All cosmic velocities are measured relative to the frame of the microwave background.
The images of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) from the COBE satelite (amoung others) show that the CMB is doppler shifted in opposite directions (a dipole shift) on either side of the Earth. By defining a stationary observer as an observer for which there is no dipole shift, it is possibleto define a frame which all observers, at any point in spacetime, will define as stationary. Therefore all observers will measure the an object as having same speed relative to this frame.
Also there are penalty clauses in the contracts with the construction company. It is too damn expensive to pay off these contractors to wait around while you take another years worth of data. Or so stated my particles lecturer who works on Opal there.
The higgs field gives the particles inertial mass, not gravitational mass. The effects of gravity on this scale just aren't known at all, as measurements only go down to scales of ~1mm whereas these particles are 10^-12mm in "size" (which doesn't have much meaning in quantum mechanics).
The interaction of massive particles with the Higgs field is what gives particles inertial mass. The force of gravity i.e. weight of the particle is given by the particles interaction with whatever curved spacetime exists at that scale, which is unknown, as the effects of GR gravity below a scale of ~1mm hasn't been measured, and these particles are smaller than 10^-12 mm
Imagine what Northern Ireland would have been like if every Catholic who was pissed off with the Protestants and vice versa had a gun. A lot more people in Northern Ireland supported terrorism than actually carried it out.
Hands? Arsenic? Hypodermic syringe full of air? I could name a lot more and that last one is a pretty nasty way to go.
Oh, and I think the death penalty is a bad idea, because of the problems of appeal and the like. There's been a couple of cases here in England where people have been cleared after more than 15 years in prison, and in a few cases after being executed (before it was outlawed in the 60's). The consequences of miscarriages of justice are just to high for it to be useful by any moral state. (not that I'm saying England is a moral state)
All the pollution now comes from fewer places, which can fit much larger (more efficient) pollution controls.
If fusion power gets going soon (it should do, if the EC governments can find the 3 billion Euros to fund the ITER FEAT tokamak, which will produce about 0.5 GigaWatts, despite still being experimental)
These cars would put the necessary things in place to immediately reduce emissions when a cleaner power source comes online.
It would also reduce the dependence of car drivers on the political stability of the Middle East, and would prevent the fuel blockades that happened in Europe over the summer, as it's very hard to blockade a HT cable
It's not actually a linear relationship, I think it goes something like efficiancy = T(hot) - T(cold) / T(hot), although it's about 6 months since I did any classical thermodynamics.
An IC engine runs on (around) the Stirling cycle anyway. The Carnot cycle is the theoretical maximum of efficiency for a heat engine.
But UK employers are bound by Health and Safety law to provide adequate toilet facilities for employees. I'd say that providing the time to use them is part of those facilities.
But, the hypothetical quantum entanglement data transmission methods involve instananeous action at a distance, which does break special relativistic predictions. It's not yet known how to resolve this issue, but noone has managed to transfer data over such a link yet, so no experiments exist to show the way.
but I think entangled-particle (quantum) data transmission breaks light speed in terms of data transmission
This a very dificult question with no obvious answer at the moment, and there won't be one until someone comes up with a quantum theory that incorporates general relativity. Even if it is correct, you'd need a very large supply of entangled particles (one pair per bit minimum, i.e 1200 million per second if the other posts are correct).
This kind of thing is a bit far in future to say that latency is not an issue, barring massive breakthroughs.
This just isn't remotely true. The optoelectronics group here in Cambridge have produced polymer FETs at about 1nm, (i.e 0.001 micron), and there is also work going on here on single electron logic, with a benzene (with some sulphur) molecules as the gates between a traditional silicon source and drain, again this on the nanometre scale.
The micro electronics group are working on 0.5 nm single nanocrystals of silicon devices as well.
With a sudden surge in advertisements for American style accident litigation over the summer on British TV, the cost of insurance has risen rapidly here.
Genetic screening would allow insurers to keep their premiums lower, and provided that they make the screening results available to the applicant, it would allow the applicant to make alternative arrangements to insurance, such as investing an amount of money to pay for their medical care.
This isn't actually as bad as it sounds, as we do still have a free National Health Service here, so medical insurance isn't as important as say, in the States.
I'm sure the hype this decision will cause will cause some insurers not to take it up, and advertise this fact, just as some advertise "No medical required" at the moment.
Iodine is the right stuff to dope polymers (polyacetylene in the most basic case), to make them conducting. It gives them the conductivity of copper. Doping the same polymer in a different way gives it the same semiconductor properties as gallium arsenide.
In conjunction with the optoelectronics group here in Cambridge, some of the same people who got the Nobel prize are working in single molecule FETs (1nm scale). You can also spray the polymers through a modified inkjet printer and print 0.1 micron sized polymer integrated circuits and LEP LEDs (which is a fun acronym).
By a curious coincidence I had a one off lecture on this subject yesterday, about 4 hours before the Nobel Prize was announced.
And you'd never be able to get published in a refereed journal, so grants for doing this sort of thing are unlikely, and noone will trust your results.
This has been the case (to some extent) for some time in the UK. Indeed, an act of parliament was digitally signed recently, to show how up to date our lovely government is.
Presenting science as absolute truth is wrong, and a lie. Saying that the best idea we have at the moment is so and so, and these experiments agree with it, is an accurate representation of the way that science works, and this is how it should be taught.
Science was presented at my school in such a way that there was no way within science to discuss past and present theories, and that once a theory has been tested once it is absolutely correct. Since science at school before the age of 16 was mostly conservation/ecology this doesn't seem the correct way to go about this sort of thing.
Helpfully, my school science teachers were so crap that I taught physics to my teacher at the age of 15.
Which is what I wish schools would teach (in England they don't unless your lucky enough to have a good teacher who actually understands the philosophy of science).
In my school education we were always taught science as absolute fact, at least until the age of 16, without any reference to the concept of theories and experimental tests of theories. Given that most people in England stop their scientific education at 16, it's not surprising that the public does not understand the methods of the way of looking at universe around us that we call science.
Not exactly. Its hard to see how the mass of a black hole could increase as the universe expanded, although as the curvature of the universe decreased the volume of the black hole would increase.
Primordial black holes are (theoretically) local regions of space time where the expansion did not happen as quickly as for the rest of the universe, leaving a small region where the gravitational energy density was high enough for it to remain a black hole.
If an object has a high density the gravitational field strength around it will be strong enough that there is a stable circular orbit outside the object with an orbital velocity of the speed of light, which is the exact definition of the event horizon for a nonrotating blackhole (other definitions apply for rotating blackholes).
The existence of an event horizon means that a blackhole is present, whether or not the blackhole contains a singularity.
Big Bang is currently the ONLY theory that can plausibly explain Microwave Background and the abundance of deuterium.
And in particular, the new inflationary model of the early universe, whereby the curvature of the universe suddenly reduces from a very high figure to the current value of almost exactly zero, in about 10^-30s starting about 10^-34s after the beginning of the universe. These times a little odd in that they're defined within the curved coordinate system of the early universe (and I might have misremembered the orders of magnitude).
Slashdot Mirror
All cosmic velocities are measured relative to the frame of the microwave background.
The images of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) from the COBE satelite (amoung others) show that the CMB is doppler shifted in opposite directions (a dipole shift) on either side of the Earth. By defining a stationary observer as an observer for which there is no dipole shift, it is possibleto define a frame which all observers, at any point in spacetime, will define as stationary. Therefore all observers will measure the an object as having same speed relative to this frame.
Also there are penalty clauses in the contracts with the construction company. It is too damn expensive to pay off these contractors to wait around while you take another years worth of data. Or so stated my particles lecturer who works on Opal there.
The higgs field gives the particles inertial mass, not gravitational mass. The effects of gravity on this scale just aren't known at all, as measurements only go down to scales of ~1mm whereas these particles are 10^-12mm in "size" (which doesn't have much meaning in quantum mechanics).
Sort of
The interaction of massive particles with the Higgs field is what gives particles inertial mass. The force of gravity i.e. weight of the particle is given by the particles interaction with whatever curved spacetime exists at that scale, which is unknown, as the effects of GR gravity below a scale of ~1mm hasn't been measured, and these particles are smaller than 10^-12 mm
So could most peoples hands
Imagine what Northern Ireland would have been like if every Catholic who was pissed off with the Protestants and vice versa had a gun. A lot more people in Northern Ireland supported terrorism than actually carried it out.
Hands? Arsenic? Hypodermic syringe full of air? I could name a lot more and that last one is a pretty nasty way to go.
Oh, and I think the death penalty is a bad idea, because of the problems of appeal and the like. There's been a couple of cases here in England where people have been cleared after more than 15 years in prison, and in a few cases after being executed (before it was outlawed in the 60's). The consequences of miscarriages of justice are just to high for it to be useful by any moral state. (not that I'm saying England is a moral state)
All the pollution now comes from fewer places, which can fit much larger (more efficient) pollution controls.
If fusion power gets going soon (it should do, if the EC governments can find the 3 billion Euros to fund the ITER FEAT tokamak, which will produce about 0.5 GigaWatts, despite still being experimental)
These cars would put the necessary things in place to immediately reduce emissions when a cleaner power source comes online.
It would also reduce the dependence of car drivers on the political stability of the Middle East, and would prevent the fuel blockades that happened in Europe over the summer, as it's very hard to blockade a HT cable
It's not actually a linear relationship, I think it goes something like efficiancy = T(hot) - T(cold) / T(hot), although it's about 6 months since I did any classical thermodynamics.
An IC engine runs on (around) the Stirling cycle anyway. The Carnot cycle is the theoretical maximum of efficiency for a heat engine.
But UK employers are bound by Health and Safety law to provide adequate toilet facilities for employees. I'd say that providing the time to use them is part of those facilities.
But, the hypothetical quantum entanglement data transmission methods involve instananeous action at a distance, which does break special relativistic predictions. It's not yet known how to resolve this issue, but noone has managed to transfer data over such a link yet, so no experiments exist to show the way.
but I think entangled-particle (quantum) data transmission breaks light speed in terms of data transmission
This a very dificult question with no obvious answer at the moment, and there won't be one until someone comes up with a quantum theory that incorporates general relativity. Even if it is correct, you'd need a very large supply of entangled particles (one pair per bit minimum, i.e 1200 million per second if the other posts are correct).
This kind of thing is a bit far in future to say that latency is not an issue, barring massive breakthroughs.
actual chip the size would be a LOT bigger..
This just isn't remotely true. The optoelectronics group here in Cambridge have produced polymer FETs at about 1nm, (i.e 0.001 micron), and there is also work going on here on single electron logic, with a benzene (with some sulphur) molecules as the gates between a traditional silicon source and drain, again this on the nanometre scale.
The micro electronics group are working on 0.5 nm single nanocrystals of silicon devices as well.
You don't have to have insurance to be able to plan for your future health problems, there are other ways of saving money etc.
Noone in Britain needs medical insurance anyway. Or at least they wouldn't if the NHS worked properly.
Except that a positive genetic test doesn't nessecarily mean that any tendencies will be shown, and a negative test doesn't mean they won't
With a sudden surge in advertisements for American style accident litigation over the summer on British TV, the cost of insurance has risen rapidly here.
Genetic screening would allow insurers to keep their premiums lower, and provided that they make the screening results available to the applicant, it would allow the applicant to make alternative arrangements to insurance, such as investing an amount of money to pay for their medical care.
This isn't actually as bad as it sounds, as we do still have a free National Health Service here, so medical insurance isn't as important as say, in the States.
I'm sure the hype this decision will cause will cause some insurers not to take it up, and advertise this fact, just as some advertise "No medical required" at the moment.
Iodine is the right stuff to dope polymers (polyacetylene in the most basic case), to make them conducting. It gives them the conductivity of copper. Doping the same polymer in a different way gives it the same semiconductor properties as gallium arsenide.
In conjunction with the optoelectronics group here in Cambridge, some of the same people who got the Nobel prize are working in single molecule FETs (1nm scale). You can also spray the polymers through a modified inkjet printer and print 0.1 micron sized polymer integrated circuits and LEP LEDs (which is a fun acronym).
By a curious coincidence I had a one off lecture on this subject yesterday, about 4 hours before the Nobel Prize was announced.
It'll be turned to plasma.
And you'd never be able to get published in a refereed journal, so grants for doing this sort of thing are unlikely, and noone will trust your results.
This has been the case (to some extent) for some time in the UK. Indeed, an act of parliament was digitally signed recently, to show how up to date our lovely government is.
Which isn't remotely what I said.
Presenting science as absolute truth is wrong, and a lie. Saying that the best idea we have at the moment is so and so, and these experiments agree with it, is an accurate representation of the way that science works, and this is how it should be taught.
Science was presented at my school in such a way that there was no way within science to discuss past and present theories, and that once a theory has been tested once it is absolutely correct. Since science at school before the age of 16 was mostly conservation/ecology this doesn't seem the correct way to go about this sort of thing.
Helpfully, my school science teachers were so crap that I taught physics to my teacher at the age of 15.
Which is what I wish schools would teach (in England they don't unless your lucky enough to have a good teacher who actually understands the philosophy of science).
In my school education we were always taught science as absolute fact, at least until the age of 16, without any reference to the concept of theories and experimental tests of theories. Given that most people in England stop their scientific education at 16, it's not surprising that the public does not understand the methods of the way of looking at universe around us that we call science.
Not exactly. Its hard to see how the mass of a black hole could increase as the universe expanded, although as the curvature of the universe decreased the volume of the black hole would increase.
Primordial black holes are (theoretically) local regions of space time where the expansion did not happen as quickly as for the rest of the universe, leaving a small region where the gravitational energy density was high enough for it to remain a black hole.
Yes, that's correct
If an object has a high density the gravitational field strength around it will be strong enough that there is a stable circular orbit outside the object with an orbital velocity of the speed of light, which is the exact definition of the event horizon for a nonrotating blackhole (other definitions apply for rotating blackholes).
The existence of an event horizon means that a blackhole is present, whether or not the blackhole contains a singularity.
Big Bang is currently the ONLY theory that can plausibly explain Microwave Background and the abundance of deuterium.
And in particular, the new inflationary model of the early universe, whereby the curvature of the universe suddenly reduces from a very high figure to the current value of almost exactly zero, in about 10^-30s starting about 10^-34s after the beginning of the universe. These times a little odd in that they're defined within the curved coordinate system of the early universe (and I might have misremembered the orders of magnitude).