Fair enuf. In fact I was wrong, it is often misattributed to James Randi, but he attributes it to an anonymous reader of Swift magazine. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/James_Randi
As a few people have pointed out, using this device will waste an additional 30%+ of the energy used to recharge batteries.
They will have been working on this product for several years and must have been agonising over the attention that has been focused on global warming and energy efficiency in the last year or so.
To combat this they have put together a hilarious white paper on the environmental benefits which you can request from their website. My favourite is the solar panel one:
An Ecologically Friendly Alternative to Solar Cells Though often hailed as a staple of green power, solar cells can pro- duce potentially damaging environmental effects. Chemicals required for the production of certain types of solar cells can pose a significant threat to manufacturing employees and the ozone if not handled properly. Solar cells also contain cadmium, which, as stated above, constitutes an environmental disposal hazard 12 . The adoption of the Powercast Wireless Power Platform would diminish these undesirable effects by providing a more ecologically sound energy harvesting alternative.
Hang on, how can this thing possibly work? By putting the reference printout in the image you can determine the distance and orientation of the reference, but how does that tell you about the distance to other points in the image? It can only work for points in the same plane as the reference printout, such as the features on a flat wall. It cannot tell you anything about the dimensions of a complex object like a car.
There are systems I've seen that can do similar jobs using video or multiple images to triangulate the 3D structure, but the FAQs on the iPhotoMEASURE website repeatedly refer to taking a single photo.
From what I can understand the backwards-in-time measurement requires communication from one entangled photon to the other. This would allow faster-than-light communication which is the first thing you think of when you hear about entanglement. I thought it was well established that this was impossible since measuring one photon destroys the entanglement and you can never tell if you sent the signal or received it. Can anyone explain how this experiment is different, and would it also allow for ftl comms?
The problem with raytracing researchers is that they are incredibly myopic. Yes but myopia would seem to be one of those problems that ray tracing would be much better at solving since it can handle refraction directly.
You could be making the same mistake they have made in assuming that there is no reduction in the height dimension. If the smaller storm is also half the height (not an unreasonable assumption in the extremely deep atmosphere of Jupiter) then it's actually one eighth the size.
That "law" is predicated on the supposed non-existance of negative refraction. This assumption has already been demonstrated to be wrong for microwaves.
There's nothing junk about this area of research because every advance has been well demonstrated, highly repeatable and supported by more fundamental theory.
They both use hot rising air. The difference is that the solar chimney design uses a solid tube to contain the air until it reaches the cool upper atmosphere whereas the vortex uses a tube formed of air and maintained by centrifugal acceleration.
Reminds me of a joke. Advisor: President Bush, we've receive a report of 3 Brazilian soldiers dying. Bush: That's terrible. Remind me- how many is a brazillion?
Remember: in some fields, the singularity has already happened.
The point of the singularity idea is that advancement is going to get so fast that we can't keep track of it, control it or predict what life will be like afterwards. None of that has been true about computing yet.
The intensity of Hawking radiation falls away rapidly with with size. Only miniscule black holes shine brightly and quickly "evaporate". Large ones like this radiate incredibly faintly due to the intense gravity gradient near the event horizon.
Meanwhile there's massive gamma-ray radiation from the acretion disc due to plain old friction outside of the event horizon (nothing to do with Hawking radiation though).
The purpetrators of this attrocity are the faceless, and I would suggest faithless (because no one could truthfully commit such acts in the name of any God) terrorists, and their aim is to spread, rather obviously, terror.
I guess you're a Christian if you object to the use of the word faith in this context. Keep in mind the history of Christianity is just as bloody as modern islamic fundamentalism. The inquisitions murdered far more people just as indiscriminately. How could an athiest become a suicide bomber? Surely the concept of martydom being rewarded in the afterlife is an enabling factor.
I know we're talking about relative motion dude. The description is quite clear in stating that the tip is stationary relative to the air while the blade was moving "backwards through the air". Hence the chopper was moving backwards by simple geomtric deduction. Ie. it was dead wrong.
This means that at a certain point, the tip of the retreating blade is "standing still" relative to the wind and producing no lift, while the rest of the blade is actually moving backwards through the air. Such a condition is normally impossible...
Actually such a condition is completely impossible. If the tip of the blade is stationary and the rest of the blade is moving backwards, then the axle/chopper is moving backwards. Clearly the chopper and blades are screaming forwards except for the tip of the blade on one side which is stationary.
When most people think of glass, they think of that transparent stuff in window panes. But glass doesn't have to be transparent nor is it always found in windows.
becuase of the short time frame that the anitmatter could exist before it, say, collides with matter and annhilates
The key question here is how short is this time? This is the same question that the origional poster is asking, ie "how long would it take to replenish".
Antiparticles don't have "short time frame for existence due to their nature". They're perfectly stable until they hit some matter. That could take anything from seconds to weeks depending on the density of the van allen belt which I suspect none of us here has a clue about.
Slashdot Mirror
Fair enuf. In fact I was wrong, it is often misattributed to James Randi, but he attributes it to an anonymous reader of Swift magazine.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/James_Randi
Now, be honest and quote your source. That's a Richard Dawkins quote.
What am I thinking? This is slashdot...
As a few people have pointed out, using this device will waste an additional 30%+ of the energy used to recharge batteries.
They will have been working on this product for several years and must have been agonising over the attention that has been focused on global warming and energy efficiency in the last year or so.
To combat this they have put together a hilarious white paper on the environmental benefits which you can request from their website. My favourite is the solar panel one:
An Ecologically Friendly
Alternative to Solar Cells
Though often hailed as a staple of green power, solar cells can pro-
duce potentially damaging environmental effects. Chemicals required
for the production of certain types of solar cells can pose a significant
threat to manufacturing employees and the ozone if not handled
properly. Solar cells also contain cadmium, which, as stated above,
constitutes an environmental disposal hazard
12
. The adoption of the Powercast Wireless Power Platform would diminish these undesirable
effects by providing a more ecologically sound energy harvesting
alternative.
I presume you were attempting irony?
Either way you're a moron.
Ironic, coming from an anonymous coward!
. html
http://www.visionbib.com/bibliography/motion-i789
Hang on, how can this thing possibly work?
By putting the reference printout in the image you can determine the distance and orientation of the reference, but how does that tell you about the distance to other points in the image?
It can only work for points in the same plane as the reference printout, such as the features on a flat wall.
It cannot tell you anything about the dimensions of a complex object like a car.
There are systems I've seen that can do similar jobs using video or multiple images to triangulate the 3D structure, but the FAQs on the iPhotoMEASURE website repeatedly refer to taking a single photo.
For $99? I'll stick to a tape measure.
From what I can understand the backwards-in-time measurement requires communication from one entangled photon to the other. This would allow faster-than-light communication which is the first thing you think of when you hear about entanglement. I thought it was well established that this was impossible since measuring one photon destroys the entanglement and you can never tell if you sent the signal or received it.
Can anyone explain how this experiment is different, and would it also allow for ftl comms?
The problem with raytracing researchers is that they are incredibly myopic.
Yes but myopia would seem to be one of those problems that ray tracing would be much better at solving since it can handle refraction directly.
You could be making the same mistake they have made in assuming that there is no reduction in the height dimension. If the smaller storm is also half the height (not an unreasonable assumption in the extremely deep atmosphere of Jupiter) then it's actually one eighth the size.
The cadmium atom that has lost an electron becomes a negatively charged ion...
It must have lost one of those funky quantum positively charged electrons if it then becomes negatively charged.
That "law" is predicated on the supposed non-existance of negative refraction. This assumption has already been demonstrated to be wrong for microwaves.
There's nothing junk about this area of research because every advance has been well demonstrated, highly repeatable and supported by more fundamental theory.
They both use hot rising air. The difference is that the solar chimney design uses a solid tube to contain the air until it reaches the cool upper atmosphere whereas the vortex uses a tube formed of air and maintained by centrifugal acceleration.
$1.2 billion, not trillion.
Reminds me of a joke.
Advisor: President Bush, we've receive a report of 3 Brazilian soldiers dying.
Bush: That's terrible. Remind me- how many is a brazillion?
I agreed with most of your post, except:
Remember: in some fields, the singularity has already happened.
The point of the singularity idea is that advancement is going to get so fast that we can't keep track of it, control it or predict what life will be like afterwards. None of that has been true about computing yet.
Erosion doesn't require a fluid. Cratering by impacts or sandblasting or whatever can cause erosion.
The intensity of Hawking radiation falls away rapidly with with size. Only miniscule black holes shine brightly and quickly "evaporate". Large ones like this radiate incredibly faintly due to the intense gravity gradient near the event horizon.
Meanwhile there's massive gamma-ray radiation from the acretion disc due to plain old friction outside of the event horizon (nothing to do with Hawking radiation though).
Colloquialism has no place in scientific reporting.
The purpetrators of this attrocity are the faceless, and I would suggest faithless (because no one could truthfully commit such acts in the name of any God) terrorists, and their aim is to spread, rather obviously, terror.
I guess you're a Christian if you object to the use of the word faith in this context. Keep in mind the history of Christianity is just as bloody as modern islamic fundamentalism. The inquisitions murdered far more people just as indiscriminately.
How could an athiest become a suicide bomber? Surely the concept of martydom being rewarded in the afterlife is an enabling factor.
Not bad reading for an Australian who's been living in London for 2 years either.. :)
No! Really? What the article description says is "the rest of the blade is actually moving backwards through the air".
I know we're talking about relative motion dude.
The description is quite clear in stating that the tip is stationary relative to the air while the blade was moving "backwards through the air".
Hence the chopper was moving backwards by simple geomtric deduction. Ie. it was dead wrong.
This means that at a certain point, the tip of the retreating blade is "standing still" relative to the wind and producing no lift, while the rest of the blade is actually moving backwards through the air. Such a condition is normally impossible...
Actually such a condition is completely impossible. If the tip of the blade is stationary and the rest of the blade is moving backwards, then the axle/chopper is moving backwards. Clearly the chopper and blades are screaming forwards except for the tip of the blade on one side which is stationary.
They also spend some of their money developing snappy spell checkers. ;)
When most people think of glass, they think of that transparent stuff in window panes. But glass doesn't have to be transparent nor is it always found in windows.
Learning is fun...
becuase of the short time frame that the anitmatter could exist before it, say, collides with matter and annhilates
The key question here is how short is this time? This is the same question that the origional poster is asking, ie "how long would it take to replenish".
Antiparticles don't have "short time frame for existence due to their nature". They're perfectly stable until they hit some matter. That could take anything from seconds to weeks depending on the density of the van allen belt which I suspect none of us here has a clue about.