At least on slashdot he has access to a very large population of interested people, some of them actually practitioners or reasearchers in the relevant fields.
I'm too lazy to read your entire comment, so forgive me if you addressed this: The way I see it, Slashdot is overwhelmingly populated with people who claim to be the authority on a variety of different topics, but rarely demonstrate this through their postings. I'm not trying to be a jerk... its just that I rarely see GOOD advice on this site that is anything other than common sense. A good example is all the people posting to this thread saying "find a focus group". On top of this, the majority of posts actually made are usually useless and offer no intellectual value other than possibly being funny.
Its all about indexing. If Google indexes based on how often the file is created or perhaps keeps track of the contents in a low impact way, the searching could be substantially less time.
The difference here though, is that Google's algorithm is based off of links (for their website) to a certain document and scoring the "authenticity" based on that. On a file system, you don't have that option, unless they came up with a better method.
If you make the connection between that discussion and the present one.
You are essentially telling me that I am at fault for asking the time to a French person in Paris because of the way I look or act. This is equivalent to saying that a rape victim deserved what she got because of the way she looked or behaved.
Now answer the question: Yes or No
And don't give me any wordy responses because I've lost the patience to read anymore of your posts.
I live on a pier which is the single closest appartment building to NYC that is still in NJ. I don't get to NYC very often, but when I do, I am usually lost if I'm travelling by foot. I have asked for directions a gazillion times and the worst thing I have gotten was a few people pretending not to hear me (they probably thought I was a bum, which is debatible).
But seriously... keep bringing up Iraq and the prisoner abuse. The next time the Germans invade France we'll be supplying the bombs...
Most likely because I was American. I don't recall attempting to ask somebody the time in French as being an overtly offensive thing to do. Even if I had asked in English...
Well, lets see. The French started the Vietnam war and we took it over in an effort to prevent communism from spreading. I think thats a fairly decent intention although the cause may or may not have been hopeless.
As far as slavery, civil rights and Native Americans, theres not much I can say about that because Slavery and the Native American issues were well before my time and quite frankly do not apply to the world today. It was obviously wrong, but in all honesty variations of the same thing occurred with France, Britain, Japan or Australia. Civil Rights was a damn shame but we've learned from that as well (although my perception of it was that it was a thing of the south).
So what you're saying is that the French are intollerant of other cultures?
Let me give you an example:
I was in Washington DC once, and a French person asked me what time it was in broken French. I told her and she didn't understand, so I told her in French and was greatful.
I asked for the time in France in broken France and was spit on. It doesn't get any clearer than that.
Actually, the way we see WWII, France appeased Hitler, then when the Germans became hostile, France gave up without a fight. Then after the Nazi's pretty much took France, the French helped them fight the Allies.
But this really has little to do with the current perception of France in the USA. For example, I don't like France because France is consistently attempting to undermine our interests. This is fine, except when we were attacked on 9/11, France donated a whopping 40 troops to be deployed in Afganistan well after the Taliban had been toppled.
So while you may be "good people" (debatible), as a country, you're not. As a country, you don't back us up when we need you and you take a step further to sabotage our efforts.
As for French people, I have been to France 5 times. Everytime I have gone, I have experienced some sort of anti-American behavior. From being kicked out of a convenience store (because I was looking at the post cards), to being spit on for speaking English. Both of these incidents occurred in Paris on seperate trips.
The stars are definately not fixed WRT each other but the "rotates like a wheel" analogy is not being taken too far.
If the stars were to be jumbled up that drastically in one rotation, you would expect (to some degree) to see galaxies that are fuzzy balls rather than spiral with arms. My understanding has always been that an arm revolves as a whole unless stripped apart by other forces (speaking generally here). If it did not rotate as a whole, you would not see these communities like the stars of the Orion nebula.
I'll see if I can find a source tonight and post it.
The purpose of the statement to begin with was basically that we should be looking in our local area for systems similar to ours, but (disc/wheel or not) that may only be the case for a certain amount of time.
"I'm saying that dark matter may or may not exist"
The term "Dark Matter" means matter we cannot see. Dark Matter is not necessarily some exotic form of mass or particles. The term "baryonic" should have given that away, if you knew what it meant.
"the ggp post about the galaxy rotating as free-floating bodies is equally unproven"
Yes, it is "unproven", but there is no evidence that shows the stars revolve around the center of the galaxy like free-floating bodies. There is evidence that they revolve like a disc. They are two contradictory theories. If one is correct, the other cannot be.
Neither is fact, or scientific law, only theory. Thus to argue about it is silly, to say the least."
I'm not arguing, I'm defending my statement because it is based on scientific research.
"If you're going to be scientifically skeptical, the least you could do is apply the same ammount of skepticism to your own theories as you do to other's theories."
They are not my theories. They are the theories of people who have spent many more years studying it than you or I have.
Read up on the Scientific Method and practice it in everyday life. Once you understand how and more importantly WHY it works, you'll understand the difference between erroneous statements like yours and relatively scientific statements like mine. (I say 'relatively' because I have not posted any DATA as backup to my statements)
Here's an example of a theory and a fact:
Theory: You might be a dumbass because you post really stupid statements and make a fool of yourself.
Fact that backs up the theory: You scored a 650 culmulative score on your SATs
What could prove this theory wrong is if you were to post something relatively intelligent that is not based off of half-baked philosophical ideas.
Remember Heaven's Gate? When they believed that Christ was an alien and that we were their creation (or something to that effect). They're the ones who committed suicide in order to "join the mother ship" flying behind comet Hyakutake. Their leader used a NASA photo of the comet which had large chunks of debris breaking apart, claiming that a couple specs on the image was the ship following the comet.
I'm not sure, I would assume it would (I've never used an interferometer myself).
On a related note, interferometers in space are actually not a new thing (supposedly). The NOSS Trio are a set of 3 satelites operated by the Navy and is used to detect ships and the wakes they produce, even at extremely deep depths (supposedly). You can see them in the sky flying in formation. Its really pretty cool.
Are you saying I'm wrong or are you just making FUD?
The proof is in the pudding. If the stars rotated as free-floating bodies, there would be no "arms" in the Milky Way. It would look more like a Quasar or a fuzzy ball.
There is also an interstellar cloud of supernova remnants in our local area that I recall reading a paper about a few years ago, but I don't have motivation to go looking for it.
But what do I know... I'm just explaining the current theory. I suppose you could say that the stars revolve around the galactic center like free-floating points, but then you'd have to explain a whole variety of other things in order for your theory to be Scientific.
Yes, but the success of interferometry is based on the distance between two observation points. So to achieve better performance you would only need to extend the distance between the observation points, rather than throw more satelites at it.
If you've taken any galactic structure classes, you'd know that galaxies spin more like disks than they do like free-floating bodies. This is because of the amount of (baryonic?) dark matter between the stars.
So while you would think that local stars would drift away quickly, that is not the case. Yes there is stellar drift but not enough to put one star on the other side of the galaxy from another within its life span (without a seriously cataclismic event).
Slashdot Mirror
At least on slashdot he has access to a very large population of interested people, some of them actually practitioners or reasearchers in the relevant fields.
I'm too lazy to read your entire comment, so forgive me if you addressed this: The way I see it, Slashdot is overwhelmingly populated with people who claim to be the authority on a variety of different topics, but rarely demonstrate this through their postings. I'm not trying to be a jerk... its just that I rarely see GOOD advice on this site that is anything other than common sense. A good example is all the people posting to this thread saying "find a focus group". On top of this, the majority of posts actually made are usually useless and offer no intellectual value other than possibly being funny.
I'd be weary of any "Doctor" who posted medical advice to a public forum, anonymously or not.
Slashdot already provides people with enough inaccurate Science and Technology information... lets not shoot for Medical as well...
Its all about indexing. If Google indexes based on how often the file is created or perhaps keeps track of the contents in a low impact way, the searching could be substantially less time.
The difference here though, is that Google's algorithm is based off of links (for their website) to a certain document and scoring the "authenticity" based on that. On a file system, you don't have that option, unless they came up with a better method.
Actually, they shouldn't spend OUR money on sending China to the Moon.
You're so funny, I almost read your entire post.
If you make the connection between that discussion and the present one.
You are essentially telling me that I am at fault for asking the time to a French person in Paris because of the way I look or act. This is equivalent to saying that a rape victim deserved what she got because of the way she looked or behaved.
Now answer the question: Yes or No
And don't give me any wordy responses because I've lost the patience to read anymore of your posts.
Just answer the question, yes or no.
Get something besides a printed T-shirt and jeans.
Would you blame a rape victim for being raped?
I live on a pier which is the single closest appartment building to NYC that is still in NJ. I don't get to NYC very often, but when I do, I am usually lost if I'm travelling by foot. I have asked for directions a gazillion times and the worst thing I have gotten was a few people pretending not to hear me (they probably thought I was a bum, which is debatible).
But seriously... keep bringing up Iraq and the prisoner abuse. The next time the Germans invade France we'll be supplying the bombs...
Thats good to know, thanks.
Most likely because I was American. I don't recall attempting to ask somebody the time in French as being an overtly offensive thing to do. Even if I had asked in English...
You're absolutely right, I bought it.
Well, lets see. The French started the Vietnam war and we took it over in an effort to prevent communism from spreading. I think thats a fairly decent intention although the cause may or may not have been hopeless.
As far as slavery, civil rights and Native Americans, theres not much I can say about that because Slavery and the Native American issues were well before my time and quite frankly do not apply to the world today. It was obviously wrong, but in all honesty variations of the same thing occurred with France, Britain, Japan or Australia. Civil Rights was a damn shame but we've learned from that as well (although my perception of it was that it was a thing of the south).
You're just crazy emotional.
So what you're saying is that the French are intollerant of other cultures?
Let me give you an example:
I was in Washington DC once, and a French person asked me what time it was in broken French. I told her and she didn't understand, so I told her in French and was greatful.
I asked for the time in France in broken France and was spit on. It doesn't get any clearer than that.
Actually, the way we see WWII, France appeased Hitler, then when the Germans became hostile, France gave up without a fight. Then after the Nazi's pretty much took France, the French helped them fight the Allies.
But this really has little to do with the current perception of France in the USA. For example, I don't like France because France is consistently attempting to undermine our interests. This is fine, except when we were attacked on 9/11, France donated a whopping 40 troops to be deployed in Afganistan well after the Taliban had been toppled.
So while you may be "good people" (debatible), as a country, you're not. As a country, you don't back us up when we need you and you take a step further to sabotage our efforts.
As for French people, I have been to France 5 times. Everytime I have gone, I have experienced some sort of anti-American behavior. From being kicked out of a convenience store (because I was looking at the post cards), to being spit on for speaking English. Both of these incidents occurred in Paris on seperate trips.
People in southern France are really nice though.
One thing is for sure, they're all terrorists.
The stars are definately not fixed WRT each other but the "rotates like a wheel" analogy is not being taken too far.
If the stars were to be jumbled up that drastically in one rotation, you would expect (to some degree) to see galaxies that are fuzzy balls rather than spiral with arms. My understanding has always been that an arm revolves as a whole unless stripped apart by other forces (speaking generally here). If it did not rotate as a whole, you would not see these communities like the stars of the Orion nebula.
I'll see if I can find a source tonight and post it.
The purpose of the statement to begin with was basically that we should be looking in our local area for systems similar to ours, but (disc/wheel or not) that may only be the case for a certain amount of time.
"I'm saying that dark matter may or may not exist"
The term "Dark Matter" means matter we cannot see. Dark Matter is not necessarily some exotic form of mass or particles. The term "baryonic" should have given that away, if you knew what it meant.
"the ggp post about the galaxy rotating as free-floating bodies is equally unproven"
Yes, it is "unproven", but there is no evidence that shows the stars revolve around the center of the galaxy like free-floating bodies. There is evidence that they revolve like a disc. They are two contradictory theories. If one is correct, the other cannot be.
Neither is fact, or scientific law, only theory. Thus to argue about it is silly, to say the least."
I'm not arguing, I'm defending my statement because it is based on scientific research.
"If you're going to be scientifically skeptical, the least you could do is apply the same ammount of skepticism to your own theories as you do to other's theories."
They are not my theories. They are the theories of people who have spent many more years studying it than you or I have.
Read up on the Scientific Method and practice it in everyday life. Once you understand how and more importantly WHY it works, you'll understand the difference between erroneous statements like yours and relatively scientific statements like mine. (I say 'relatively' because I have not posted any DATA as backup to my statements)
Here's an example of a theory and a fact:
Theory: You might be a dumbass because you post really stupid statements and make a fool of yourself.
Fact that backs up the theory: You scored a 650 culmulative score on your SATs
What could prove this theory wrong is if you were to post something relatively intelligent that is not based off of half-baked philosophical ideas.
Remember Heaven's Gate? When they believed that Christ was an alien and that we were their creation (or something to that effect). They're the ones who committed suicide in order to "join the mother ship" flying behind comet Hyakutake. Their leader used a NASA photo of the comet which had large chunks of debris breaking apart, claiming that a couple specs on the image was the ship following the comet.
I'm not sure, I would assume it would (I've never used an interferometer myself).
On a related note, interferometers in space are actually not a new thing (supposedly). The NOSS Trio are a set of 3 satelites operated by the Navy and is used to detect ships and the wakes they produce, even at extremely deep depths (supposedly). You can see them in the sky flying in formation. Its really pretty cool.
NOSS Trio
Are you saying I'm wrong or are you just making FUD?
The proof is in the pudding. If the stars rotated as free-floating bodies, there would be no "arms" in the Milky Way. It would look more like a Quasar or a fuzzy ball.
There is also an interstellar cloud of supernova remnants in our local area that I recall reading a paper about a few years ago, but I don't have motivation to go looking for it.
But what do I know... I'm just explaining the current theory. I suppose you could say that the stars revolve around the galactic center like free-floating points, but then you'd have to explain a whole variety of other things in order for your theory to be Scientific.
Yes, but the success of interferometry is based on the distance between two observation points. So to achieve better performance you would only need to extend the distance between the observation points, rather than throw more satelites at it.
If you've taken any galactic structure classes, you'd know that galaxies spin more like disks than they do like free-floating bodies. This is because of the amount of (baryonic?) dark matter between the stars.
So while you would think that local stars would drift away quickly, that is not the case. Yes there is stellar drift but not enough to put one star on the other side of the galaxy from another within its life span (without a seriously cataclismic event).
This post is funny enough to warrant me posting the statement: No Comment.