They didn't, because countenancing genocide on that scale wouldn't have gone over well with the electorate in any vaguely civilised nation.
As the magnitude, or even existance, of the nazi genocides were not known to anyone outside Germany until after the war, I find this reasoning dubious.
How would that be? Isn't the CMB representative of the material 300.000 years after the Big Bang? If it is, doesn't conservation of momentum mean that movement relative to that must be movement relative to the average mass at the Big Bang, and as such, of the universe?
People don't get rejected by low impact journals, and resubmit to Nature. That would be batty.
A professor at my university suggested doing just that. After all, you have gotten constructive criticism, so after working that into your paper, you have a better paper, fitting for a higher impact journal. I agree, though, that is batty.
Short answer: We have no idea. We don't know what "stopped" looks like, so we can't possibly say how fast we are going compared to "stopped". We can see that we move at X compared to the sun, and Y compared to the galactic core, but since they're in motion as well,...well, we have no idea how "fast we are going".
Aren't we going the speed of light, relative to light?
As opposed to an american one, where the NSA probably have a backdoor and is eager to help with industrial spionage? I know, if I get one where the hardware is made in China and the software in the US, my company can get spied on by BOTH the US competition AND the Chinese competition!
Mass and the distance of the surface from the center, so a higher density would make the escape velocity higher. Mars' density is around 4, gold has a density around 20, so assuming no pressure effects and constant mass, the volume will go down by a factor of 4, so the radius will decrease by 37%. The escape velocity is proportional to the square root of the inverse of the radius, so it will go up with 60%.
Assuming constant radius, the mass will go up with a factor of four, and as the escape velocity is proportional to the square root of the mass, the escape velocity will end up around Earths present escape velocity.
Does hair clipping contain enough DNA to do a test? I remember hearing that testing on hair is done on the follicle, so hair clipping would not work. OTOH, I recall more recently hearing that hair is better at preserving the small pieces of DNA it contains (no air or water), so ancient DNA is better done on hair samples. But are the pieces in hair large enough to use in a forensic test?
There are people who find it offensive that other people use their freedom of speech in a certain manner.
There are people who find it offensive that certain other people are not dead.
In fact, for every human right, I am sure you can find some people who find it offensive that other people use it. As long as that is the case (which is pretty much guaranteed to be as long as people exist), it is a human right to be offensive, at least in those ways.
Aren't you confounding interpretations with observations? Interpretations are interpretations of what the equations say, so they can't be more accurate than the equations. I am not discounting the interpretations, they are extremely helpful in making us understand what the equations say, and wondering about them might give rise to new hypothesis, which can be tested, but that doesn't make the interpretations themselves scientific.
Perhaps the most well-known example of methane making its way from frack wells into homes was in heavily fracked Dimock, Pa. It was in this small Pennsylvania town that residents reported exploding water wells and tap water that was famously lit on fire in the Academy Award-nominated documentary, "Gasland."
The study itself (http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/methane-contamination-of-drinking-water-accompanying-gas-well-drilling) seems to have done their home-work, testing the isotopic ratios, but the example from Gasland is certainly didn't. Even when they have a good point, the critics of frakking insists on damaging their own case by mentioning the embarrassment that is Gasland. Why? Do they hate convincing people?
Earthquakes happen where fault is present. Frakking is done where the beds are accessible. Wouldn't one of the criteria for accessibility be depth? And wouldn't faults be where the beds were closest to the surface? If that is the case, faults could cause both earthquakes and frakking. Do we have a temporal correlation, with more earthquakes after frakking then before in the same area, or is there only spatial correlation?
It is the only interpretation that I am aware of (though its precise phrasing varies).
That is the Copenhagen interpretation. There are several others: In the many-world interpretation, there are universe in which the cat is alive, and universes in which the cat is dead. Until you open the peek, you can interact with both. Ones you have peeked, the versions of you in the universe where the cat is dead and the versions of you in the universe where the cat is alive diverges, and cannot interact anymore (roughly). Then there is the de Borglie-Bohm interpretation, where the cat is either dead or alive (particles have a definite, deterministic position), but until you have observed it, you can only interact with the wavefunction, which is the same for dead and alive cats (I think, but I might have horribly misunderstood it). In fact, there a quite a lot different interpretations of quantum mechanics
In fact, it is the only reason that anyone hopes qbits will work.
Qubits works because of quantum mechanics, that is, because the equations are as they are. That have nothing to do with the interpretation, which is how we understand the equations. Interpretations are not scientific, as they make exactly the same predictions as the underlying model, but are more complex. They are not really needed, but the human mind doesn't like thinking in equations, it prefers to have something that behave like something physical, so we like having them.
Every smartphone allowed you to short circuit two antenna tuned to work at different frequencies? Oh, you bought Steve Jobs' bad excuse, and is confounding antennagate, the problem caused Apple insistence on letting designers engineer the antenna, with the problem of the human body being a good absorber for cell phone radiation, which is experienced by every phone. Man, that really was a low point for Jobs, talking about a completely unrelated issue, and hoping that people didn't caught on. It seems to have worked in some cases.
That depends on the definition of "gold". For every element, there is at least three different meanings of it's name:
1) (one of) the chemical compound(s) (allotropes) that only consists of those atoms.
2) Atoms of that element.
3) The "platonic ideal", the very idea that atoms having a certain number of protons in the core behave in certain ways.
The first have physical properties like density and color, the first and the second have properties such isotopic ratios, the second have properties such as oxidation states or being part of a compound, the third have properties such as potential oxidation states and possible compounds.
For the first definition, the bacteria creates gold, for the second, they don't. For the third, it is hard to see how you could create it. Perhaps changing the laws of physics?
If there were no dark energy, the temperature difference between a heat storage and an ever cooling universe would allow you to do infinitely many calculations, at an ever slowing rate. It seems that there is dark energy though, so the point where space-time recedes faster than c from you moves closer and closer. This is, essentially, an event horizon, so it will have Hawking radiation, meaning that the visible universe will not get arbitrarily cold, so only finitely many calculations can be done. It also becomes hard to do calculations when the electrons around a nucleus recedes from the nucleus faster than c. Dark energy is really a bummer when it comes to living forever.
If there is a minority (ethnic or otherwise) with interests differing from that of the majority, that minority may be underrepresented in representative systems.
Only if you use winner-take-all voting with no adjusting, and no country would do that, that would ensure a two-party system which would no represent the best interest of the public. Oh, wait....
Or, in other words, fix the problem, not one of the symptoms. The problem is that winner-take-all is not going to be representative, and furthermore that it will encourage the forming of two huge parties, neither of which will have interests coinciding with the public.
Non-baryonic gas, I presume, as big bang nucleosynthesis puts an upper limit on the amount of baryonic matter in the universe. Do you have a link detailing the discovery of these massive amounts of non-baryonic gas?
Our universe is 13.5 billion years old because 13.5 billion years ago a black hole formed inside of the parent universe that contains it. Crap could still be falling into it from the parent and that may be what causes the readings we attribute to such things as dark matter and expansion.
Not so fast. Inside the event horizon, distance from the the center becomes time-like, so you cannot move further from the center, while time becomes space-like. Seen from the inside, the event horizon is a time-point, not a position. So all mass materializes at the same time (it might move a bit further back in time as the black hole becomes larger), which kind of looks like a big bang.
At a range of lightseconds your lasers will be too diffuse
The diffusion of laser goes down with diameter of main mirror squared (or waist size squared, to be technical). If I am not mistaken (and I might be, please tell me if I am), a 400 nm laser with a 10 m waist will have a width of 14 m at 2.6 light seconds (formula from Wikipedia). It will thus have an effect per area of half of what is has a point blank range, which is far from useless.
Countries are squeamish about their embassies, probably because they know how easy it is allow riots to destroy one. Not protecting an embassy properly is, if not an act of war, a casus belli for the country whos embassy it was. If I can trust my media (and I am not sure I can), some of the embassies were overrun by far smaller demonstrations than what the police have earlier demonstrated that they could control. It could simply be failing to predict the size of the riots, and the US certainly doesn't want worse relationships with the north African/middle eastern countries, so it will be played down, but had there been a different level of international tension, these riots would be bad for international relationships, to the point where wars could be started over them.
. Political and historical realities suggest that such free speech has potential to cause catastrophic damage, and as a result it's illegal in Germany, while legal in, for example, some Nordic countries.
If you are talking about the rise of nazism, it is worth to note that the Weimar republic did not have freedom of speech, to the degree that leading nazis were imprisoned for blasphemy. The nazis used the witness stand as a pedestal for getting their message out, and used the prison sentences to "prove" that they were being suppressed by the evil state. If anything, the rise of nazism proved that limiting free speech helps the purveyors of hate.
I see. While writing my reply, I got the feeling that it had to be something like what you wrote, but I didn't really get a firm grasp of it until your reply. Thank you for that:-)
I think I have the method from some very popular scientific descriptions at least a decade ago, so they probably didn't go into too much detail about entangled data.
I think there exists two kinds of quantum cryptography. The one you describe is the one implemented now. It doesn't require entangled particles. IIRC, the other goes something like this:
1. Alice creates two sets of entangled particle, and sends one to Bob.
2. Alice encodes her message into a from that can interact with the entangled particle.
3. Alice lets her message interact with the entangled particles, creating the coded message. It is now no longer readable.
4. Alice sends the coded message to Bob. It is not readable, so it can be done over an open channel.
5. Bob lets the coded message interact with his set of particles, retrieving the original message.
AFAICT, entanglement creates a one time pad that is guaranteed not to be known by anyone else. The method implemented now creates random, shared information.
I am not sure whether the coded message created in step 3. is entangled with Bobs particles, or whether step 3. breaks the entanglement.
There is an infinite number of primes, the number of primes have got nothing to do with new bitcoins, and you can break a bitcoin into smaller bits. You couldn't get it more wrong if you tried, so I am going to call Poes law.
I don't find it especially convenient, it doesn't really change the anything, as it probably is too slow and to do anything about AGW in any timespan relavant for humans. I think I read about it in "Rare Earth". A quick googling leads me to this article, which in the introduction states:
Mountain uplift is known to greatly enhance rates of physical
erosion and chemical weathering compared to the rates in tectonically
stable regions (e.g., Stallard and Edmond, 1983; Milliman and Syvitski,
1992; Derry and France-Lanord, 1997). These observations have been
used to argue that orogenic events lead to global cooling over geologic
time scales by accelerating the rate of atmospheric CO
2consumption
by silicate weathering (e.g., Raymo et al., 1988; Raymo and Ruddiman,
1992; Edmond and Huh, 1997; Wallmann, 2001).
It talks about another cause of accelerated erosion, mountain uplift, but increased rainfall should do the same.
As I assumed, it talks about geologic time-scales, so it doesn't really help us.
Slashdot Mirror
They didn't, because countenancing genocide on that scale wouldn't have gone over well with the electorate in any vaguely civilised nation.
As the magnitude, or even existance, of the nazi genocides were not known to anyone outside Germany until after the war, I find this reasoning dubious.
How would that be? Isn't the CMB representative of the material 300.000 years after the Big Bang? If it is, doesn't conservation of momentum mean that movement relative to that must be movement relative to the average mass at the Big Bang, and as such, of the universe?
People don't get rejected by low impact journals, and resubmit to Nature. That would be batty.
A professor at my university suggested doing just that. After all, you have gotten constructive criticism, so after working that into your paper, you have a better paper, fitting for a higher impact journal. I agree, though, that is batty.
Short answer: We have no idea. We don't know what "stopped" looks like, so we can't possibly say how fast we are going compared to "stopped". We can see that we move at X compared to the sun, and Y compared to the galactic core, but since they're in motion as well, ...well, we have no idea how "fast we are going".
Aren't we going the speed of light, relative to light?
Doesn't the red- and blueshift of the CMB tell us something like the total velocity of the earth?
As opposed to an american one, where the NSA probably have a backdoor and is eager to help with industrial spionage? I know, if I get one where the hardware is made in China and the software in the US, my company can get spied on by BOTH the US competition AND the Chinese competition!
Mass and the distance of the surface from the center, so a higher density would make the escape velocity higher. Mars' density is around 4, gold has a density around 20, so assuming no pressure effects and constant mass, the volume will go down by a factor of 4, so the radius will decrease by 37%. The escape velocity is proportional to the square root of the inverse of the radius, so it will go up with 60%.
Assuming constant radius, the mass will go up with a factor of four, and as the escape velocity is proportional to the square root of the mass, the escape velocity will end up around Earths present escape velocity.
Does hair clipping contain enough DNA to do a test? I remember hearing that testing on hair is done on the follicle, so hair clipping would not work. OTOH, I recall more recently hearing that hair is better at preserving the small pieces of DNA it contains (no air or water), so ancient DNA is better done on hair samples. But are the pieces in hair large enough to use in a forensic test?
There are people who find it offensive that other people use their freedom of speech in a certain manner.
There are people who find it offensive that certain other people are not dead.
In fact, for every human right, I am sure you can find some people who find it offensive that other people use it. As long as that is the case (which is pretty much guaranteed to be as long as people exist), it is a human right to be offensive, at least in those ways.
Aren't you confounding interpretations with observations? Interpretations are interpretations of what the equations say, so they can't be more accurate than the equations. I am not discounting the interpretations, they are extremely helpful in making us understand what the equations say, and wondering about them might give rise to new hypothesis, which can be tested, but that doesn't make the interpretations themselves scientific.
Perhaps the most well-known example of methane making its way from frack wells into homes was in heavily fracked Dimock, Pa. It was in this small Pennsylvania town that residents reported exploding water wells and tap water that was famously lit on fire in the Academy Award-nominated documentary, "Gasland."
The study itself (http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/methane-contamination-of-drinking-water-accompanying-gas-well-drilling) seems to have done their home-work, testing the isotopic ratios, but the example from Gasland is certainly didn't. Even when they have a good point, the critics of frakking insists on damaging their own case by mentioning the embarrassment that is Gasland. Why? Do they hate convincing people?
Earthquakes happen where fault is present. Frakking is done where the beds are accessible. Wouldn't one of the criteria for accessibility be depth? And wouldn't faults be where the beds were closest to the surface? If that is the case, faults could cause both earthquakes and frakking. Do we have a temporal correlation, with more earthquakes after frakking then before in the same area, or is there only spatial correlation?
It is the only interpretation that I am aware of (though its precise phrasing varies).
That is the Copenhagen interpretation. There are several others: In the many-world interpretation, there are universe in which the cat is alive, and universes in which the cat is dead. Until you open the peek, you can interact with both. Ones you have peeked, the versions of you in the universe where the cat is dead and the versions of you in the universe where the cat is alive diverges, and cannot interact anymore (roughly). Then there is the de Borglie-Bohm interpretation, where the cat is either dead or alive (particles have a definite, deterministic position), but until you have observed it, you can only interact with the wavefunction, which is the same for dead and alive cats (I think, but I might have horribly misunderstood it). In fact, there a quite a lot different interpretations of quantum mechanics
In fact, it is the only reason that anyone hopes qbits will work.
Qubits works because of quantum mechanics, that is, because the equations are as they are. That have nothing to do with the interpretation, which is how we understand the equations. Interpretations are not scientific, as they make exactly the same predictions as the underlying model, but are more complex. They are not really needed, but the human mind doesn't like thinking in equations, it prefers to have something that behave like something physical, so we like having them.
Every smartphone allowed you to short circuit two antenna tuned to work at different frequencies? Oh, you bought Steve Jobs' bad excuse, and is confounding antennagate, the problem caused Apple insistence on letting designers engineer the antenna, with the problem of the human body being a good absorber for cell phone radiation, which is experienced by every phone. Man, that really was a low point for Jobs, talking about a completely unrelated issue, and hoping that people didn't caught on. It seems to have worked in some cases.
That depends on the definition of "gold". For every element, there is at least three different meanings of it's name:
1) (one of) the chemical compound(s) (allotropes) that only consists of those atoms.
2) Atoms of that element.
3) The "platonic ideal", the very idea that atoms having a certain number of protons in the core behave in certain ways.
The first have physical properties like density and color, the first and the second have properties such isotopic ratios, the second have properties such as oxidation states or being part of a compound, the third have properties such as potential oxidation states and possible compounds.
For the first definition, the bacteria creates gold, for the second, they don't. For the third, it is hard to see how you could create it. Perhaps changing the laws of physics?
If there were no dark energy, the temperature difference between a heat storage and an ever cooling universe would allow you to do infinitely many calculations, at an ever slowing rate. It seems that there is dark energy though, so the point where space-time recedes faster than c from you moves closer and closer. This is, essentially, an event horizon, so it will have Hawking radiation, meaning that the visible universe will not get arbitrarily cold, so only finitely many calculations can be done. It also becomes hard to do calculations when the electrons around a nucleus recedes from the nucleus faster than c. Dark energy is really a bummer when it comes to living forever.
If there is a minority (ethnic or otherwise) with interests differing from that of the majority, that minority may be underrepresented in representative systems.
Only if you use winner-take-all voting with no adjusting, and no country would do that, that would ensure a two-party system which would no represent the best interest of the public. Oh, wait....
Or, in other words, fix the problem, not one of the symptoms. The problem is that winner-take-all is not going to be representative, and furthermore that it will encourage the forming of two huge parties, neither of which will have interests coinciding with the public.
Non-baryonic gas, I presume, as big bang nucleosynthesis puts an upper limit on the amount of baryonic matter in the universe. Do you have a link detailing the discovery of these massive amounts of non-baryonic gas?
Our universe is 13.5 billion years old because 13.5 billion years ago a black hole formed inside of the parent universe that contains it. Crap could still be falling into it from the parent and that may be what causes the readings we attribute to such things as dark matter and expansion.
Not so fast. Inside the event horizon, distance from the the center becomes time-like, so you cannot move further from the center, while time becomes space-like. Seen from the inside, the event horizon is a time-point, not a position. So all mass materializes at the same time (it might move a bit further back in time as the black hole becomes larger), which kind of looks like a big bang.
At a range of lightseconds your lasers will be too diffuse
The diffusion of laser goes down with diameter of main mirror squared (or waist size squared, to be technical). If I am not mistaken (and I might be, please tell me if I am), a 400 nm laser with a 10 m waist will have a width of 14 m at 2.6 light seconds (formula from Wikipedia). It will thus have an effect per area of half of what is has a point blank range, which is far from useless.
Countries are squeamish about their embassies, probably because they know how easy it is allow riots to destroy one. Not protecting an embassy properly is, if not an act of war, a casus belli for the country whos embassy it was. If I can trust my media (and I am not sure I can), some of the embassies were overrun by far smaller demonstrations than what the police have earlier demonstrated that they could control. It could simply be failing to predict the size of the riots, and the US certainly doesn't want worse relationships with the north African/middle eastern countries, so it will be played down, but had there been a different level of international tension, these riots would be bad for international relationships, to the point where wars could be started over them.
. Political and historical realities suggest that such free speech has potential to cause catastrophic damage, and as a result it's illegal in Germany, while legal in, for example, some Nordic countries.
If you are talking about the rise of nazism, it is worth to note that the Weimar republic did not have freedom of speech, to the degree that leading nazis were imprisoned for blasphemy. The nazis used the witness stand as a pedestal for getting their message out, and used the prison sentences to "prove" that they were being suppressed by the evil state. If anything, the rise of nazism proved that limiting free speech helps the purveyors of hate.
I see. While writing my reply, I got the feeling that it had to be something like what you wrote, but I didn't really get a firm grasp of it until your reply. Thank you for that :-)
I think I have the method from some very popular scientific descriptions at least a decade ago, so they probably didn't go into too much detail about entangled data.
I think there exists two kinds of quantum cryptography. The one you describe is the one implemented now. It doesn't require entangled particles. IIRC, the other goes something like this:
1. Alice creates two sets of entangled particle, and sends one to Bob.
2. Alice encodes her message into a from that can interact with the entangled particle.
3. Alice lets her message interact with the entangled particles, creating the coded message. It is now no longer readable.
4. Alice sends the coded message to Bob. It is not readable, so it can be done over an open channel.
5. Bob lets the coded message interact with his set of particles, retrieving the original message.
AFAICT, entanglement creates a one time pad that is guaranteed not to be known by anyone else. The method implemented now creates random, shared information.
I am not sure whether the coded message created in step 3. is entangled with Bobs particles, or whether step 3. breaks the entanglement.
There is an infinite number of primes, the number of primes have got nothing to do with new bitcoins, and you can break a bitcoin into smaller bits. You couldn't get it more wrong if you tried, so I am going to call Poes law.
Mountain uplift is known to greatly enhance rates of physical erosion and chemical weathering compared to the rates in tectonically stable regions (e.g., Stallard and Edmond, 1983; Milliman and Syvitski, 1992; Derry and France-Lanord, 1997). These observations have been used to argue that orogenic events lead to global cooling over geologic time scales by accelerating the rate of atmospheric CO 2consumption by silicate weathering (e.g., Raymo et al., 1988; Raymo and Ruddiman, 1992; Edmond and Huh, 1997; Wallmann, 2001).
It talks about another cause of accelerated erosion, mountain uplift, but increased rainfall should do the same. As I assumed, it talks about geologic time-scales, so it doesn't really help us.