they were convinced was medical child abuse, or step in. And the judge didn't just defer to the hospital's diagnosis in his ruling to put her in protective custody, but also blasted the parents for their erratic behavior and for trying to derail all attempts at compromise. There were many proposals laid out that would have left them with custody of her, but "Rather, the parents, either directly or indirectly, continue to engage in very concerning conduct that does not give this court any confidence they will comply with conditions of custody.'
The case was accused of basically being Munchhausen Syndrome by proxy - that is, the caretaker lies to or otherwise misleads the child and doctors about their child's condition, and often seeks treatment that actually cause the child to develop real symptoms which they then play into their dealings with the child and with doctors. They often engage extensively in doctor shopping, staying only with a doctor so long as he agrees to continue doing whatever treatments they feel are necessary for the child. Kids are very suggestible to begin with, even without parents doing that sort of thing. In the case of Justina, when they brought in a psychologist, the psychologist immediately noticed that the severity of Justina's symptoms was highly dependent on whether her mother was around, and the mother was constantly playing up everything.
It's easy to get concerned about the seriousness of taking a child out of their parents' custody - it's a massive blow to both the parents and the child. But let's also not forget the seriousness of what medical child abuse is all about. In the case of Justina, her parents had taken her for all kinds of surgeries and invasive procedures, some risky and experimental, such as installing a flush port to her digestive tract in her abdomen. She was said to have "mito", but her metabolic workup showed perfectly normal results. She had never had a muscle biopsy. While she was at the hospital her parents were trying to have a feeding tube installed. She was taking a wide range of medications, some with harmful side effects. If you were concerned that this was a case of MSP and were looking at what these parents had done and what they were trying to do, wouldn't you be concerned?
This isn't E-voting. Everyone who keeps thinking this is about elections, please read the patent. They've patented a particular (uncreative) implementation of a webpoll, nothing more.
Read the patent. It's not about voting for presidents or anything like that; it's not about elections. It's literally for people voting on things like "Top American Singer" on social networks and such. It's not designed to prevent voting fraud or anything of that nature... it's really just a fancy description of a webpoll.
Exactly. To ask Sweden and the UK to ignore actual binding rulings in order to enforce nonbinding rulings is basically saying, "Hey, Rule of Law? Go f*** yourself!"
Some people seem to want to live in a world where the concept of rule of law is thrown out for "People We Like". The cases we should be going after are those where people manage to avoid the rule of law.
Or, for actually approvable/implementable ideas: develop (if not already on the market) and install a film that filters out the most common laser frequencies.
That said, automatic direction finding and reporting (doesn't this already exist? if not, it should) would be nice to assist local police. Maybe with a nice telephoto camera to give them a picture of the suspect.
Such a person would be terrible trapped inside a spacecraft - and later, habitat - with a bunch of other people that they have no possibility to escape.
They wouldn't even be allowed to go out walking alone - that would be too dangerous.
I'm sure (s)he's now totally changed their opinion on the nature of the political right after reading your well thought out and well argued post.
Anyway, can we stop with all of the anger for a minute and remember that a human being just died here? Show some respect. Regardless of whether or not we agree with his positions, there are people out there who loved and cared about this man. My condolences go out to the Koch brothers for their loss.
I want to know if they'll be censoring my results here in Iceland (we're in Europe but not the EU - but we are in the EFTA)