I don't see how you can prove something conclusively in silico, you put in what you know and you get a distillation of it out. How can you discover* completely new physics when the computer can only start with a potentially incorrect/inaccurate theory and make deterministic calculations based on that input? I mean, you can't get out more than you put in, can you?
Caveat: I can easily accept that collisions of the same energy take place all the time in nature, even if a hole were somehow formed I have far more confidence in Hawking than someone who can scream "Think of the Children!!!" while keeping a straight face.
*There's no reason why you can't put in your theory and come out with a simulation that doesn't resemble how things happen in nature and so begin to disprove a theory. That being said, if CERN could have shown the existence of the Higgs boson using only simulations then they might not have bothered with the LHC.
Imagine: you're driving a car, which from your description has the consistency of a tank. Somehow you get the thing to 100mph and you encounter a few tons of concrete.
You stop (rather suddenly) but fortunately the next owner doesn't even have to repaint - a quick scrub will be enough to clean the mess you make inside!
Seriously though, at 100mph hitting anything much bigger than a field mouse and you're probably fucked, but at lower speeds that little extra time that crumple zones can make a big difference.
Ironically the wheel is one of the few things nature didn't invent first. There are beasties with magnets in their heads, some with electrical generators in their muscles, sophisticated echolocation etc. etc.. A wheel and axle may be beyond Mother Nature's reach, barring some amazing fluke.
Still, reinventing the wheel isn't always such a bad thing; the first solution is rarely the optimal one.
For example, a small device that turns heat into power could power an IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL DEVICE using the bodies own heating/cooling systems? No more changing the battery for the pacemaker every
Depends... what are you going to use for the cold sink when the implant is surrounded by flesh that's all at 38 degrees?
Fine, let them. Then let the rest of the world disregard US patents while Apple and Qualcomm et al. ignore Nokia's. Nokia still has the rest of the world and everyone can benefit from the billions of dollar's research it took to discover that people have more than one finger...
I imagine having experienced starvation or homelessness would cause the same effect hearing people complain about the doneness of their steak or the color of the paint in their house.
I would have thought the opposite: when you only rarely (sorry) have a steak, you want the ones you do have to be just right. You've had a lot of time to think about how you want it. I suppose the same goes for a house; once you get over how great it is you start to think "Hey, I'm going to make this great."
It's more credible than "why do his powers work at night & underground, but fail instantly under a red sun?"
And infinitely more credible than a guy who can lift something that large, while standing on a pavement without cracking it and sinking. Or how he gets that power at all by collecting ~3m^2 worth of sunlight.
On the other hand I never get an ODF. It might be neat, but when the guy with the cornered market doesn't support it you need something with a lot more pulling power than a file format to win people over.
The story of human exploration on Earth has been one of navigation and seafaring, and the idea that we could explore for the first time an extraterrestrial sea I think would be mind-blowing for most people
Oh come on, everyone knows that once you invent satellites the whole map is revealed!
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see how you can prove something conclusively in silico, you put in what you know and you get a distillation of it out. How can you discover* completely new physics when the computer can only start with a potentially incorrect/inaccurate theory and make deterministic calculations based on that input? I mean, you can't get out more than you put in, can you?
Caveat: I can easily accept that collisions of the same energy take place all the time in nature, even if a hole were somehow formed I have far more confidence in Hawking than someone who can scream "Think of the Children!!!" while keeping a straight face.
*There's no reason why you can't put in your theory and come out with a simulation that doesn't resemble how things happen in nature and so begin to disprove a theory. That being said, if CERN could have shown the existence of the Higgs boson using only simulations then they might not have bothered with the LHC.
or the end of a good one
It doesn't use a pen either.
Imagine: you're driving a car, which from your description has the consistency of a tank. Somehow you get the thing to 100mph and you encounter a few tons of concrete.
You stop (rather suddenly) but fortunately the next owner doesn't even have to repaint - a quick scrub will be enough to clean the mess you make inside!
Seriously though, at 100mph hitting anything much bigger than a field mouse and you're probably fucked, but at lower speeds that little extra time that crumple zones can make a big difference.
It's been a while since I did one so I'd better ask: do people still do full backups overnight?
Ironically the wheel is one of the few things nature didn't invent first. There are beasties with magnets in their heads, some with electrical generators in their muscles, sophisticated echolocation etc. etc.. A wheel and axle may be beyond Mother Nature's reach, barring some amazing fluke.
Still, reinventing the wheel isn't always such a bad thing; the first solution is rarely the optimal one.
For example, a small device that turns heat into power could power an IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL DEVICE using the bodies own heating/cooling systems? No more changing the battery for the pacemaker every
Depends... what are you going to use for the cold sink when the implant is surrounded by flesh that's all at 38 degrees?
Heat is Energy. In fact every bit of waste energy ends up as heat.
The OP point stands: we are directing energy at the Earth that wouldn't have otherwise got there.
While the question of whether this will be offset by a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions remains, we are still adding energy to the ecosystem.
Our Governing system is such a joke, we can afford to have Joke parties too.
In all seriousness though, we're talking about local information and local government here is a completely different beast.
Where's an Igor when you need one?!
I'm sorry, Jack but no amount of money will get Dennis Quaid inside me.
Fine, let them. Then let the rest of the world disregard US patents while Apple and Qualcomm et al. ignore Nokia's. Nokia still has the rest of the world and everyone can benefit from the billions of dollar's research it took to discover that people have more than one finger...
I imagine having experienced starvation or homelessness would cause the same effect hearing people complain about the doneness of their steak or the color of the paint in their house.
I would have thought the opposite: when you only rarely (sorry) have a steak, you want the ones you do have to be just right. You've had a lot of time to think about how you want it. I suppose the same goes for a house; once you get over how great it is you start to think "Hey, I'm going to make this great."
It's more credible than "why do his powers work at night & underground, but fail instantly under a red sun?"
And infinitely more credible than a guy who can lift something that large, while standing on a pavement without cracking it and sinking. Or how he gets that power at all by collecting ~3m^2 worth of sunlight.
Clearly these kids never heard of Sneakernet®.
And economics. Economics is not a science, and never will be!
On the other hand I never get an ODF. It might be neat, but when the guy with the cornered market doesn't support it you need something with a lot more pulling power than a file format to win people over.
When it comes to the old glow-in-the-dark I want there to be Science, real Science!
Sure, inspiration is a boon but there has to be some serious number crunching afterwards.
and that we earthlings will have to intervene at some point, correct?
The Earth is Really Big, and we are Really Small.
True, but we're really resource-hungry, and underwater mining really sucks.
Then I got very confused...
Nope, I play Civ IV on an old P4 in the corner.
Europa? But we're not allowed to attempt any landings there!
My assumption is that having a weaker heat sink will reduce power output but I can't confirm that.
I really ought to know the answer to this, but at least they'll have convection to help.
The story of human exploration on Earth has been one of navigation and seafaring, and the idea that we could explore for the first time an extraterrestrial sea I think would be mind-blowing for most people
Oh come on, everyone knows that once you invent satellites the whole map is revealed!
Because Macguyver without the Mullet isn't Macguyver at all!