Maybe I'm missing something... isn't this less "interesting" than wandering? Seems the mini family history supports the notion that IQ is genetic, at least. But as to what is measured, which seems to be the point of the post, there are no data, even anecdotal. Does your sister excel at spatial as well as verbal skills, etc? Do you share a subset of these skills? These would be observations that might at least lead somewhere. Like I admitted, maybe I'm missing something.
My $0.02: From an evolutionary point of view, most skills measured on an IQ exam are probably poorly related to what has been selected over the generations. A beautifully logical argument is rarely as persuasive as a moving rhetorical appeal. Human interactions are very complicated and resistant to genetic cheating (like male display characteristics). Maybe IQ measures the intellectual "horsepower" but what counts (in life, instead of the test) is how much of this power can be delivered to the wheels. 'Course a metaphor doesn't really explain anything...
"...now they will even talk to you" Emphasis added.
(At the risk of wandering off-topic...) A German expression for a tune you can't get out of your head translates as "ear worm". It makes a disgusting combination with the English expression "hook". Frankly, with the tween-dominated "pop" tunes, I'd say we've a worm pandemic for some time now.
"...wind turbine farm off the coast of Martha's Vineyard/Nantucket Island has been tied up in litigation"
It's strange that the sight of sails on boats moving laterally is ok and actually thought attractive by most people, but the sight of sails rotating disturbs some people.
All this talk about R&D and struggling companies, gotta mention IBM. After doing Nobel-prize winning work, they trimmed research budgets in the early 1990's when they looked to be on their corporate deathbed. Now they are again doing the sort of fundamental work -slowing light! - that will lay the foundation for optical computers. This is real research, not figuring out how to save $2.37 on a commodity computer.
By this logic, Intel is the inevitable winner because advantages gained from their lead in desktop CPUs usually can benefit their embedded CPUs but the other companies rarely can apply their embedded CPU advantages to their desktop CPUs. In short, the lessons always trickle down.
It seemed when the PowerPC chips were first introduced that their low power would enable efficient multiple processors, but this advantage has disappeared since the G5 is hot. This history seems to support your argument.
Excellent point, I hadn't thought about atmospheric absorption (and emission). Your link's deep field image, since it is very narrow angle, would presumably be also difficult for a ground-based telescope because its aim is more restricted than a space-based telescope.
The main advantage of space for a telescope was avoiding atmospheric distortion. Now it is possible to adjust the mirrors to compensate for atmospheric distortion (adapive optics), enabling large and clear telescopes on the ground (Earth). Here's an explanation of how a guide star is used to "eliminate twinkling". In short, orbital telescopes may be obsolete once these technologies are perfected.
You are persuasive but biology is also involved. The enzymes that detoxify alcohol vary considerably among humans, which could contribute to the behavioural differences (for example).
on a treadmill while working. His paper found that: Humans expend energy through purposeful exercise and through changes in posture and movement that are associated with the routines of daily life [called nonexercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT)]....If obese individuals adopted the NEAT-enhanced behaviors of their lean counterparts, they might expend an additional 350 calories (kcal) per day.
As reported in the mainstream press (including NPR), he finds he can type etc walking 0.7 mph - a very slow stroll. Here's a lay summary with a picture of the author on his treadmill. This addresses the key problem with recommending excersize - many people (think they) have no time.
...the interface from Minority Report. The protagonist (aka Tom Cruise) pointed at things on the screen and waved them to where he wanted them to go. Here's a web page describing the interface. Tired of "pointing and clicking"? Then move beyond GUI to a whole-body user interface WBUI (da-buoy). Some videogames already interpret users' motions (Sony?). Why can't this be adapted to more mundane tasks? Add a voice recognition function for new text or commands. How cool would that be?
23. Gene - genome search Yes, including the sex chromosomes!! (whew, almost forgot it was/.) Seriously, I wonder how google would compare with BLAST, the standard tool of gene hunters.
Even when IBM was nearly "dead", in the early 90's, they still did some of the best science around. They moved atoms around to make "IBM" and scored the cover of Science (or Nature?), the top pure science journals. Ever see Microsoft make a "MS" of it? IBM was, and remains (albeit slightly diminished), a truly innovative company testing the edges of fundamental reality. Far from dead, the IBM pulse was always palpable to those who followed reality instead of hype. Worst case for the early 90's was a break up at solid value for the stockholders, which Gerstner avoided to his eternal credit because it was worth more as a whole enterprise.
Excuses, explanations, or what? 1.Long time to learn precise trajectory of comet vs. few minutes with missile. Outweighed by much shorter distance. 2.One comet (and big at that) vs. multiple warheads and fake warheads x10. But many failed tests had no decoys or only easily distinguished decoys. 3.Comet is in a microgravity enviroment, bullet could stop and wait for comet vs. warheads - where can you "wait" for warhead? - you would need constant thrust to maintain position. Huh? The mass bullet should "stop and wait"? Maybe this grasp of physics is why the 'scientists' at 'Defense' can't hit the mark. 4.You miss the comet NASA looks bad for a few weeks. vs. you miss the missile - some city looks bad forever. And how exactly does this explain the failures?
Once you've digested the NYT article, have a look at the original research article published in the journal Science. The original paper is linked from the PubMed abstract, which is linked from this (brief) discussion discussion on a slashsite called MedDot.org.
...from what I understand, a helicopter can only safely land if it was moving forward at the time the engine died
A helicopter must be at a certain height (above the ground) in order to start autorotation and land safely. So says my expert source (aka wife). Maybe moving forward helps, I don't know.
Windows XP is a more finished product than Linux (specifically, Mandrake & Red Hat)
You should try Fedora. At work, I use with a recent Dell with XP pro maintained by a IT staff. At home, I use a $400 eMachines with Fedora Core 2, Open Office etc installed and maintained by me, no sweat. This linux distro opens CDs, DVDs, and USB memory sticks without fiddling. The XPP at work crashes with the same memory stick (I have to reboot to copy files). Linux is snappier on the Celeron than XPP is on the P4. I had no complaints with RedHat but switched to Fedora to keep updated.
Properly implemented (admittedly a big 'if'), this could save energy because the energy otherwise spent in damping the suspension can be saved. That's why speed bumps work - quite a bit of your forward momentum is redirected upward. 'Course the fact that it's also very uncomfortable means you also slow down in anticipation.
"Power Hungery Vehiculars" = obligatory mispelling or the company cable cars for a middle-European utility?
You're right, Contact is a great movie! They also ignored the classic Forbidden Planet! Scientists, maybe, but not fans of these thoughtful, thought-provoking, and philosophical movies.
Slashdot Mirror
He should'a started teaching Science in his religion class. Inappropriate, you say? He's not qualified, you say? Exactly the point.
Maybe I'm missing something... isn't this less "interesting" than wandering? Seems the mini family history supports the notion that IQ is genetic, at least. But as to what is measured, which seems to be the point of the post, there are no data, even anecdotal. Does your sister excel at spatial as well as verbal skills, etc? Do you share a subset of these skills? These would be observations that might at least lead somewhere. Like I admitted, maybe I'm missing something.
My $0.02: From an evolutionary point of view, most skills measured on an IQ exam are probably poorly related to what has been selected over the generations. A beautifully logical argument is rarely as persuasive as a moving rhetorical appeal. Human interactions are very complicated and resistant to genetic cheating (like male display characteristics). Maybe IQ measures the intellectual "horsepower" but what counts (in life, instead of the test) is how much of this power can be delivered to the wheels. 'Course a metaphor doesn't really explain anything...
"...now they will even talk to you" Emphasis added.
(At the risk of wandering off-topic...) A German expression for a tune you can't get out of your head translates as "ear worm". It makes a disgusting combination with the English expression "hook". Frankly, with the tween-dominated "pop" tunes, I'd say we've a worm pandemic for some time now.
It's strange that the sight of sails on boats moving laterally is ok and actually thought attractive by most people, but the sight of sails rotating disturbs some people.
All this talk about R&D and struggling companies, gotta mention IBM. After doing Nobel-prize winning work, they trimmed research budgets in the early 1990's when they looked to be on their corporate deathbed. Now they are again doing the sort of fundamental work - slowing light! - that will lay the foundation for optical computers. This is real research, not figuring out how to save $2.37 on a commodity computer.
For an indie production, try MedDot: http://www.genexpression.com/MedDot/Podcast/MedDot Pod.html Each podcast introduces 4 science papers and provides some of the details. It might be too detailed for dabblers. The parent site is slash-based http://www.meddot.org/
Thinner, no, but any chance a brand-new color iPod could be upgraded to video? The screen resolutions and capacities are similar.
"you're in charge".
A for Apple (integrator, still)
I for Intel (duh, bye IBM)
M for Microsloth (Office, bye Motorola)
We hardly knew ye. So much for think different.
It seemed when the PowerPC chips were first introduced that their low power would enable efficient multiple processors, but this advantage has disappeared since the G5 is hot. This history seems to support your argument.
Excellent point, I hadn't thought about atmospheric absorption (and emission). Your link's deep field image, since it is very narrow angle, would presumably be also difficult for a ground-based telescope because its aim is more restricted than a space-based telescope.
The main advantage of space for a telescope was avoiding atmospheric distortion. Now it is possible to adjust the mirrors to compensate for atmospheric distortion (adapive optics), enabling large and clear telescopes on the ground (Earth). Here's an explanation of how a guide star is used to "eliminate twinkling". In short, orbital telescopes may be obsolete once these technologies are perfected.
You are persuasive but biology is also involved. The enzymes that detoxify alcohol vary considerably among humans, which could contribute to the behavioural differences (for example).
on a treadmill while working. His paper found that: Humans expend energy through purposeful exercise and through changes in posture and movement that are associated with the routines of daily life [called nonexercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT)]. ...If obese individuals adopted the NEAT-enhanced behaviors of their lean counterparts, they might expend an additional 350 calories (kcal) per day.
As reported in the mainstream press (including NPR), he finds he can type etc walking 0.7 mph - a very slow stroll. Here's a lay summary with a picture of the author on his treadmill. This addresses the key problem with recommending excersize - many people (think they) have no time.
Repeat & Duplicate!
...the interface from Minority Report. The protagonist (aka Tom Cruise) pointed at things on the screen and waved them to where he wanted them to go. Here's a web page describing the interface.
Tired of "pointing and clicking"? Then move beyond GUI to a whole-body user interface WBUI (da-buoy). Some videogames already interpret users' motions (Sony?). Why can't this be adapted to more mundane tasks? Add a voice recognition function for new text or commands. How cool would that be?
23. Gene - genome search /.)
Yes, including the sex chromosomes!! (whew, almost forgot it was
Seriously, I wonder how google would compare with BLAST, the standard tool of gene hunters.
Even when IBM was nearly "dead", in the early 90's, they still did some of the best science around. They moved atoms around to make "IBM" and scored the cover of Science (or Nature?), the top pure science journals. Ever see Microsoft make a "MS" of it? IBM was, and remains (albeit slightly diminished), a truly innovative company testing the edges of fundamental reality.
Far from dead, the IBM pulse was always palpable to those who followed reality instead of hype. Worst case for the early 90's was a break up at solid value for the stockholders, which Gerstner avoided to his eternal credit because it was worth more as a whole enterprise.
Buy it today! MacOSX, a beautiful user interface on a solid, open source unix/darwin base. To have a chance, "Winks" should precede "oh SeX".
Excuses, explanations, or what?
1.Long time to learn precise trajectory of comet vs. few minutes with missile.
Outweighed by much shorter distance.
2.One comet (and big at that) vs. multiple warheads and fake warheads x10.
But many failed tests had no decoys or only easily distinguished decoys.
3.Comet is in a microgravity enviroment, bullet could stop and wait for comet vs. warheads - where can you "wait" for warhead? - you would need constant thrust to maintain position.
Huh? The mass bullet should "stop and wait"? Maybe this grasp of physics is why the 'scientists' at 'Defense' can't hit the mark.
4.You miss the comet NASA looks bad for a few weeks. vs. you miss the missile - some city looks bad forever.
And how exactly does this explain the failures?
...from what I understand, a helicopter can only safely land if it was moving forward at the time the engine died
A helicopter must be at a certain height (above the ground) in order to start autorotation and land safely. So says my expert source (aka wife). Maybe moving forward helps, I don't know.
You should try Fedora. At work, I use with a recent Dell with XP pro maintained by a IT staff. At home, I use a $400 eMachines with Fedora Core 2, Open Office etc installed and maintained by me, no sweat. This linux distro opens CDs, DVDs, and USB memory sticks without fiddling. The XPP at work crashes with the same memory stick (I have to reboot to copy files). Linux is snappier on the Celeron than XPP is on the P4. I had no complaints with RedHat but switched to Fedora to keep updated.
Obligatory: YMMV-BIWAS (but it's worth a shot)
Properly implemented (admittedly a big 'if'), this could save energy because the energy otherwise spent in damping the suspension can be saved. That's why speed bumps work - quite a bit of your forward momentum is redirected upward. 'Course the fact that it's also very uncomfortable means you also slow down in anticipation.
"Power Hungery Vehiculars" = obligatory mispelling or the company cable cars for a middle-European utility?
You're right, Contact is a great movie! They also ignored the classic Forbidden Planet! Scientists, maybe, but not fans of these thoughtful, thought-provoking, and philosophical movies.