well it's not inverse square root, it's inverse of square root of (x).
the square would be the reciprocal and it would be the unambiguous way to say so except there is no need to give that exotic name to the square function when it already has a very well known one (square).
Inverse is very much the name of the function f(x)=1/x, at least it is in french and spanish. When we talk about the inverse of a function, we mean its reciprocal function, but when we talk about inverting a number, 'taking the inverse of a number', or apply the inverse function on a number (that is the function whose little name is 'inverse') we really mean finding the inverse of the number for the multiplication
This is also an interesting remark because at no point did I even think about this function being the reciprocal of anything (plus, it is very clearly not a 'square' function, but I 'knew' that before I looked at the code). Looking at this thread, many people had the same reflex as you, I think it is interesting for the guy who wrote the article, because if you read the article, (maybe you did, I don't imply you did not) you will find that we didn't really get to find who actually wrote the piece of code, and maybe factoring in that the guy is not an english speaker (or maybe students do call the 1/x function inverse in other english speaking countries, well you get the idea) could help him refine his search...
That's what they want you to believe !
This whole article is just a very well crafted hoax that exploits an IE bug that will be made public in about a week.
Meanwhile, they try to gather as many passwords as they can from unsuspecting IE users; They found a very clever way it seems.
(yes I'm just kidding)
(it's not true) ...
(I hope)
In about a month, an improbable experiment about sending a message back in time will go terribly wrong.
The message will fail to be sent in the past but the entanglement will be enforced.
As a result, the 42 bits message supposed to be the future reference will stay in the present, but the rest of the universe will be accordingly time shifted in the past to compensate.
The universe will keep running CRC checks on the 42 bits, and error correcting algorithms which are based on the universe's 'current present' assumptions.
Soon enough, the ligh beam will scatter delocalizing the CRC error fixing routine that will spread *faster* than the speed of light as the universe hops to maintain other natural entanglements (there are many of them, in fact most particles, but fortunately not all, are entangled to their invisible counterpart (the ones beyond light-reach that were early set appart during the fast expansion) that seem to be violated. We know this because we would have known this 30 years later).
Anyway, those future console reviews are not an isolated case, it was just more obvious to most of us but many more, less noticeable discrepancies are happening right now.
The abnormalities will increase dramatically as we catch up with the experiment's date next month, expect a lot of deja-vu or even dupes on slashdot..what ? there are already ? well I told you ! I'm just too slow on this post and the clock ticks !
The universe *will* heal, this is also known; so this isn't the armaggedon, but we will have to learn to deal with time loops and anachronisms. The hardest part will be to detect and avoid the causality breakages (known as reality ghosts or more technicaly "Link Induced Excluded Simultaneity"). Bush will use it at its advantage to try to be reelected claiming experience on the matter.
The time loops are a bitch, there will be a way out of them so I'll post about it as soon as I get the procedure, but if I can't make it, you slashdotters should stop worrying about new consoles and make sure you get laid before we hit the loop mark.
Sorry I will be wrong the loop cannot be avoided
The best you can do is alter them slightly but it breaked causality so it was possibly worse than it was going to have been.
Go get laid !
There's no living in my life anymore
The seas have gone dry
And the rain's stopped falling
Please don't you cry any more
Can't you see
Listen to the breeze
Whisper to me please
Don't send me to the path of nevermore ...
?
That sounds even better than 'Resident Evil Wii'
Is this Nintendo stepping into the survival horror genre ?
Are we playing Peach ?
It could be great.. you start with a fry pan knocking your way through those nasty zombies until you find the umbrella (much more effective) but then zombies get nastier and you will need Mario and his double-jump shoes to stomp them and...
I could play that if you can swing the umbrella swinging the wiimote but I'm not too sure the fans of the series will apreciate.
Not really, there would be the added complexity of dealing with the appropriate name for the hero according to your choice instead of just calling him Recht once and for all which was easily done with sed.
I don't really know much about this, but couldn't you also rely on 'trustable' entities for this kind of data ?
I mean, who would need your address in the first place that you feel you would want them to 'not know anymore' ?
I suppose you (correct me if I whoosh too:)) are thinking about some online store that needs to ship whatever you bought online, maybe to facture too.
couldn't that also rely on external services ?
(the online store ships with only your digital identity that the delivery service (dhl, fedex, usps, whatever) is able to translate into your shipping address because it is the one trusted organism for this particular piece of information)
I guess the first idea is precisely not to have to hand out information that really shouldn't be out in the first place...
It's not close enough to zero, it's exactly zero which is the big point of the superconductor (versus, say, an extremely good conductor).
The neat levitation trick would not work if it wasn't exactly zero.
Hi, I'm not a mathematician unfortunately so I probably misunderstand many things, but
I don't think what he proposes is a multidimensional time, it is still time as one dimension, or degree of freedom. the difference is that the natural flow of time is not unidirectional for all points in space.
But that doesn't take an infinite number of dimensions to me, of course I lack the vocabulary to express what I mean so I would have to use an analogy.
Suppose the space being considered is two dimensional. It's a sphere (S2).
Note that to embed it (sorry if it isn't the correct term, I know it exists as a term in topology so maybe it's not exactly what I mean, I mean "contain it"), you need (at least) three dimensions.
What this guy talks about is the local normal of that sphere in the embedding space. That would be "time".
So, again, imagine a sphere in a cube (the cube not necessarily finite, but with a fixed basis defined by one of its corners).
He says that right now, physicists consider time as being one of those (fixed) vertice of that cube. It doesn't matter which, none is better, in fact none is even considered, all that matters is that it is orthogonal to S2. (or better said lineraly independent maybe or it would have also to be in a fourth dimension)
So, anyway, he proposes that time is, indeed, always normal to the surface. looking at the sphere again, the "time vector" always point at a different direction.
But, sorry if I miss something, I don't see how that counts for a multidimensional time, that is, if we already talk about a "spacetime" (vector space, manifold, whatever (sorry for being so loosy on the terms, I really lack knowledge)), well I don't see where S2 needs more than a third dimension to have a well defined normal in every point, and that normal is a three dimensional vector (maybe this is what was meant by multidimensional time but I had the feeling that dimension was in fact "direction"), but, by itself, it only adds "its own" dimension.. I mean, it is just one more dimension, not many.
I think the feeling on how it works is complexified by confusing the description of the spacetime thing and by "the thing" itself.
I mean, it's like if I was trying to describe (3D) space starting from polar coordinates and adding 'Z' and getting cylindrical coordinates. Then, the new idea would be to say that instead, we use spherical coordinates, (that's not exatly it of course because we don't even start with polar coordinates, we start with rectangular ones but they would happen to be on a closed, bounded surface (S2) instead of an infinite plane). I am sure that using different coordinates system must have an impact on the properties of your 'object' (at least on the way you work with it), but I don't think you added any dimensionality in it.
(sorry for slaughtering well defined mathematical terms)
Well, actually they don't really have to claim it. it is implied, as this very truth is the justification of their existences (as scientists).
Otherwise, we would only have engineers, I mean, if everything was known, what would there be to study ?
All you would care about would be to exploit the knowledge. I don't think that would be a scientist's job.
I know this sounds like "won't someone think of the children ??!!?" but really
Do you have children ?
If not, you probably don't see it as clearly as many parents do
I have children and while I wouldn't fall into such nonsense as censoring (how anyway ?) the net to protect the poor children, I can still understand how 'victim' isn't such a bad word.
It so happens that I know a kid whose irresponsible environment has quite negatively affected.
Basically he was under the care of his 20 years old half-brother not too smart that wouldn't find inapropriate to watch and comment porn with him on the sofa (he is six years old).
You should see how he is behaving now at school. in a matter of monthes he went from model classmate with exellent results to a "dark personality" teachers are concerned with when not straight scared at. Also his results are going down and his tendency to want to do funny things to the girls in his classroom is increasingly difficult to cope with...
Anyway, believe me it is extremely obvious he was negatively impacted (it is so obvious we just deduced it happened, it's not klike we knew it was happening or we would have of course not let it happen, but his behavior is just too clear to leave a doubt), and yes I consider him a victim. Don't you ?
(not that I have anything against your point of letting them see exesive violence.)
I am certain someone thought about this before so there must be some good arguments about what I am thinking. If anyone knows them I would appreciate being answered.
Why can't this acceleration be attributed to the shape of the universe itself instead of by some new force pushing on the matter ?
That is, if I understand correctly, gravity itself is not taken into account for this observed acceleration because of the expanding nature of the phenomenon, where we would be expecting the opposite.
But what if, in fact, matter is being attracted by matter, but "beyond the edge" (the edge being relative to the observer, that is, the observer consider itself as a pole and that would be the equator for the case of a sphere shape analogy).
From the point of view of the observer, the matter would be expanding around him, but it would be in fact collapsing.
Is that acceleration not following a gravity compatible pattern ?
If not, how not ?
You didn't understand your parent's post:
First, he was stating (true and insightful btw) facts that you seem to ask him to justify ("do you REALLY think,blahblah").
How his thinking anything on this matter would have any bearing on the fact itself ? he wasn't advocating the current state as any good or bad, just describing it.
Second, you didn't understand the point being made itself:
"do you really think muslims will become more..."
The fact is, that has never been an objective, and the law doesn't specificaly target muslims (even though, in truth, that's how it started being enforced)
The idea is that in a laic school, we do not practice religion, we follow certain rules (and believe me they are lax enough) for dressing, behaving etc. and they are the same for everybody.
Where this becomes a muslim specific problem is because for some of them, temporarily behaving this way or dressing this way is not acceptable because of their religion.
I am atheist, but I honestly find that truly wonderful on this particular aspect of those muslism beliefs since I honestly can't imagine myself being a believer of whatever god commanded conduct and just 'let it go' temporarily because I have to attend school.
In truth I admire that people can have so strong convictions and adhere to them with such passion (the fact that I don't share the belief itself being besides the point). But the good thing is, noone would ask them to let their convictions, and noone does (that I know about).
I admire even more the political point of stating that unfortunately this is not compatible with laicity, it's true, so those people will have to make the decision they find more correct, that is either go to the laic school and abid to its rules, or...tadaaa... just go to another non laic school, it's not like there aren't.
Some christian people would find unacceptable not to pray every now and then, not to have their children teached catechism, not to thank god for the food before lunch is served, etc. Well, they typically don't send their children to a laic school.
Just in case ths confusion is somewhere else, again, most muslim wear headscarfs, everyone that is religious enough is publicly displaying their religious artifacts wherever they go, etc. Just not in laic schools.
Slashdot Mirror
well it's not inverse square root, it's inverse of square root of (x).
the square would be the reciprocal and it would be the unambiguous way to say so except there is no need to give that exotic name to the square function when it already has a very well known one (square).
Inverse is very much the name of the function f(x)=1/x, at least it is in french and spanish. When we talk about the inverse of a function, we mean its reciprocal function, but when we talk about inverting a number, 'taking the inverse of a number', or apply the inverse function on a number (that is the function whose little name is 'inverse') we really mean finding the inverse of the number for the multiplication
This is also an interesting remark because at no point did I even think about this function being the reciprocal of anything (plus, it is very clearly not a 'square' function, but I 'knew' that before I looked at the code). Looking at this thread, many people had the same reflex as you, I think it is interesting for the guy who wrote the article, because if you read the article, (maybe you did, I don't imply you did not) you will find that we didn't really get to find who actually wrote the piece of code, and maybe factoring in that the guy is not an english speaker (or maybe students do call the 1/x function inverse in other english speaking countries, well you get the idea) could help him refine his search...
Pardon, :)
We like them WYSIWYG
That's what they want you to believe !
...
This whole article is just a very well crafted hoax that exploits an IE bug that will be made public in about a week.
Meanwhile, they try to gather as many passwords as they can from unsuspecting IE users; They found a very clever way it seems.
(yes I'm just kidding)
(it's not true)
(I hope)
In about a month, an improbable experiment about sending a message back in time will go terribly wrong.
The message will fail to be sent in the past but the entanglement will be enforced.
As a result, the 42 bits message supposed to be the future reference will stay in the present, but the rest of the universe will be accordingly time shifted in the past to compensate.
The universe will keep running CRC checks on the 42 bits, and error correcting algorithms which are based on the universe's 'current present' assumptions.
Soon enough, the ligh beam will scatter delocalizing the CRC error fixing routine that will spread *faster* than the speed of light as the universe hops to maintain other natural entanglements (there are many of them, in fact most particles, but fortunately not all, are entangled to their invisible counterpart (the ones beyond light-reach that were early set appart during the fast expansion) that seem to be violated. We know this because we would have known this 30 years later).
Anyway, those future console reviews are not an isolated case, it was just more obvious to most of us but many more, less noticeable discrepancies are happening right now.
The abnormalities will increase dramatically as we catch up with the experiment's date next month, expect a lot of deja-vu or even dupes on slashdot..what ? there are already ? well I told you ! I'm just too slow on this post and the clock ticks !
The universe *will* heal, this is also known; so this isn't the armaggedon, but we will have to learn to deal with time loops and anachronisms. The hardest part will be to detect and avoid the causality breakages (known as reality ghosts or more technicaly "Link Induced Excluded Simultaneity"). Bush will use it at its advantage to try to be reelected claiming experience on the matter.
The time loops are a bitch, there will be a way out of them so I'll post about it as soon as I get the procedure, but if I can't make it, you slashdotters should stop worrying about new consoles and make sure you get laid before we hit the loop mark.
Sorry I will be wrong the loop cannot be avoided
The best you can do is alter them slightly but it breaked causality so it was possibly worse than it was going to have been.
Go get laid !
There's no living in my life anymore
...
The seas have gone dry
And the rain's stopped falling
Please don't you cry any more
Can't you see
Listen to the breeze
Whisper to me please
Don't send me to the path of nevermore
?
Well, apparently, that didn't stop other moderators...
That sounds even better than 'Resident Evil Wii'
Is this Nintendo stepping into the survival horror genre ?
Are we playing Peach ?
It could be great.. you start with a fry pan knocking your way through those nasty zombies until you find the umbrella (much more effective) but then zombies get nastier and you will need Mario and his double-jump shoes to stomp them and...
I could play that if you can swing the umbrella swinging the wiimote but I'm not too sure the fans of the series will apreciate.
Not really, there would be the added complexity of dealing with the appropriate name for the hero according to your choice instead of just calling him Recht once and for all which was easily done with sed.
I'm not sure about that,
But there are certainly planes on a snake
I don't really know much about this, but couldn't you also rely on 'trustable' entities for this kind of data ? :)) are thinking about some online store that needs to ship whatever you bought online, maybe to facture too.
I mean, who would need your address in the first place that you feel you would want them to 'not know anymore' ?
I suppose you (correct me if I whoosh too
couldn't that also rely on external services ?
(the online store ships with only your digital identity that the delivery service (dhl, fedex, usps, whatever) is able to translate into your shipping address because it is the one trusted organism for this particular piece of information)
I guess the first idea is precisely not to have to hand out information that really shouldn't be out in the first place...
It's not close enough to zero, it's exactly zero which is the big point of the superconductor (versus, say, an extremely good conductor).
The neat levitation trick would not work if it wasn't exactly zero.
Yes, for instance we could say it is malicious if it wouldn't halt
you mispelled stuhl...
Well there are theorems too, and interestingly enough, some theorems will sometime become axioms instead in a new theory.
..and yet explaining in details trivialities like what a diameter is or what is the pythagore's theorem...
Hi, I'm not a mathematician unfortunately so I probably misunderstand many things, but
I don't think what he proposes is a multidimensional time, it is still time as one dimension, or degree of freedom. the difference is that the natural flow of time is not unidirectional for all points in space.
But that doesn't take an infinite number of dimensions to me, of course I lack the vocabulary to express what I mean so I would have to use an analogy.
Suppose the space being considered is two dimensional. It's a sphere (S2). Note that to embed it (sorry if it isn't the correct term, I know it exists as a term in topology so maybe it's not exactly what I mean, I mean "contain it"), you need (at least) three dimensions.
What this guy talks about is the local normal of that sphere in the embedding space. That would be "time".
So, again, imagine a sphere in a cube (the cube not necessarily finite, but with a fixed basis defined by one of its corners).
He says that right now, physicists consider time as being one of those (fixed) vertice of that cube. It doesn't matter which, none is better, in fact none is even considered, all that matters is that it is orthogonal to S2. (or better said lineraly independent maybe or it would have also to be in a fourth dimension)
So, anyway, he proposes that time is, indeed, always normal to the surface. looking at the sphere again, the "time vector" always point at a different direction.
But, sorry if I miss something, I don't see how that counts for a multidimensional time, that is, if we already talk about a "spacetime" (vector space, manifold, whatever (sorry for being so loosy on the terms, I really lack knowledge)), well I don't see where S2 needs more than a third dimension to have a well defined normal in every point, and that normal is a three dimensional vector (maybe this is what was meant by multidimensional time but I had the feeling that dimension was in fact "direction"), but, by itself, it only adds "its own" dimension.. I mean, it is just one more dimension, not many.
I think the feeling on how it works is complexified by confusing the description of the spacetime thing and by "the thing" itself.
I mean, it's like if I was trying to describe (3D) space starting from polar coordinates and adding 'Z' and getting cylindrical coordinates. Then, the new idea would be to say that instead, we use spherical coordinates, (that's not exatly it of course because we don't even start with polar coordinates, we start with rectangular ones but they would happen to be on a closed, bounded surface (S2) instead of an infinite plane). I am sure that using different coordinates system must have an impact on the properties of your 'object' (at least on the way you work with it), but I don't think you added any dimensionality in it.
(sorry for slaughtering well defined mathematical terms)
Yeah, well you're suppository, I swear, I could have shoved it up my ass and it would have been just as effective !
Mais avec moi elles sont *toutes* ravies au lit :)
Well, actually they don't really have to claim it. it is implied, as this very truth is the justification of their existences (as scientists).
Otherwise, we would only have engineers, I mean, if everything was known, what would there be to study ?
All you would care about would be to exploit the knowledge. I don't think that would be a scientist's job.
Sounds just like the voting for Bush theorem....
You have a tin opener you can operate with your mind ?
;)
your feet ?
??
I know this sounds like "won't someone think of the children ??!!?" but really
Do you have children ?
If not, you probably don't see it as clearly as many parents do
I have children and while I wouldn't fall into such nonsense as censoring (how anyway ?) the net to protect the poor children, I can still understand how 'victim' isn't such a bad word.
It so happens that I know a kid whose irresponsible environment has quite negatively affected.
Basically he was under the care of his 20 years old half-brother not too smart that wouldn't find inapropriate to watch and comment porn with him on the sofa (he is six years old).
You should see how he is behaving now at school. in a matter of monthes he went from model classmate with exellent results to a "dark personality" teachers are concerned with when not straight scared at. Also his results are going down and his tendency to want to do funny things to the girls in his classroom is increasingly difficult to cope with...
Anyway, believe me it is extremely obvious he was negatively impacted (it is so obvious we just deduced it happened, it's not klike we knew it was happening or we would have of course not let it happen, but his behavior is just too clear to leave a doubt), and yes I consider him a victim. Don't you ?
(not that I have anything against your point of letting them see exesive violence.)
I am certain someone thought about this before so there must be some good arguments about what I am thinking. If anyone knows them I would appreciate being answered.
Why can't this acceleration be attributed to the shape of the universe itself instead of by some new force pushing on the matter ?
That is, if I understand correctly, gravity itself is not taken into account for this observed acceleration because of the expanding nature of the phenomenon, where we would be expecting the opposite.
But what if, in fact, matter is being attracted by matter, but "beyond the edge" (the edge being relative to the observer, that is, the observer consider itself as a pole and that would be the equator for the case of a sphere shape analogy).
From the point of view of the observer, the matter would be expanding around him, but it would be in fact collapsing.
Is that acceleration not following a gravity compatible pattern ?
If not, how not ?
Hi,
You didn't understand your parent's post:
First, he was stating (true and insightful btw) facts that you seem to ask him to justify ("do you REALLY think,blahblah").
How his thinking anything on this matter would have any bearing on the fact itself ? he wasn't advocating the current state as any good or bad, just describing it.
Second, you didn't understand the point being made itself:
"do you really think muslims will become more..."
The fact is, that has never been an objective, and the law doesn't specificaly target muslims (even though, in truth, that's how it started being enforced)
The idea is that in a laic school, we do not practice religion, we follow certain rules (and believe me they are lax enough) for dressing, behaving etc. and they are the same for everybody.
Where this becomes a muslim specific problem is because for some of them, temporarily behaving this way or dressing this way is not acceptable because of their religion.
I am atheist, but I honestly find that truly wonderful on this particular aspect of those muslism beliefs since I honestly can't imagine myself being a believer of whatever god commanded conduct and just 'let it go' temporarily because I have to attend school.
In truth I admire that people can have so strong convictions and adhere to them with such passion (the fact that I don't share the belief itself being besides the point). But the good thing is, noone would ask them to let their convictions, and noone does (that I know about).
I admire even more the political point of stating that unfortunately this is not compatible with laicity, it's true, so those people will have to make the decision they find more correct, that is either go to the laic school and abid to its rules, or...tadaaa... just go to another non laic school, it's not like there aren't.
Some christian people would find unacceptable not to pray every now and then, not to have their children teached catechism, not to thank god for the food before lunch is served, etc. Well, they typically don't send their children to a laic school.
Just in case ths confusion is somewhere else, again, most muslim wear headscarfs, everyone that is religious enough is publicly displaying their religious artifacts wherever they go, etc. Just not in laic schools.