It also has 2 usb2.0 ports, which are 480 mbps, faster than firewire.
Re:Of all the billions of stars to choose...
on
Quark Stars
·
· Score: 1
They "beam" from the magnetic poles, which is usually not aligned with the rotational axis, so the beam sweeps around the axis. It's only when the beam's path crosses earth that we can see a pulsar. The "pulses" of a pulsar are the beam sweeping across the earth as it rotates.
Yes but Stephen Hawking has assistants to do it for him. Lucky bastard.
Re:Why can we see it?
on
Quark Stars
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
If it were dense enough that light couldn't escape, it would form a singularity too. Can't have one without the other, if it's high enough density to trap light, then there are no forces, even at the subatomic level, that can resist the collapse to a singularity. What they are talking about here is a stage that they didn't realize existed, where very dense neutron stars collapse one level further without becoming a black hole.
Re:He's either a fruit that's a little nutty...
on
Time Travel
·
· Score: 2
Maybe you need to catch one of the existing wormholes from both ends? What would happen if you grabbed one, stretched out the opening and stepped through, but the other end was still a microscopic virtual wormhole? I have no idea either, but everything I've read about wormhole theories requires a device at both ends.
A meteor is actually easier to predict. A meteor will be coming in from an orbit that crosses the path of earth, so it will come almost straight at earth. A satellite is orbiting earth and slowly dipping into the atmosphere. It's the interaction with the atmosphere that makes a satellite fall unpredictable. It will last for days or weeks, as opposed to a meteor, which will come straight in.
You're reading it wrong. If half of the warming happened since 1900, and 30% came since 1950, then that means 20% came between 1900 and 1950. How is 30% less than half of 20%?
If the initial cable is twice the length from the surface to geosynchronous orbit, then it needs only a small counterweight at the end so it can support the extra weight of the first climbers. Once you have a single cable, you can add all the counterweight you want by just sending climbers all the way to the end parking them there. The first climbers will also lay new cable behind them, adding to the strength and lifting capacity of the system. In theory, it only takes 1 shuttle launch to get the initial cable up, and 1 for the counterweight, then the cable can be used to build itself.
I'm looking out the window at the tower of light too (looks like 1 tower from NJ), and I'd I'd have to say no, a space elevator won't look anything like it. Imagine the towers of light, only 1/100 of the diamater and not lit up. It would be invisible at night and look like a line fading to nothing during the day (if you were close enough to see it, not more than a couple miles away).
Data isn't burned onto normal cds, it's stamped in during the manufacturing. These aren't recordable cds, the only advantage of them taking 0.3 seconds to make is that they can be cranked out of factories faster, making them cheaper. But considering that normal cds have dropped like 95% in production costs in the last 10 years, and the retail prices have gone UP, I don't expect this to change anything pricewise.
I have both an RHCE and a CCNA, and I can tell you absolutely that ANY cisco cert is harder than the RHCE. Comparing the RHCE to CCIE in terms of dificulty is like comparing climbing your stairs to climbing a mountain.
Actually, the article says they used single walled nanotubes, bot multiwalled. So the electrodes aren't layered. The article doesn't mention the configuration, but the most likely way they are doing it is to have the nanotubes attached at one end to the electrode, making a sort of hairy electrode.
The paws are probably the least sick place the cables could have come out of. Imagine them coming out anywhere else, the farther you get from the paws the sicker it gets.
Am I the only one here who bought lifetime service? When I got it, people thought i was crazy for paying for it when tivo could go out of businiess any day now. That was 2 years ago, and the lifetime has already paid for itself (in terms of monthly fees), and I've still got the same tivo (although now with 200 hours, a network card, and a memory upgrade). The service is absolutely worth it.
What makes the monitor degauss is just a coil of wire around the edge of the screen, that has an alternating current put through it to create an alternating magnetic field. The field it creates doesn't need to extend very far, since it's wound directly around the screen.
If you hooked up a stronger power supply to the degauss coil, you could probably degauss a couple monitors at once, but the coil would burn out quickly.
Interesting trick though, if you ever have a monitor or tv that needs to be degaussed, that doesn't have it's own degauss coil. Hold it face to face with a monitor with a degausser, and hit the button, it will degauss them both at once.
It definitly doesn't top out at 128, I used to pull more than 200kbps through it. When it was connected, it was more like 128 was the minimum, and it would start to drop the connection at lower speeds. I'm not sure what the actual max speed is, but from personal experience, it's at least 256kbps.
Basically you're saying we could build a system that takes normal mass as input and returns energy as output. For that to work, you'd need very high efficiency methods for converting energy to antimatter, and for converting the energy released by annihilation to a usefull form. For example, if you had 67% efficiency (1.5 units energy yields 1 unit antimatter), then you'd need >75% efficiency in converting the energy back to a useable form to create more antimatter in order to sustain the reaction. Currently it takes 3 or 4 orders of magnitude more energy than the equivilent antimatter that is created, so it's nowhere near efficient enough. And the efficiency of the energy conversion afterwards is on a similar scale of uselessness. All in all, not possible by any current or even theoretical understanding of physics.
Unless there's something more to it than what they say, then their explaination doesn't make sense at all. The explaination, "the atmosphere is speeding up, so the earth must be slowing down to conserve angular momentum" completly ignores all the energy being added to the system by the sun Global warming is caused by greenhouse gasses trapping energy that would normally radiate out into space. Shouldn't adding enegry to the system effect the total angular momentum? Why should it be conserved by the earth slowing just because the atmosphere speeds up? The atmosphere isn't being sped up by the earth itself, it's being sped up by solar energy.
Of course i just finished a six pack so i could be wrong, but it makes sense to me.
Slashdot Mirror
+1 informative!
This motherboard has firewire also.
It also has 2 usb2.0 ports, which are 480 mbps, faster than firewire.
They "beam" from the magnetic poles, which is usually not aligned with the rotational axis, so the beam sweeps around the axis. It's only when the beam's path crosses earth that we can see a pulsar. The "pulses" of a pulsar are the beam sweeping across the earth as it rotates.
Yes but Stephen Hawking has assistants to do it for him. Lucky bastard.
If it were dense enough that light couldn't escape, it would form a singularity too. Can't have one without the other, if it's high enough density to trap light, then there are no forces, even at the subatomic level, that can resist the collapse to a singularity. What they are talking about here is a stage that they didn't realize existed, where very dense neutron stars collapse one level further without becoming a black hole.
Can you prove that free will does exist?
Maybe you need to catch one of the existing wormholes from both ends? What would happen if you grabbed one, stretched out the opening and stepped through, but the other end was still a microscopic virtual wormhole? I have no idea either, but everything I've read about wormhole theories requires a device at both ends.
Yeah, but if it didn't need to parse html, it would be better for the client AND google in terms of cpu and bandwidth usage.
A meteor is actually easier to predict. A meteor will be coming in from an orbit that crosses the path of earth, so it will come almost straight at earth. A satellite is orbiting earth and slowly dipping into the atmosphere. It's the interaction with the atmosphere that makes a satellite fall unpredictable. It will last for days or weeks, as opposed to a meteor, which will come straight in.
You're reading it wrong. If half of the warming happened since 1900, and 30% came since 1950, then that means 20% came between 1900 and 1950. How is 30% less than half of 20%?
If the initial cable is twice the length from the surface to geosynchronous orbit, then it needs only a small counterweight at the end so it can support the extra weight of the first climbers. Once you have a single cable, you can add all the counterweight you want by just sending climbers all the way to the end parking them there. The first climbers will also lay new cable behind them, adding to the strength and lifting capacity of the system. In theory, it only takes 1 shuttle launch to get the initial cable up, and 1 for the counterweight, then the cable can be used to build itself.
I'm looking out the window at the tower of light too (looks like 1 tower from NJ), and I'd I'd have to say no, a space elevator won't look anything like it. Imagine the towers of light, only 1/100 of the diamater and not lit up. It would be invisible at night and look like a line fading to nothing during the day (if you were close enough to see it, not more than a couple miles away).
Why not just feed the nutrient rich liquid directly to the astronauts?
Data isn't burned onto normal cds, it's stamped in during the manufacturing. These aren't recordable cds, the only advantage of them taking 0.3 seconds to make is that they can be cranked out of factories faster, making them cheaper. But considering that normal cds have dropped like 95% in production costs in the last 10 years, and the retail prices have gone UP, I don't expect this to change anything pricewise.
I have both an RHCE and a CCNA, and I can tell you absolutely that ANY cisco cert is harder than the RHCE. Comparing the RHCE to CCIE in terms of dificulty is like comparing climbing your stairs to climbing a mountain.
Actually, the article says they used single walled nanotubes, bot multiwalled. So the electrodes aren't layered. The article doesn't mention the configuration, but the most likely way they are doing it is to have the nanotubes attached at one end to the electrode, making a sort of hairy electrode.
Actually CO2 does have a liquid state, just not at normal atmospheric presure. Learn some physics if you're gonna flame someone about it.
The paws are probably the least sick place the cables could have come out of. Imagine them coming out anywhere else, the farther you get from the paws the sicker it gets.
They forgot an option on their poll.
Fire hazzard.
I was forced to vote evil in the absence of a fire hazzard option.
Am I the only one here who bought lifetime service? When I got it, people thought i was crazy for paying for it when tivo could go out of businiess any day now. That was 2 years ago, and the lifetime has already paid for itself (in terms of monthly fees), and I've still got the same tivo (although now with 200 hours, a network card, and a memory upgrade). The service is absolutely worth it.
What makes the monitor degauss is just a coil of wire around the edge of the screen, that has an alternating current put through it to create an alternating magnetic field. The field it creates doesn't need to extend very far, since it's wound directly around the screen.
If you hooked up a stronger power supply to the degauss coil, you could probably degauss a couple monitors at once, but the coil would burn out quickly.
Interesting trick though, if you ever have a monitor or tv that needs to be degaussed, that doesn't have it's own degauss coil. Hold it face to face with a monitor with a degausser, and hit the button, it will degauss them both at once.
It definitly doesn't top out at 128, I used to pull more than 200kbps through it. When it was connected, it was more like 128 was the minimum, and it would start to drop the connection at lower speeds. I'm not sure what the actual max speed is, but from personal experience, it's at least 256kbps.
Basically you're saying we could build a system that takes normal mass as input and returns energy as output. For that to work, you'd need very high efficiency methods for converting energy to antimatter, and for converting the energy released by annihilation to a usefull form. For example, if you had 67% efficiency (1.5 units energy yields 1 unit antimatter), then you'd need >75% efficiency in converting the energy back to a useable form to create more antimatter in order to sustain the reaction. Currently it takes 3 or 4 orders of magnitude more energy than the equivilent antimatter that is created, so it's nowhere near efficient enough. And the efficiency of the energy conversion afterwards is on a similar scale of uselessness. All in all, not possible by any current or even theoretical understanding of physics.
Unless there's something more to it than what they say, then their explaination doesn't make sense at all. The explaination, "the atmosphere is speeding up, so the earth must be slowing down to conserve angular momentum" completly ignores all the energy being added to the system by the sun Global warming is caused by greenhouse gasses trapping energy that would normally radiate out into space. Shouldn't adding enegry to the system effect the total angular momentum? Why should it be conserved by the earth slowing just because the atmosphere speeds up? The atmosphere isn't being sped up by the earth itself, it's being sped up by solar energy.
Of course i just finished a six pack so i could be wrong, but it makes sense to me.