they also may want local teachers because the language in SA varies hugely from place to place, and there arent a ton of people outside that speak (for example) Afrikaans
So make a friend (or even more).....and do the problems in their book on the assigned pages......
I know friends are scary.....but thats part of the college experience.
Sometimes its just that wording one certain questions was unclear such that lots of students misunderstood the question, or new information or a better way of explaining a section (or realizing a section was being glossed over too quickly) is often the motivation. Education, like science, is not static, and sometimes one idea of how to present a concept seems really good if you are a professor who understands it, but lacking for someone who has no clue whats going on.
Note: My experience is from a chemist whose PI wrote an intro chem book for college, might not be the same in other fields.
Thats not true at all. When plants die, fungus and microbes eat them up, and re-release the CO2. In the normal course of events (non-human = "normal") there is a continuous flow to and from plants. Plants breath the CO2, make themselves grow, and eventually they are re-converted to CO2 through natural processes.
If instead when they die (at your hand or otherwise) you convert them to a block of Carbon then that CO2 is removed from the cycle.
Its true, not all carbon in the carbon cycle is in the atmosphere. A lot is trapped in plants and animals, but these are "short-term" not geological scale storage. Carbon neutral/positive/negative is talking about whether the cycle gains or loses carbon.
If you burned the coal that you made with this machine until it was all back to CO2, THEN it would be carbon neutral.
By that logic, bio-fuels would not be considered carbon neutral......
Carbon neutral and non-neutral relate to releasing carbon that is trapped (i.e. oil, coal) and doesnt participate in the "short-term" carbon cycle. You can plant and burn trees for eternity and the amount of carbon going into and from the air will be (almost) neutral. If you turn trees into coal, but can grow more trees, you will slowly deplete carbon from the atmosphere, and have it in your trunk.
If instead you take all the oil and coal and burn them you will be adding a lot of otherwise non-gaseous/non-carbon-cycle carbon into the carbon-cycle
It releases no CO2, while using a source which initially converted CO2 into other organic molecules (plants growing)
Imagine using this burn every plant for a lot of years. At some point all the carbon in the world would be in the form of charcoal, and there would be no CO2 in the atmosphere.
If you burn plants and release CO2 equal to the amount they needed to "breath" in order to build themselves, that is carbon neutral
If you instead of releasing that CO2 are turning the CO2 (directly or indirectly) into C you are removing all of that CO2 from the normal carbon cycle.
Imagine doing this to every plant for 1Million years. At some point all the carbon in the world would be in the form of charcoal, and there would be no CO2 in the atmosphere. Not advised, but thats how.
yes. by living in or traveling in the US you make an implicit agreement to accept the currency of the land. You can move your business elsewhere if you dont trust the dollar. It would require a lot of effort, but thats your problem if you view it as "backed by nothing".
Using this currency also comes with rights of the land, so (independent of whether you want it or not) you get the protections and regulations that come along with it. This is a part of participating in a society where people are not altruistic and we require laws and order, whether or not you agree with all the laws and regulations as they are.
So the person who bought small round objects and left them around a 4-year old should be responsible....the company that made something really fun should?
this is not a product that is inherently dangerous in any way, its only dangerous if you really pervert the use by any mode of insertion (oral or other).
"The emission rates were similar to those measured in previous studies of several other devices and indoor activities, including cooking on a gas or electric stove, burning scented candles, operating laser printers, or even burning a cigarette."
You might not have known it, but its a scare tactic if you read the last part.
A better title would be, "Despite slight emission of nanoparticles, 3D printing is safer than many activities you already do."
"The emission rates were similar to those measured in previous studies of several other devices and indoor activities, including cooking on a gas or electric stove, burning scented candles, operating laser printers, or even burning a cigarette."
Probably would be more efficient to have one literal "crazy town" with 20,000 "crazies", than to have services spread across the country......sounds to me like they are all about cost-cutting.
Slashdot Mirror
electronic crap that only works for one semester
yeah....they often have candy (ore ice cream) so pretty good yield.....and its free when you steal it, so also really economical
they also may want local teachers because the language in SA varies hugely from place to place, and there arent a ton of people outside that speak (for example) Afrikaans
I know friends are scary.....but thats part of the college experience.
Sometimes its just that wording one certain questions was unclear such that lots of students misunderstood the question, or new information or a better way of explaining a section (or realizing a section was being glossed over too quickly) is often the motivation. Education, like science, is not static, and sometimes one idea of how to present a concept seems really good if you are a professor who understands it, but lacking for someone who has no clue whats going on.
Note: My experience is from a chemist whose PI wrote an intro chem book for college, might not be the same in other fields.
its 50-50 since 3D printing and bitcoin became old hat.
this
are you trying to convince us, or yourself, that it was a good idea for you to not join.
citation needed
only if its 2-ply
If instead when they die (at your hand or otherwise) you convert them to a block of Carbon then that CO2 is removed from the cycle.
Its true, not all carbon in the carbon cycle is in the atmosphere. A lot is trapped in plants and animals, but these are "short-term" not geological scale storage. Carbon neutral/positive/negative is talking about whether the cycle gains or loses carbon.
If you burned the coal that you made with this machine until it was all back to CO2, THEN it would be carbon neutral.
Carbon neutral and non-neutral relate to releasing carbon that is trapped (i.e. oil, coal) and doesnt participate in the "short-term" carbon cycle. You can plant and burn trees for eternity and the amount of carbon going into and from the air will be (almost) neutral. If you turn trees into coal, but can grow more trees, you will slowly deplete carbon from the atmosphere, and have it in your trunk.
If instead you take all the oil and coal and burn them you will be adding a lot of otherwise non-gaseous/non-carbon-cycle carbon into the carbon-cycle
Imagine using this burn every plant for a lot of years. At some point all the carbon in the world would be in the form of charcoal, and there would be no CO2 in the atmosphere.
If you instead of releasing that CO2 are turning the CO2 (directly or indirectly) into C you are removing all of that CO2 from the normal carbon cycle.
Imagine doing this to every plant for 1Million years. At some point all the carbon in the world would be in the form of charcoal, and there would be no CO2 in the atmosphere. Not advised, but thats how.
$200 a year for 15,000 tablets.....what a deal, thats like 1 penny each per year!
yes. by living in or traveling in the US you make an implicit agreement to accept the currency of the land. You can move your business elsewhere if you dont trust the dollar. It would require a lot of effort, but thats your problem if you view it as "backed by nothing". Using this currency also comes with rights of the land, so (independent of whether you want it or not) you get the protections and regulations that come along with it. This is a part of participating in a society where people are not altruistic and we require laws and order, whether or not you agree with all the laws and regulations as they are.
this is not a product that is inherently dangerous in any way, its only dangerous if you really pervert the use by any mode of insertion (oral or other).
yeah, none of those cities had land-lines either.....
toil toil grey sludge and genetically engineered eye of newt
huh? which company....bitcoin doesnt only run out of thailand, does it?
"The emission rates were similar to those measured in previous studies of several other devices and indoor activities, including cooking on a gas or electric stove, burning scented candles, operating laser printers, or even burning a cigarette." You might not have known it, but its a scare tactic if you read the last part. A better title would be, "Despite slight emission of nanoparticles, 3D printing is safer than many activities you already do."
Or just print outdoors like nature intended
"The emission rates were similar to those measured in previous studies of several other devices and indoor activities, including cooking on a gas or electric stove, burning scented candles, operating laser printers, or even burning a cigarette."
....but....so.....shiny......
....toll...
Probably would be more efficient to have one literal "crazy town" with 20,000 "crazies", than to have services spread across the country......sounds to me like they are all about cost-cutting.