Why do you figure that the earth will not be inhabitable by humans? Consider that before the last major ice-age, the world was much warmer than it is now....
Depth of focus caused by the eye lens isn't really used by the brain to detect distance actually. The most significant factors that contribute to sense of depth for near objects are the difference between left and right eye views and how convergent the eyes must be to look at an object (and the latter generally less so than the former), For objects beyond a few meters away, parallax motion and relative size to objects which appear near it and which have a known size are the primary cues.
3D would mean that one's real-space position would affect exactly what they see. It would also mean that one wouldn't have to wear glasses to perceive the depth. You would perceive different images in each eye, producing the appearance of depth, because your eyes are in different locations in space instead of because specific different images are being forced into them.
... invented to mock the notion of teaching intelligent design in public schools? (Yeah, I know some people hate it when a person starts a sentence in the subject and finishes it in the body, but Slashdot doesn't like posts that don't put something in the subject line).
Anyways... I'm not suggesting that all religions aren't invented by man at some point, but at the very least, most such religions can at least claim that the people who follow them *genuinely* believe what they do, and cannot point to any specific historical person and say that *that* person invented the religion (some can... but most, at least of those that are actually recognized as religions today, cannot).
And heck, the guy who even invented Pastafarianism is still alive today.... The "Flying Spaghetti Monster" was first described in a satirical open letter written by a specific individual, Bobby Henderson, to protest the Kansas State Board of Education proposal to permit teaching intelligent design in 2005. It's demonstrably a friggen joke religion, with extremely clearly documented origins, and there's no rational reason to consider it equivalent to religions for which no historical record exists which categorically shows that they were made up by somebody (which, I think, would make the religion be classified as a cult moreso than religion anyways, and so would not have all of the same protections anyways).
I'd suggest that maybe in a thousand years or so when its origins have been lost in antiquity it might somehow get elevated to the level of a real religion, but I don't even know if that's likely given the popularity of literacy today unless a lot of our written records today also get destroyed in the interim.
In the meantime... I think everybody gets the point. ID isn't appropriate for teaching in public schools... can people who are claiming to believe this made-up thing now *please* just give it a rest?
I'm probably just going to get modded down as some sort of troll who's intolerant of some particular religion, but I'm not.... I'm just intolerant of something claiming to be a religion when it's historically verifiable that it's not. If somebody can erase all record of what Bobby Henderson did 8 years ago last June, then maybe... but until then. No... just... no.
Most modern dentist drills do not utilize gears, since at the speeds that dentist drills must spin, utilizing gears would induce far too much heat from friction, requiring that they be made much larger (and more massive) to dissipate the heat more effectively, and they would probably also be extremely vulnerable to seizing up and could be unreliable. For something that is essentially used as a surgeon's tool, both of these issues would be problematic, but completely avoided by a dental drill's design.
In fact, modern dentist drills are driven by a difference in pressure inside of the drill which spins an internal turbine that in turn is *directly* connected to the shaft of the drill, with absolutely no intermediate parts between them so that no energy gets lost. With no components spinning at lower speeds to drive the drill shaft, what you are describing would simply not occur with a dentist drill, although I do not dismiss that it may happen with other types.
He apparently did... although I suppose that one is welcome to disagree.
FTA:
in the absence of a radical alteration in patterns of human behaviour, a good deal of energy from 3He mining is unlikely to go towards a great life-enhancing project. It is likely to be used for comparatively trivial purposes such as advertising, waste and the enhancement of prestige.
Modern dentists use air turbine drills driven by compressed air. These drills can reach speeds of over 500,000 rpm. Most modern drills commonly work at the 400,000 rpm range for "high speed" applications while the others operate at 40,000 rpm for "slow speed" applications.
Okay, not specifically 600,000 rpm, but still pretty darn close, relatively speaking.
There's simply no immediate financial incentive to preventing disastrous climate change and rather large financial implications to actively trying to do something about it for the organizations with the ability to do so... such as, say, creating a firm ban on the internal combustion engine, and legislating that absolutely *NO* new vehicles made after this year can use gasoline. The economic implications of such a regulation would be enormous, probably cause total financial ruin for no small number of people, and it's not the least bit surprising that measures such as that, which might actually make some kind of difference are not being taken.
Perhaps steering column is the wrong word then... but I didn't know what else to call it. It's not actually on the steering wheel itself, but it's not any harder for me to reach while driving than the turning signals or the windshield wiper controls, my hand doesn't even need to fully be removed from the wheel to press it. I can reach it with my right index finger easily while the base of my palm still rests on the outside of the steering wheel and can still steer two-handed.
Using your hands to drive a stick shift is part of the normal operation of that type of vehicle, which, if read more carefully what I had actually wrote above, would not be affected.
They should probably generalize such prohibition to make it illegal while driving to do *ANYTHING* else which requires the use of either hand, foot, or requires a person to not maintain visual focus on the traffic and road conditions outside of the car for any period longer than perhaps a second or so, unless such activity is part of the normal and safe operation of the vehicle.
I realize that this technically all falls under the prohibition of driving while distracted, but it seems to me like people need something a little more concrete... so why not just explicitly tell
them that they aren't allowed to do anything else while driving?
Although I guess that'd also make it illegal to do things like drink coffee while driving, or eat anything... which would make drive-thru's illegal.
Not exactly a huge price to pay, however.... if it meant that people would actually pay more attention to what they were doing while driving.
actually, I prefer getting voice calls while driving to text messages, because I can't respond to the latter while driving, while my car has bluetooth, so I can answer an incoming call effectively hands-free with just a single button press, which is located on the steering column.
How, generally speaking, would the sender necessarily know that the recipient is driving at the time? I'm not saying it can't happen, but it would seem to me to be quite far removed from the general rule.
I don't try to speed like my agenda is somehow more urgent than everyone else's on the road, who are equally legally obligated to obey the law, and *I'M* the self-centered wanker?
Depends on your insurance, I guess... with comprehensive, you'll pay a deductible for hit and runs, but that will get refunded if they ever catch the person (which I have even seen happen when somebody I know was a victim of a hit and run), I've also always received complementary usage of a vehicle provided for by the garage while my car is being repaired, so I don't even end up without a car for any period (but to be fair, the vehicles they provide are pretty much jalopies compared to my own).
I suspect I've been modded up because it's not delusional, as you seem to believe. It's a trivial matter to notice and remember somebody's license plate if they try to speed away after a collision, and that will get them into even more trouble.
Not where I live. Unless the vehicle in front is actually backing up, being rear-ended is always taken to mean that the rear driver was following too closely.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do you figure that the earth will not be inhabitable by humans? Consider that before the last major ice-age, the world was much warmer than it is now....
Even drifting aimlessly in space, it would eventually get caught by the gravity of another object... and would still end up inside of a star.
Nonetheless, rendering this rock a lifeless ice-cube hovering near temperature of only a couple of kelvin pretty much counts as "being destroyed" too.
Depth of focus caused by the eye lens isn't really used by the brain to detect distance actually. The most significant factors that contribute to sense of depth for near objects are the difference between left and right eye views and how convergent the eyes must be to look at an object (and the latter generally less so than the former), For objects beyond a few meters away, parallax motion and relative size to objects which appear near it and which have a known size are the primary cues.
Stereovision.
There is a world of difference.
3D would mean that one's real-space position would affect exactly what they see. It would also mean that one wouldn't have to wear glasses to perceive the depth. You would perceive different images in each eye, producing the appearance of depth, because your eyes are in different locations in space instead of because specific different images are being forced into them.
Anyways... I'm not suggesting that all religions aren't invented by man at some point, but at the very least, most such religions can at least claim that the people who follow them *genuinely* believe what they do, and cannot point to any specific historical person and say that *that* person invented the religion (some can... but most, at least of those that are actually recognized as religions today, cannot).
And heck, the guy who even invented Pastafarianism is still alive today.... The "Flying Spaghetti Monster" was first described in a satirical open letter written by a specific individual, Bobby Henderson, to protest the Kansas State Board of Education proposal to permit teaching intelligent design in 2005. It's demonstrably a friggen joke religion, with extremely clearly documented origins, and there's no rational reason to consider it equivalent to religions for which no historical record exists which categorically shows that they were made up by somebody (which, I think, would make the religion be classified as a cult moreso than religion anyways, and so would not have all of the same protections anyways).
I'd suggest that maybe in a thousand years or so when its origins have been lost in antiquity it might somehow get elevated to the level of a real religion, but I don't even know if that's likely given the popularity of literacy today unless a lot of our written records today also get destroyed in the interim.
In the meantime... I think everybody gets the point. ID isn't appropriate for teaching in public schools... can people who are claiming to believe this made-up thing now *please* just give it a rest?
I'm probably just going to get modded down as some sort of troll who's intolerant of some particular religion, but I'm not.... I'm just intolerant of something claiming to be a religion when it's historically verifiable that it's not. If somebody can erase all record of what Bobby Henderson did 8 years ago last June, then maybe... but until then. No... just... no.
Most modern dentist drills do not utilize gears, since at the speeds that dentist drills must spin, utilizing gears would induce far too much heat from friction, requiring that they be made much larger (and more massive) to dissipate the heat more effectively, and they would probably also be extremely vulnerable to seizing up and could be unreliable. For something that is essentially used as a surgeon's tool, both of these issues would be problematic, but completely avoided by a dental drill's design.
In fact, modern dentist drills are driven by a difference in pressure inside of the drill which spins an internal turbine that in turn is *directly* connected to the shaft of the drill, with absolutely no intermediate parts between them so that no energy gets lost. With no components spinning at lower speeds to drive the drill shaft, what you are describing would simply not occur with a dentist drill, although I do not dismiss that it may happen with other types.
If all that's left of this rock is a charred ball of ash held together by gravity,. it's destroyed. And yes, there is a 100% chance of that.
He apparently did... although I suppose that one is welcome to disagree.
FTA:
Okay, not specifically 600,000 rpm, but still pretty darn close, relatively speaking.
Yes actually, they do. Look it up.
10khz is well within the normal hearing range for most human beings.
when there's a small number of them in one area, yes.
And the range on the signal sent by such vehicles is unlikely to be large enough that you'd be looking at more than a few others at the same time.
It's money.
There's simply no immediate financial incentive to preventing disastrous climate change and rather large financial implications to actively trying to do something about it for the organizations with the ability to do so... such as, say, creating a firm ban on the internal combustion engine, and legislating that absolutely *NO* new vehicles made after this year can use gasoline. The economic implications of such a regulation would be enormous, probably cause total financial ruin for no small number of people, and it's not the least bit surprising that measures such as that, which might actually make some kind of difference are not being taken.
Perhaps steering column is the wrong word then... but I didn't know what else to call it. It's not actually on the steering wheel itself, but it's not any harder for me to reach while driving than the turning signals or the windshield wiper controls, my hand doesn't even need to fully be removed from the wheel to press it. I can reach it with my right index finger easily while the base of my palm still rests on the outside of the steering wheel and can still steer two-handed.
When your hands barely leave the steering wheel no more than they would to activate a turning signal, I don't see the problem.
Using your hands to drive a stick shift is part of the normal operation of that type of vehicle, which, if read more carefully what I had actually wrote above, would not be affected.
They should probably generalize such prohibition to make it illegal while driving to do *ANYTHING* else which requires the use of either hand, foot, or requires a person to not maintain visual focus on the traffic and road conditions outside of the car for any period longer than perhaps a second or so, unless such activity is part of the normal and safe operation of the vehicle.
I realize that this technically all falls under the prohibition of driving while distracted, but it seems to me like people need something a little more concrete... so why not just explicitly tell them that they aren't allowed to do anything else while driving?
Although I guess that'd also make it illegal to do things like drink coffee while driving, or eat anything... which would make drive-thru's illegal.
Not exactly a huge price to pay, however.... if it meant that people would actually pay more attention to what they were doing while driving.
actually, I prefer getting voice calls while driving to text messages, because I can't respond to the latter while driving, while my car has bluetooth, so I can answer an incoming call effectively hands-free with just a single button press, which is located on the steering column.
How, generally speaking, would the sender necessarily know that the recipient is driving at the time? I'm not saying it can't happen, but it would seem to me to be quite far removed from the general rule.
I don't try to speed like my agenda is somehow more urgent than everyone else's on the road, who are equally legally obligated to obey the law, and *I'M* the self-centered wanker?
"Shit" results are not commensurate with my own experience, nor anyone else that I personally know.
Depends on your insurance, I guess... with comprehensive, you'll pay a deductible for hit and runs, but that will get refunded if they ever catch the person (which I have even seen happen when somebody I know was a victim of a hit and run), I've also always received complementary usage of a vehicle provided for by the garage while my car is being repaired, so I don't even end up without a car for any period (but to be fair, the vehicles they provide are pretty much jalopies compared to my own).
I suspect I've been modded up because it's not delusional, as you seem to believe. It's a trivial matter to notice and remember somebody's license plate if they try to speed away after a collision, and that will get them into even more trouble.
Not where I live. Unless the vehicle in front is actually backing up, being rear-ended is always taken to mean that the rear driver was following too closely.
Ah yes... the ancient tactic of insulting a person you disagree with to somehow discredit their position.
How quaint.