"That's a great laugh. I'm from Canada too and our health care is worse than useless (at least with nothing we can pay for decent health care)."
Have you *lived* in the US? Have you had to deal *directly* with the US medical system? Both the US and Canadian systems are far from perfect, but having lived both systems, I will tell you that - warts & all - I vastly prefer the Canadian.
My story: CDN born & bred, moved to US for 1.5 yrs. Dealt with routine doc appts, emergency room care, specialists, and a child born with a medical condition that required two surgeries before he was a month old. Had medical insurance from a CDN firm that specialized in insuring expatriates. No worries there (although I discovered in my market research that the cost of medical insurance in the US goes a *long* way to covering the gap between US & CDN tax rates).
The Good: US - better availability of service. Specialists were available *now*, not weeks later. Ultrasounds etc available *now* and in our case often in the doctors office. Waits are much lower. And the quality of service I received was great (the main specialist we had to deal with was cold, but damn she knew her stuff - our doc here always still marvels at how good a job she did on our son)
The Good: Canada - no damn HMO's or similar. Not in the sense of "if you don't have insurance you're f*cked", but in the sense "HMO oversight adds serious stress." Look, I had insurance, it was *good* insurance. The people were great (Telfer Insurance out of Montreal if you care) and I never had any problem with them paying for things and saying "go ahead". But the fact is that I had to be in *constant* contact with them. Check with them before seeing a doc if possible, the docs office has to contact them before you enter your appointment, let them know the outcome. Every step you are in contact. Submit forms or have the doc submit the forms, doesn't matter, when you receive a statement in the mail there is always a pit in your gut about whether they will pay for it all or if you are out of pocket.
The whole insurance thing is not simple a consumer of time, a series of hoops to jump, it is a source of stress, a source of serious stress that you do not need to deal with when yourself or your loved on is in need.
I am home now in Canada. When I have to use the medical system I can concentrate on the important things. When I go through my records and happen upon an old statement from my time in the US, the pit in my stomach returns. No, I have no interest in returning that system, or in having the US system implemented here.
So stop bitching about the CDN system. Go out and become part of the solution. Dammit, even volunteering in the gift shop is helping out.
Sorry - had to rant. I lean right on a lot of issues, but after my stint in the US I feel *very* strongly about keeping the CDN medical system alive and well.
Imagine if you will that this thing actually penetrated the atmosphere. Okay - so it wouldn't reach ground, but there would likely be a fairly significant blast (this one is only about 1/3 to 2/3 the diameter of the Tunguska object, and that one made a hellish blast).
Imagine now that this penetrated the atmosphere over, say, North Korea, or the Sea of Japan, or somewhere over India/Pakistan. It is not much of a stretch to suggest that this might precipitate a limited nuclear exchange. Not a for-sure, but enough of a "could-be" that somebody's day could be ruined.
This is why it is important to look for (small) potentially hazardous objects - not because they will (directly) cause the extinction of the human race, but because they could precipitate an all-too-human conflict, just out of ignorance.
Note also that, as good a job as LINEAR and others do, there is a class of asteroids that are damn hard to see form the ground - the "Aten"-class asteroids, which orbit mostly inside earths orbit and thus come at us from out of the sun. These ones also need to be catalogued and a watchfull eye kept out for.
So, when people start to ask the value of asteroid hunting, bring up these ideas. Sadly, nuclear war is a much more real threat to most people compared to mass extinction.
It's because the information isn't coming at the rate you'd like, and you feel like you're wasting your time doing B.S. tasks (exams, papers, projects, etc.) which really mean nothing in a 'real world' context.
As opposed to the "real world" where you do bullshit tasks like writing reports, attending meetings, putting together proposals, and dealing with "clients" who haven't got a goddamn idea what they want but know that what you have isn't it.
No, the B.S. tasks are not what you have in the real world, but you better learn to deal with B.S. - it just takes a different form.
The thing here is that MOST will not be able to *image* the planets, but will only be able to detect the reflected light from them. There is a difference.
Lets look at MOST - each CCD pixel is 3" in size - not enough for seperating planet from star. Further, the light from the star goes through a Fabry lenslet array, which spreads the light over a large (>100) number of pixels. The point of this is to minimize photometry errors due to variations in pixel sensitivity across the CCD - basically the variations average out. Either way, imaging of the planet is right out.
But the high-precision photometry is what allows for planet detection. MOST will stare at a given star for up to about 7 weeks, and measure the light from the star on a regular basis during that time (the long time series and the precise optical characteristics allow for very good photometric measurements). One can then take that time sequence of light measurements and pass it through a Fourier Transform and look for periodicities (similar in many ways to what pulsar folks do, but pulsar searches have their own headaches to add to this simple picture).
Some of the periodicities will be due to stellar oscillations (what MOST is sent up to monitor), some might be due to any planets that are around the star. I don't know how they seperate the one from the other, but on the MOST website you reference there is a poster about this - have a look. The important part is that they will thus be able to directly detect the reflected light from the star and thus confirm, refute, or simply muddle previous claims about detected planets around nearby stars.
Bottom line: No imaging, but can detect reflected light from large planets due to high-precision photometry and long time series' of measurements.
Hope a) this helps and b) I haven't told too many lies. I am not a mamber of the MOST science team, but I am interested in the MOST mission for other reasons and have given you my best shot at my understanding of this utterly cool, yet low-cost, mission.
If you are interested in actually reading the papers, they can be found on the arXiv.org e-Print archive, and directly here and here. I would suggest the first article - the math doesn't look so hairy.
This ruling effectively throws the issue back into the laps of the politicians, who will undoubtedly be lobbied strongly by industry. Canadians who agree with this ruling need to lobby back. I recall the existance of a number of areas where medical progress has been held back in the US due to patents on higher life forms, but do not recall the details. Can anybody pass on pointers to these cases, so they can be used as arguments against a policy change by our elected officials?
Really. Have your XP box and set up a Linux box next to it.
This addresses several problems. First, you will always have a box that will do what you want. Second, you get to test out products/issues on your own time (and not in a panic because your 3-year old is throwing a tantrum because Tonka Raceway isn't working). Third, you can showcase Linux simply by using it, and your kids *will* be curious. Fourth, you have a second machine that can do at least *some* stuff so that you will (hopefully) lessen the squabbles over whose turn it is to use the computer. This last point also eases the transition - the older kids will move to the Linux box at least some of the time, and the 3 year-old will grow up knowing that Linux exists.
Finally, having you work on the Linux box as the kids play allows you to monitor them (without being there *to* monitor them), and also may allow for some bonding as they gently inquire why you are swearing at the Linux box:^)
"I guess there's a certain amount of tolerance for going to the bathroom. But if you formalize it and you create a device that skips certain second increments, you've got that only for one reason, unless you go to the bathroom for 30 seconds."
The remote control for my t.v. allows me to set a timer in 30s increments. I can then flick to whatever channels I want, and when the timer hits zero I am sent back to the original channel. The point? My t.v. itself has become the instrument of my so-called theft - no PVR or VCR is needed. It's a feaure I rarely use, but I think I'll use it more, just for the petty feeling I'll get that I'm pissing off t.v. execs
As a radio astronomer, I worry whenever I see stories about wireless communications, especially broadband. Is there going to be room for us in the future? Astronomers measure signals having strengths on theorder of 10**-26 W/m**2/Hz, and we need large bandwidths to get these signals, even with cooled receiver systems. Even a small amount of leakage from adjacent bands can kill our signals (We've already had problems with Russian GPS satellites, and IRIDIUM satellite signals).
The problem is made worse by the fact that spectral lines from many atoms and molecules can only be found in the radio frequencies (the whole range, but it gets very congested up in the mm to sub-mm wavelengths), and thus we either have a clear frequency band, or we lose the science. And much of the science can only be reached at these frequencies.
So, the question really is - how much does astronomy mean to you? Are you willing to forgo theknowledge and wonder that is astronomy (as well as the technological benefits that flow from people trying to push the envelope in a different direction than industry) for the sake of a faster connection, or a funkier cell-phone (or so the engineers can get away with a sloppy implementation to meet budget and time constraints)?
Slashdot Mirror
"That's a great laugh. I'm from Canada too and our health care is worse than useless (at least with nothing we can pay for decent health care)."
Have you *lived* in the US? Have you had to deal *directly* with the US medical system? Both the US and Canadian systems are far from perfect, but having lived both systems, I will tell you that - warts & all - I vastly prefer the Canadian.
My story: CDN born & bred, moved to US for 1.5 yrs. Dealt with routine doc appts, emergency room care, specialists, and a child born with a medical condition that required two surgeries before he was a month old. Had medical insurance from a CDN firm that specialized in insuring expatriates. No worries there (although I discovered in my market research that the cost of medical insurance in the US goes a *long* way to covering the gap between US & CDN tax rates).
The Good: US - better availability of service. Specialists were available *now*, not weeks later. Ultrasounds etc available *now* and in our case often in the doctors office. Waits are much lower. And the quality of service I received was great (the main specialist we had to deal with was cold, but damn she knew her stuff - our doc here always still marvels at how good a job she did on our son)
The Good: Canada - no damn HMO's or similar. Not in the sense of "if you don't have insurance you're f*cked", but in the sense "HMO oversight adds serious stress." Look, I had insurance, it was *good* insurance. The people were great (Telfer Insurance out of Montreal if you care) and I never had any problem with them paying for things and saying "go ahead". But the fact is that I had to be in *constant* contact with them. Check with them before seeing a doc if possible, the docs office has to contact them before you enter your appointment, let them know the outcome. Every step you are in contact. Submit forms or have the doc submit the forms, doesn't matter, when you receive a statement in the mail there is always a pit in your gut about whether they will pay for it all or if you are out of pocket.
The whole insurance thing is not simple a consumer of time, a series of hoops to jump, it is a source of stress, a source of serious stress that you do not need to deal with when yourself or your loved on is in need.
I am home now in Canada. When I have to use the medical system I can concentrate on the important things. When I go through my records and happen upon an old statement from my time in the US, the pit in my stomach returns. No, I have no interest in returning that system, or in having the US system implemented here.
So stop bitching about the CDN system. Go out and become part of the solution. Dammit, even volunteering in the gift shop is helping out.
Sorry - had to rant. I lean right on a lot of issues, but after my stint in the US I feel *very* strongly about keeping the CDN medical system alive and well.
Imagine if you will that this thing actually penetrated the atmosphere. Okay - so it wouldn't reach ground, but there would likely be a fairly significant blast (this one is only about 1/3 to 2/3 the diameter of the Tunguska object, and that one made a hellish blast).
Imagine now that this penetrated the atmosphere over, say, North Korea, or the Sea of Japan, or somewhere over India/Pakistan. It is not much of a stretch to suggest that this might precipitate a limited nuclear exchange. Not a for-sure, but enough of a "could-be" that somebody's day could be ruined.
This is why it is important to look for (small) potentially hazardous objects - not because they will (directly) cause the extinction of the human race, but because they could precipitate an all-too-human conflict, just out of ignorance.
Note also that, as good a job as LINEAR and others do, there is a class of asteroids that are damn hard to see form the ground - the "Aten"-class asteroids, which orbit mostly inside earths orbit and thus come at us from out of the sun. These ones also need to be catalogued and a watchfull eye kept out for.
So, when people start to ask the value of asteroid hunting, bring up these ideas. Sadly, nuclear war is a much more real threat to most people compared to mass extinction.
It's because the information isn't coming at the rate you'd like, and you feel like you're wasting your time doing B.S. tasks (exams, papers, projects, etc.) which really mean nothing in a 'real world' context.
As opposed to the "real world" where you do bullshit tasks like writing reports, attending meetings, putting together proposals, and dealing with "clients" who haven't got a goddamn idea what they want but know that what you have isn't it.
No, the B.S. tasks are not what you have in the real world, but you better learn to deal with B.S. - it just takes a different form.
The thing here is that MOST will not be able to *image* the planets, but will only be able to detect the reflected light from them. There is a difference.
Lets look at MOST - each CCD pixel is 3" in size - not enough for seperating planet from star. Further, the light from the star goes through a Fabry lenslet array, which spreads the light over a large (>100) number of pixels. The point of this is to minimize photometry errors due to variations in pixel sensitivity across the CCD - basically the variations average out. Either way, imaging of the planet is right out.
But the high-precision photometry is what allows for planet detection. MOST will stare at a given star for up to about 7 weeks, and measure the light from the star on a regular basis during that time (the long time series and the precise optical characteristics allow for very good photometric measurements). One can then take that time sequence of light measurements and pass it through a Fourier Transform and look for periodicities (similar in many ways to what pulsar folks do, but pulsar searches have their own headaches to add to this simple picture).
Some of the periodicities will be due to stellar oscillations (what MOST is sent up to monitor), some might be due to any planets that are around the star. I don't know how they seperate the one from the other, but on the MOST website you reference there is a poster about this - have a look. The important part is that they will thus be able to directly detect the reflected light from the star and thus confirm, refute, or simply muddle previous claims about detected planets around nearby stars.
Bottom line: No imaging, but can detect reflected light from large planets due to high-precision photometry and long time series' of measurements.
Hope a) this helps and b) I haven't told too many lies. I am not a mamber of the MOST science team, but I am interested in the MOST mission for other reasons and have given you my best shot at my understanding of this utterly cool, yet low-cost, mission.
If you are interested in actually reading the papers, they can be found on the arXiv.org e-Print archive, and directly here and here. I would suggest the first article - the math doesn't look so hairy.
This ruling effectively throws the issue back into the laps of the politicians, who will undoubtedly be lobbied strongly by industry. Canadians who agree with this ruling need to lobby back. I recall the existance of a number of areas where medical progress has been held back in the US due to patents on higher life forms, but do not recall the details. Can anybody pass on pointers to these cases, so they can be used as arguments against a policy change by our elected officials?
Really. Have your XP box and set up a Linux box next to it.
:^)
This addresses several problems. First, you will always have a box that will do what you want. Second, you get to test out products/issues on your own time (and not in a panic because your 3-year old is throwing a tantrum because Tonka Raceway isn't working). Third, you can showcase Linux simply by using it, and your kids *will* be curious. Fourth, you have a second machine that can do at least *some* stuff so that you will (hopefully) lessen the squabbles over whose turn it is to use the computer. This last point also eases the transition - the older kids will move to the Linux box at least some of the time, and the 3 year-old will grow up knowing that Linux exists.
Finally, having you work on the Linux box as the kids play allows you to monitor them (without being there *to* monitor them), and also may allow for some bonding as they gently inquire why you are swearing at the Linux box
Sayeth the bozo:
"I guess there's a certain amount of tolerance for going to the bathroom. But if you formalize it and you create a device that skips certain second increments, you've got that only for one reason, unless you go to the bathroom for 30 seconds."
The remote control for my t.v. allows me to set a timer in 30s increments. I can then flick to whatever channels I want, and when the timer hits zero I am sent back to the original channel. The point? My t.v. itself has become the instrument of my so-called theft - no PVR or VCR is needed. It's a feaure I rarely use, but I think I'll use it more, just for the petty feeling I'll get that I'm pissing off t.v. execs
As a radio astronomer, I worry whenever I see stories about wireless communications, especially broadband. Is there going to be room for us in the future? Astronomers measure signals having strengths on theorder of 10**-26 W/m**2/Hz, and we need large bandwidths to get these signals, even with cooled receiver systems. Even a small amount of leakage from adjacent bands can kill our signals (We've already had problems with Russian GPS satellites, and IRIDIUM satellite signals).
The problem is made worse by the fact that spectral lines from many atoms and molecules can only be found in the radio frequencies (the whole range, but it gets very congested up in the mm to sub-mm wavelengths), and thus we either have a clear frequency band, or we lose the science. And much of the science can only be reached at these frequencies.
So, the question really is - how much does astronomy mean to you? Are you willing to forgo theknowledge and wonder that is astronomy (as well as the technological benefits that flow from people trying to push the envelope in a different direction than industry) for the sake of a faster connection, or a funkier cell-phone (or so the engineers can get away with a sloppy implementation to meet budget and time constraints)?