I know there are prototype "meltdown proof" reactors but why aren't they the norm?
They would be, but for some reason in the U.S. our response to nuclear problems is to shut down the reactors instead of building safer, more reliable ones.
Weight and mass are patently *not* the same thing. In zero g, you have no weight, but you still have all your mass.
In physics, mass (from Greek "barley cake, lump [of dough]") is a property of a physical body which determines the body's resistance to being accelerated by a force and the strength of its mutual gravitational attraction with other bodies. The SI unit of mass is the kilogram (kg). As mass is difficult to measure directly, usually balances or scales are used to measure the weight of an object, and the weight is used to calculate the object's mass. For everyday objects and energies well-described by Newtonian physics, mass describes the amount of matter in an object
In science and engineering, the weight of an object is usually taken to be the force on the object due to gravity. [...] The term weight and mass are often confused with each other in everyday discourse but they are distinct quantities.[4] There is also a rival tradition within Newtonian physics and engineering which sees weight as that which is measured when one uses scales. There the weight is a measure of the magnitude of the reaction force exerted on a body. Typically, in measuring someone's weight, the person is placed on scales at rest with respect to the earth but the definition can be extended to other states of motion. Thus in a state of free fall, the weight would be zero. In this second sense of weight, terrestrial objects can be weightless. Ignoring air resistance, the famous apple on its way to meet Newton's head is weightless.
Except in theory that shouldn't work for very long, if we go with a theoretical 1:4 chance of both of you getting the question right (otherwise you win and eliminate them, they win and eliminate you, or the third player eliminates you both). And it only works if most people bet everything on Final Jeopardy, which seems like a rather poor idea tactically.
Is there a reason the binaries and source code must be distributed under the same license (or at all)? Other than the GPL, obviously, which includes explicit provisions on the matter.
Thank you, Captain Literal. I meant time almost stopping in a black hole, as compared to the energy level of each particle in BEC reaching the minimum. Both of them are things that can't happen in anything approaching "normal" circumstances.
Seems a bit silly to say "this is not a black hole"...we're basically saying that RBG 010101 is not dark enough to be considered black because 000000 is the "real" black, aren't we?
If we're already talking about an "infinitely strong material" suspending the camera inside the event horizon, wouldn't that mean that the supporting material would have to be accelerating (~"holding up") the camera away from (up/out of) the black hole at the speed of light already? I would think that would make raising the camera--or getting any information back out of it--impossible, as you'd need to accelerate the camera/information at c+x to get it back.
Slashdot Mirror
I know there are prototype "meltdown proof" reactors but why aren't they the norm?
They would be, but for some reason in the U.S. our response to nuclear problems is to shut down the reactors instead of building safer, more reliable ones.
Bathroom scales actually would make more sense being in Newtons; milk, not so much.
Another example of how metric is ruining my life ;)
Albeit beta, but still.
Well duh, it's a Google product. Er, a plugin for a Google product. Whatever.
as sweet
Or the people who feel the need to start a new comment thread talking about people talking about spamming...
Crap. Now I'm talking about people talking about people talking about spamming.
Shhh, you'll summon the Dark Lord of HOSTS Files!
Please tell us more about how you managed to take one whole flight of stairs.
CondescendingWonka.jpg
Weight and mass are patently *not* the same thing. In zero g, you have no weight, but you still have all your mass.
In physics, mass (from Greek "barley cake, lump [of dough]") is a property of a physical body which determines the body's resistance to being accelerated by a force and the strength of its mutual gravitational attraction with other bodies. The SI unit of mass is the kilogram (kg). As mass is difficult to measure directly, usually balances or scales are used to measure the weight of an object, and the weight is used to calculate the object's mass. For everyday objects and energies well-described by Newtonian physics, mass describes the amount of matter in an object
In science and engineering, the weight of an object is usually taken to be the force on the object due to gravity.
[...]
The term weight and mass are often confused with each other in everyday discourse but they are distinct quantities.[4] There is also a rival tradition within Newtonian physics and engineering which sees weight as that which is measured when one uses scales. There the weight is a measure of the magnitude of the reaction force exerted on a body. Typically, in measuring someone's weight, the person is placed on scales at rest with respect to the earth but the definition can be extended to other states of motion. Thus in a state of free fall, the weight would be zero. In this second sense of weight, terrestrial objects can be weightless. Ignoring air resistance, the famous apple on its way to meet Newton's head is weightless.
#whatcouldpossiblygowrong
A rude post by someone named satan666? Now I've seen everything.
Except in theory that shouldn't work for very long, if we go with a theoretical 1:4 chance of both of you getting the question right (otherwise you win and eliminate them, they win and eliminate you, or the third player eliminates you both). And it only works if most people bet everything on Final Jeopardy, which seems like a rather poor idea tactically.
Isn't there still a tiny "use classic mode" link at the bottom of the page?
s/ISS/IIS/g
They aren't using Internet Information Services on the International Space Station, are they?
That link doesn't even mention Dr. Horrible. And the name of the company is Mutant Enemy Productions, not "Inc."
Wikipedia lists MEP as a production company, not a corporation, too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
I thought I'd heard that somebody actually was updating the graphics?
http://www.moddb.com/mods/thie...
However every single piece of pop culture you love was released by a corporation.
Doctor Horrible?
Is there a reason the binaries and source code must be distributed under the same license (or at all)? Other than the GPL, obviously, which includes explicit provisions on the matter.
I would love to see how a judge would react to that.
Thank you, Captain Literal. I meant time almost stopping in a black hole, as compared to the energy level of each particle in BEC reaching the minimum. Both of them are things that can't happen in anything approaching "normal" circumstances.
Caaaaaarl, what's a dead human doing at the edge of our black hole!?
You need sufficient atmosphere to experience friction, don't you? And if the atmosphere is all getting sucked in with you...
Unless we're talking about some quantum definition of friction that I'm not familiar with.
(IANAS)
I wonder if this whole "time stopping at the center of a black hole" bit is analogous to Bose-Einstein condensates somehow...</muse>
Seems a bit silly to say "this is not a black hole"...we're basically saying that RBG 010101 is not dark enough to be considered black because 000000 is the "real" black, aren't we?
If we're already talking about an "infinitely strong material" suspending the camera inside the event horizon, wouldn't that mean that the supporting material would have to be accelerating (~"holding up") the camera away from (up/out of) the black hole at the speed of light already? I would think that would make raising the camera--or getting any information back out of it--impossible, as you'd need to accelerate the camera/information at c+x to get it back.
GP is poorly worded but it's of course rather expensive to tear down and rebuild chunks of city.
He obviously meant Photoshop real life :)