There's no excuse for being unaware of PETA's desires. Their most extreme positions come up in every discussion of PETA I've ever seen. You might as well be an innocent parishioner of the Westboro Baptist Church.
A 50cc scooter doing 120mpg can be had for $600. At $5/gallon, you only need to save 120 gallons to break even. What's your Subaru do, 30mpg? Accounting for the gas the scooter uses, you'd break even in 4800 miles.
That's only 96 days of round trip commuting for you. With 6 months per year, 5 days a week, with 33% unsuitable days, that's 40 days of use per year. So you'd break even in under 3 years. Plus, you're saving wear and tear on your main vehicle.
Of course this is a pretty simplistic analysis, neglecting things like the speed of the scooter, and the actual city milage of your car.
A scooter's cheap enough that you can buy one to use when it does make sense, and it will pay for itself a lot faster than an overpriced hybrid will. If you can turn a two car family into a one car/ one scooter family, that's a big savings right there.
Because the Obama administration is as pro big money corporations as they can get away with. Anything that would limit the scope of patents would harm their corporate cronies ability to make money hand over fist. It's corruption, plain and simple.
If you think otherwise, you're a very naive person that thinks too well of the power-seeking people in government. Thank you for being like that. People like you actually try to make the world a nice place to live in.
No, people like that make the world a worse place by allowing authorities to abuse their power. If you can't even concieve that the people who run the country are by and large worse than those in our prisons, you can't do anything to fix it.
Even in the US, the Apple II seemed to have occupied the same niche as Britain's BBC Micro - a "respectable" computer for the slightly-to-very wealthy, and agencies like schools answerable to the political elite.
Nope. Apple II computers were in pretty much every school you cared to walk into during the 1980s at least in the US.
Just like BBC computers in the US. Apple II computers were much less common in homes, compared to the C64.
As a result Apple was often the first choice (budget permitting) of computer for people at home along for middle class (and up) families along with the cheaper C64.
But they would still be stable even if they were solid.
No they wouldn't. The geometry in 2d doesn't cancel out the way it does in 3d.
I mean each narrow individual ring, not the whole disk of rings (that would not be stable since the inner rings would rotate faster than the outer rings).
We're both wrong. The sphere isn't stable, in that there's no net force correcting it from a perturbation. But it's not unstable either, because there's no net force amplifying a perturbation.
If you think about a sphere that has been slightly perturbed, you're right in that part of the sphere would be closer to the star and those gravitational forces would be higher. But at the same time, more than half of the sphere would be on the opposite side of the star, pulling in the opposite direction. These effects cancel each other out.
Vacuum energy? Apparently about 3/4 of the energy of the universe is vacuum energy. If you could consume space itself to produce energy, you might even be able to delay the heat death of the expanding universe.
He feels very strongly that we have more pressing needs at home in the USA than to spend almost any money on NASA. I mean, he is the exact kind of guy who I would expect to be in favor of building a moon base.
And he's right. We shouldn't go to Mars because we want to brag about putting men on Mars. We should go to Mars because investing in high tech domestic industry is an excellent solution to our economic problems. It's a good reason to invest in education, it's a good reason to pay highly educated people good salaries. A manned mission to Mars is exactly the kind of stimulus program this country needs.
Then don't buy organic, buy local. Organic produce costs more to grow, so insisting on organic makes your small farms less competitive with big farms. Go to your local farmers market, and buy what looks, smells, and tastes good. Don't even ask if it's organic or not, organic is bunk and shouldn't be encouraged. Buy local and in season, that's all you need to do.
Try comparing that dark red juicy sweet organic tomato with a dark red juicy sweet conventionally grown tomato picked at the same ripeness and you'll never be able to tell the difference. Supermarket tomatos aren't bad because they use pesticides. They're bad because they're picked unripe and ripened on the shelf. That's all there is to it.
Your conspiratorial side should notice that this NYT author is not a scientist. This NYT article IS the sensationalist crap that's getting printed just to sway the opinions of the masses.
Slashdot Mirror
What I won't forgive them for is a $2 trillion+ war and tens of thousands of lives lost
Not tens, hundreds. Dick Cheney is responsible for the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives.
How about I find none of them hurtful? Because that shit is retarded.
Vote Jill Stein. A candidate willing to get arrested to make a point is a candidate I want.
No, Romney lies through his smirk.
There's no excuse for being unaware of PETA's desires. Their most extreme positions come up in every discussion of PETA I've ever seen. You might as well be an innocent parishioner of the Westboro Baptist Church.
A 50cc scooter doing 120mpg can be had for $600. At $5/gallon, you only need to save 120 gallons to break even. What's your Subaru do, 30mpg? Accounting for the gas the scooter uses, you'd break even in 4800 miles.
That's only 96 days of round trip commuting for you. With 6 months per year, 5 days a week, with 33% unsuitable days, that's 40 days of use per year. So you'd break even in under 3 years. Plus, you're saving wear and tear on your main vehicle.
Of course this is a pretty simplistic analysis, neglecting things like the speed of the scooter, and the actual city milage of your car.
The butler did it.
A scooter's cheap enough that you can buy one to use when it does make sense, and it will pay for itself a lot faster than an overpriced hybrid will. If you can turn a two car family into a one car/ one scooter family, that's a big savings right there.
Because the Obama administration is as pro big money corporations as they can get away with. Anything that would limit the scope of patents would harm their corporate cronies ability to make money hand over fist. It's corruption, plain and simple.
World leaders without respect for the rule of law, like Obama, are far greater enemies to mankind than Al Qaeda.
If you think otherwise, you're a very naive person that thinks too well of the power-seeking people in government. Thank you for being like that. People like you actually try to make the world a nice place to live in.
No, people like that make the world a worse place by allowing authorities to abuse their power. If you can't even concieve that the people who run the country are by and large worse than those in our prisons, you can't do anything to fix it.
I have an old 1994-era dual G5 Mac
Holy crap a time travelling Apple!
Just like BBC computers in the US. Apple II computers were much less common in homes, compared to the C64.
Exactly, the slightly to very wealthy.
But they would still be stable even if they were solid.
No they wouldn't. The geometry in 2d doesn't cancel out the way it does in 3d.
I mean each narrow individual ring, not the whole disk of rings (that would not be stable since the inner rings would rotate faster than the outer rings).
This is not a problem. Ever seen a record player?
You miss one of the biggest points of having a Dyson sphere. That is, a truly enormous surface area with which to collect all that energy.
We're both wrong. The sphere isn't stable, in that there's no net force correcting it from a perturbation. But it's not unstable either, because there's no net force amplifying a perturbation.
If you think about a sphere that has been slightly perturbed, you're right in that part of the sphere would be closer to the star and those gravitational forces would be higher. But at the same time, more than half of the sphere would be on the opposite side of the star, pulling in the opposite direction. These effects cancel each other out.
I guess this is called "passive stability".
A hollow sphere is not gravitationally stable because the poles are not rotating, so there is no centripetal force to keep them from collapsing.
The poles are like the key stone in an arch.
A ring can be gravitationally stable. Proof: Saturn.
Saturns rings aren't solid rings. They're particulate matter arranged in a ring.
Vacuum energy? Apparently about 3/4 of the energy of the universe is vacuum energy. If you could consume space itself to produce energy, you might even be able to delay the heat death of the expanding universe.
He feels very strongly that we have more pressing needs at home in the USA than to spend almost any money on NASA. I mean, he is the exact kind of guy who I would expect to be in favor of building a moon base.
And he's right. We shouldn't go to Mars because we want to brag about putting men on Mars. We should go to Mars because investing in high tech domestic industry is an excellent solution to our economic problems. It's a good reason to invest in education, it's a good reason to pay highly educated people good salaries. A manned mission to Mars is exactly the kind of stimulus program this country needs.
My understanding is that a sphere is gravitationally stable but a ring is not.
I don't believe this. I think the most advanced aliens have probably realized that there isn't much point of growth after a certain threshold.
Why is that point before one constructs a Dyson sphere? That's a lot of energy escaping into space that could be put to use.
If it's such a good design, where's the prototype?
Then don't buy organic, buy local. Organic produce costs more to grow, so insisting on organic makes your small farms less competitive with big farms. Go to your local farmers market, and buy what looks, smells, and tastes good. Don't even ask if it's organic or not, organic is bunk and shouldn't be encouraged. Buy local and in season, that's all you need to do.
Try comparing that dark red juicy sweet organic tomato with a dark red juicy sweet conventionally grown tomato picked at the same ripeness and you'll never be able to tell the difference. Supermarket tomatos aren't bad because they use pesticides. They're bad because they're picked unripe and ripened on the shelf. That's all there is to it.
Your conspiratorial side should notice that this NYT author is not a scientist. This NYT article IS the sensationalist crap that's getting printed just to sway the opinions of the masses.