Sure in terms of thermodynamics and chemistry they are all the same, but that isn't the domain being used.
In order to use hydrogen as a fuel in a car we have to make the hydrogen, this requires the same amount of energy as the hydrogen will provide to the car (well a bit more since there'll be losses).
In order to use aluminum as described, we have to make the aluminium, this requires the same amount of energy as the aluminium will provide to the car (well a bit more since there'll be losses).
In order to use gasoline as a fuel, we extract oil from the ground and process it. This takes less energy than the gasoline will provide to the car.
Enemies too, as you say you'd turn it off when you got close enough. But you don't want to crash into a Iran Air passenger plane on the way there.
I suspect if they were doing a long range stealth bomber attack they'd either have informed everyone that they "own" a corridoor of airspace which most of the time is empty but which no one else should enter. Or shadow another military plane most of the way. Then again I'm not a military guy, so I'm probably way off base.
Whereas my DS gets used once a year on the flight from Los Angeles to Sydney (by the kid) which has never had outlets in the past (it's $4000 worth of plane tickets for discount economy spending even more isn't high on my priorities, but I would live on the other side of the planet to the rest of the family). It wouldn't last the entire flight being used, but some sleeping is done so it's usually working, with the red battery indicator on, when we arrive.
It's not 3D with 4.5 hours of battery. And 4.5 hours doesn't last for a cross country flight let along for a significant portion of that trip to Australia. And it looks like you need to unscrew a few screws to change the battery something that is not really practical on a plane (too easy to lose the tiny screws, too much fun getting the screw driver though security).
Because you want them to be public. The other aircraft, including those of your "enemies" and the light aircraft being flown by Bob the gardener down the street need to be able to communicate to avoid smashing into each other.
Encrypting serves no purpose when the entire idea is for anyone to be able to receive the information.
1. Name based virtual hosting doesn't work with HTTPS (unless all virtual hosts use the same cert) 2. Requires more CPU grunt on the web servers 3. Certificates cost money 4. Certificates expire and hence add work to keep the site up and running 5. Embedding http resources in an https page cause some browsers to pop up annoying confirmation boxes
Seriously? Abacuses doubled in computing power every 18 months?
Let's see the Sumerian abacus was around in about 2500BC, so it's had 4500 years or 3000 doubles. So assuming it was really crap and could only do one calculation an hour, we use 6 doubles getting to one a second. leaving us 2994 more.
So a calculation now should be taking 1/2^2994 seconds, 2^2994 is close enough to 10^902.
10^-902 second for a calculation. Plank time is ~10^-43. So the claim of that book is seriously that we can do 10^859 calculations in the smallest amount of time that is theoretically measurable.
Someone else can work what the prefix you need to stick on hertz if it's one calculation a cycle.
If "computing power" isn't measuring speed, then what can you name that we can fo 10^904 better now than then? That's a bloody big number.
And yet refrigerator manufacturers are still around, even though existing refridgerators have been perfectly good.
If Moore's law ends then do you really think the demand for computational power will just vanish with it? Or will it in fact create more demand for computing hardware. If the chips aren't getting better and better then you'll need to buy twice as many instead.
So instead of buying a new one every two years, you buy a new one in two years, two new ones two years after that, four new ones two years after that. Maybe 12 two years after than because some of the eight you have have broken and you need sixteen total.
Assuming we don't come up with some new tech in the first place.
Deserving has nothing to do with anything. It doesn't make the bullets more likely to hit, it doesn't make you easier to find. It's completely irrelevant.
Because soldiers are so stupid as to not consider that there might be enemies in more than one location?
You already get a sense of the direction of a sound from your ears, but not wonderfully precise. Having more precise information would be useful, the soldiers aren't going to be dumb enough to expose themselves in order to hide from that one sound (well some might I guess, but they won't be soldiers for very much longer either way).
The enemy can easily arrange for an actual gunshot to be fired in some location anyway
Because the sound from the gunshot comes from the location of the gun, also known as the location of the soon to be dead guy doing the distracting.
Whereas the sound from a firework comes from the location of the firework which, if the guy has any sense at all, isn't the same as the location of the guy doing the distracting because he threw it.
Everyone knows that you don't put robots in that sort of environment unless you want them to become sentient and rain nuclear death down on all of humanity.
Of course you didn't claim it was bullshit, you claimed it was a fact. Then you referenced an article that says that the idea that it is explosive is bullshit, in order to back up your claim that it is explosive, which is simply a bizarre technique.
That URL: "What set off my bullshit detector is Grossman’s claim that zirconium is dangerous because it’s used in old-school photo flashbulbs", "I can’t find ANYTHING about Zirconium exploding at 2,000 degrees that didn’t originate with Grossman.",
The right conditions for zirconium are not meet by this. Otherwsie TMI would have gone bang. And Chernobyl would have gone bang in a different way.
The zirconium does react with steam to produce hydrogen. And the hydrogen can then explode. But that's not the same as "this compound is explosive above 2000 deg".
Of course it did, and it was once defined as 1/86400 of a mean solar day. But the definition was changed before I was born and the topic was the definition not the old definition of the common usage.
Slashdot Mirror
gasoline.
Sure in terms of thermodynamics and chemistry they are all the same, but that isn't the domain being used.
In order to use hydrogen as a fuel in a car we have to make the hydrogen, this requires the same amount of energy as the hydrogen will provide to the car (well a bit more since there'll be losses).
In order to use aluminum as described, we have to make the aluminium, this requires the same amount of energy as the aluminium will provide to the car (well a bit more since there'll be losses).
In order to use gasoline as a fuel, we extract oil from the ground and process it. This takes less energy than the gasoline will provide to the car.
It'd suck for corn and wheat and bananas and rice and cows, if the metric that matters is jus tnumbers.
Good for you, of course you also don't get to brain wash your kids with that view. So whether it's genetic or learned that view dies with you.
You willing to kill yourself and your family?
If not then why would you expect anyone else to? If so then then there's little point in my replying since you aren't here anymore, right?
With those political reasons being the radiation leaks, contaminations, the plant operator covering up and lieing about the the problems, and so on.
Enemies too, as you say you'd turn it off when you got close enough. But you don't want to crash into a Iran Air passenger plane on the way there.
I suspect if they were doing a long range stealth bomber attack they'd either have informed everyone that they "own" a corridoor of airspace which most of the time is empty but which no one else should enter. Or shadow another military plane most of the way. Then again I'm not a military guy, so I'm probably way off base.
Whereas my DS gets used once a year on the flight from Los Angeles to Sydney (by the kid) which has never had outlets in the past (it's $4000 worth of plane tickets for discount economy spending even more isn't high on my priorities, but I would live on the other side of the planet to the rest of the family). It wouldn't last the entire flight being used, but some sleeping is done so it's usually working, with the red battery indicator on, when we arrive.
It's not 3D with 4.5 hours of battery. And 4.5 hours doesn't last for a cross country flight let along for a significant portion of that trip to Australia. And it looks like you need to unscrew a few screws to change the battery something that is not really practical on a plane (too easy to lose the tiny screws, too much fun getting the screw driver though security).
Because you want them to be public. The other aircraft, including those of your "enemies" and the light aircraft being flown by Bob the gardener down the street need to be able to communicate to avoid smashing into each other.
Encrypting serves no purpose when the entire idea is for anyone to be able to receive the information.
XP has 2% market share? Sure...
And XP users?
And no one uses XP or IE6, right?
1. Name based virtual hosting doesn't work with HTTPS (unless all virtual hosts use the same cert)
2. Requires more CPU grunt on the web servers
3. Certificates cost money
4. Certificates expire and hence add work to keep the site up and running
5. Embedding http resources in an https page cause some browsers to pop up annoying confirmation boxes
Because people who don't read the first line of the summary are going to read an anon coward post.
How helpful of you.
Seriously? Abacuses doubled in computing power every 18 months?
Let's see the Sumerian abacus was around in about 2500BC, so it's had 4500 years or 3000 doubles. So assuming it was really crap and could only do one calculation an hour, we use 6 doubles getting to one a second. leaving us 2994 more.
So a calculation now should be taking 1/2^2994 seconds, 2^2994 is close enough to 10^902.
10^-902 second for a calculation. Plank time is ~10^-43. So the claim of that book is seriously that we can do 10^859 calculations in the smallest amount of time that is theoretically measurable.
Someone else can work what the prefix you need to stick on hertz if it's one calculation a cycle.
If "computing power" isn't measuring speed, then what can you name that we can fo 10^904 better now than then? That's a bloody big number.
And yet refrigerator manufacturers are still around, even though existing refridgerators have been perfectly good.
If Moore's law ends then do you really think the demand for computational power will just vanish with it? Or will it in fact create more demand for computing hardware. If the chips aren't getting better and better then you'll need to buy twice as many instead.
So instead of buying a new one every two years, you buy a new one in two years, two new ones two years after that, four new ones two years after that. Maybe 12 two years after than because some of the eight you have have broken and you need sixteen total.
Assuming we don't come up with some new tech in the first place.
Oh wait, silly me, I forgot where I was.
Deserving has nothing to do with anything. It doesn't make the bullets more likely to hit, it doesn't make you easier to find. It's completely irrelevant.
Because soldiers are so stupid as to not consider that there might be enemies in more than one location?
You already get a sense of the direction of a sound from your ears, but not wonderfully precise. Having more precise information would be useful, the soldiers aren't going to be dumb enough to expose themselves in order to hide from that one sound (well some might I guess, but they won't be soldiers for very much longer either way).
The enemy can easily arrange for an actual gunshot to be fired in some location anyway
Because the sound from the gunshot comes from the location of the gun, also known as the location of the soon to be dead guy doing the distracting.
Whereas the sound from a firework comes from the location of the firework which, if the guy has any sense at all, isn't the same as the location of the guy doing the distracting because he threw it.
The radiation levels are high.
Everyone knows that you don't put robots in that sort of environment unless you want them to become sentient and rain nuclear death down on all of humanity.
Of course you didn't claim it was bullshit, you claimed it was a fact. Then you referenced an article that says that the idea that it is explosive is bullshit, in order to back up your claim that it is explosive, which is simply a bizarre technique.
Your post: "you will find that the compound is explosive. See for example: http://techyum.com/2011/03/does-zirconium-explode-at-2000-degrees/."
That URL: "What set off my bullshit detector is Grossman’s claim that zirconium is dangerous because it’s used in old-school photo flashbulbs", "I can’t find ANYTHING about Zirconium exploding at 2,000 degrees that didn’t originate with Grossman.",
The right conditions for zirconium are not meet by this. Otherwsie TMI would have gone bang. And Chernobyl would have gone bang in a different way.
The zirconium does react with steam to produce hydrogen. And the hydrogen can then explode. But that's not the same as "this compound is explosive above 2000 deg".
You back up your claim with an article that says your claim is bullshit. Interesting debate technique.
Flammable powders can "explode", yes. That doesn't mean lumps of solid or pools of liquid made of the same substance do as well.
Of course it did, and it was once defined as 1/86400 of a mean solar day. But the definition was changed before I was born and the topic was the definition not the old definition of the common usage.