As long as that "gland" would somehow inform you that it was triggered. It'd be silly to switch over to the backup only to use it all up unaware -- say in oxygen-deficient atmosphere.
Established airway for a lung transplant? Huh? Sure you can use an external heart-lung machine, but the problem is always with hemolysis and clotting. Deleting the "lung-" part from the "heart-lung" machine would certainly help with both.
The "perfected" part is a figment of someone's imagination. The batteries were heavy as hell, and those diesel-electric boats had very limited electric range and speed. It was barely usable I'd say.
Good luck making an electric car with, say, 100 mile electric range and lead-acid batteries. The technology simply wasn't there 60 years ago. Even if you could accept the outrageous weight and volume requirements, you still need electronics to do individual cell management. Lead-acid batteries need it too if you wish to prolong their life. It's no different from Ni-MH or any other modern cell, really, if you want to keep it rolling in spite of inevitable bad cells.
This has nothing to do with citizenship, what a strawman. On US soil, the law applies equally no matter where you comes from. Any law that did otherwise would be discriminatory and likely unconstitutional, often under both federal and state constitutions.
No, a person, american or otherwise, who intends to reexport an iPad to Iran, is breaking the law. A store employee knowingly letting such a sale go through could be potentially liable under federal laws, and those laws make it no laughing matter when it comes to dealing punishment. End of story.
It's could be similarly argued that it's our animal nature to run around and fuck every good looking female out there. Something "just being human nature" doesn't make it acceptable. We got brains capable of making decisions that overcome this "nature".
Racism, bigotry, rape -- all bad. We got brains that make us capable of not succumbing to those, admittedly often all too easy fallback positions.
BTW, Falcon 9 first stage has a wind surface area at least of a 100m^2. At 20mph, there'll be equivalent of 7000N pushing on the center of mass. So air resistance is important: wind alone could easily tip it over!
Are you daft? Get a 4-legged chair. A coffee table, or really any other 4-legged piece of furniture will do. Tip it as far from vertical as you can so that it doesn't fall. Let go (don't push, just release it). See what happens. It will *not* tip over on the other end of the swing. Also note that with each swing the amplitude decrases. Note that the shape and size of the object doesn't matter. A big honking rocket will behave the same. You don't have to read shit to do a simple experiment and see it for yourself. Just because the object that "landed" crooked is a rocket doesn't mean that coservation of energy gives up when faced with dollar the almighty.
Sorry, you prompted an angry response by not being reasonable anymore.
With no air friction it will be rocking back and forth "forever". With air friction it will rock shorter than that. Remember that an empty booster is light for its size. Energy conservation tells us it will not tip over simply from landing at an angle, as long as the center of mass's projection on the ground is within the support polygon, and as long as there is no imparted swing velocity due to factors other than gravitational settling. Whatever energy it gains going from -angle to zero degrees, it must use up going from zero to +angle. That's all there's to it. Just like you don't expect a pendulum's swings to increase in amplitude past initial angle, you can't expect this pendulum to do so either.
You can do hundreds of thousands of frames per second if you've got a nuclear bomb for a flashlight. To do thousands of frames per second in an inside location, you need so much light people's eyes hurt. Have a look at lighting in vehicle crash labs. It's not pleasant to be around when it's on. High frame rates are certainly possible, but you need light, lots of it.
The momentum issue of coming down at an angle is really simple. Such a system is inherently stable with air friction, as long as the wind doesn't blow the wrong way around, that is.
When it touches down with the whole stage at an angle, the settling down to vertical converts the potential energy to kinetic energy of rotation around some horizontal axis. Air friction dissipates some of it, because it's the whole damn rocket moving, and it's a "big" sail. So when it shifts weight to the opposite legs and starts to raise the center of mass, it won't deflect as much: there isn't enough energy left to raise the center of mass far enough, thus the angle of deflection will be slower, if by a tiny bit. It will probably rock a couple of times and settle. It'd be rather simple to test for this using a dummy model with same moment of inertia.
My major concern is that the angle of landing may be a tad excessive with the center of mass being so low, and it may be hard for the legs to accommodate that. If the engines are much heavier than the rest of the body (tankage and shell), it'd would be the likely dealbreaker.
I think as long as the landing "gear" (legs?) are designed to accommodate such a situation, it'd be OK. It's probably a weight vs. reliability tradeoff. They'll probably figure out how likely it is to lose the center engine. Then they'll figure how does the cost of decreased performance due to weight increase compare to the cost of losing a F9 1st stage once in a while on landing. Oh, the joys of engineering;)
Isn't their thrust vectoring good enough to get the thrust vector going through the center of mass even from a side engine? It'd be landing a bit crooked, admittedly.
The fuel and oxidizer is not in the engines, it's in the shared tanks. Losing an engine increases fuel consumption only because when you accelerate slower, you bleed off air drag slower.
I think that on a modern x86 implementation, with the CISC instructions you can use about a cacheline worth of BP-relative RAM just as it were registers. It's no slower than using registers, or so it seems. There's some instruction rewriting going on that makes it so, I bet.
The CPU may not exactly be a generic chip, probably a core in an ASIC that's got some dedicated DSP pipes, but small CPUs are quite powerful *and* low power these days. TI's MSP line, for example.
I wish we lived in a world where I could calmly tell you straight in your face that you're a deluded conspiracy nut. Alas, I can't. There will be probably an Ivy MBA somewhere who will think of this, implement it, and get a bunch of golden parachutes for his efforts:(
All this functionality you speak of is in software. Sure someone has to code it all up, test it, etc., but the only complexity to the device itself is a CPU of sufficient processing power and memory. That's all. You could make it play chiptunes all day if you wanted to.
Normally one would bite the bullet and use a power converter to step up from a single cell's voltage to something more useful. I've had a Rio MP3 player a decade+ ago and sure as heck it didn't have to use germanium semiconductors! Heck, I don't know if this germanium story isn't some made up BS. I find it hard to believe. Do they run their own germanium fab? A power converter would maybe waste 20% of battery's capacity. Doesn't sound like a hard tradeoff to make vs. running a germanium semiconductor fab.
I've seen an audiologist's office in Europe where the latex impression is scanned and sent to the lab digitally. They use 3D printing technology to recreate the shape. I've also been to that lab, and it was a rather streamlined industrial process, little custom manual labor was involved. No one was connecting any #32 wires, that's for sure.
From that description I think that Starkey is simply running an outdated manufacturing process and using an outdated product design, that's all.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as that "gland" would somehow inform you that it was triggered. It'd be silly to switch over to the backup only to use it all up unaware -- say in oxygen-deficient atmosphere.
Established airway for a lung transplant? Huh? Sure you can use an external heart-lung machine, but the problem is always with hemolysis and clotting. Deleting the "lung-" part from the "heart-lung" machine would certainly help with both.
The "perfected" part is a figment of someone's imagination. The batteries were heavy as hell, and those diesel-electric boats had very limited electric range and speed. It was barely usable I'd say.
Good luck making an electric car with, say, 100 mile electric range and lead-acid batteries. The technology simply wasn't there 60 years ago. Even if you could accept the outrageous weight and volume requirements, you still need electronics to do individual cell management. Lead-acid batteries need it too if you wish to prolong their life. It's no different from Ni-MH or any other modern cell, really, if you want to keep it rolling in spite of inevitable bad cells.
Said a bozo who doesn't realize that a human skin color goes from all black to all white in 100 generations.
OK, British English it is, then. Thanks for adding one more idiom to my arsenal. I haven't heard that one before!
This has nothing to do with citizenship, what a strawman. On US soil, the law applies equally no matter where you comes from. Any law that did otherwise would be discriminatory and likely unconstitutional, often under both federal and state constitutions.
No, a person, american or otherwise, who intends to reexport an iPad to Iran, is breaking the law. A store employee knowingly letting such a sale go through could be potentially liable under federal laws, and those laws make it no laughing matter when it comes to dealing punishment. End of story.
Make a check? What's that mean?
Infuckingsightful? Huh?
It's could be similarly argued that it's our animal nature to run around and fuck every good looking female out there. Something "just being human nature" doesn't make it acceptable. We got brains capable of making decisions that overcome this "nature".
Racism, bigotry, rape -- all bad. We got brains that make us capable of not succumbing to those, admittedly often all too easy fallback positions.
BTW, Falcon 9 first stage has a wind surface area at least of a 100m^2. At 20mph, there'll be equivalent of 7000N pushing on the center of mass. So air resistance is important: wind alone could easily tip it over!
Are you daft? Get a 4-legged chair. A coffee table, or really any other 4-legged piece of furniture will do. Tip it as far from vertical as you can so that it doesn't fall. Let go (don't push, just release it). See what happens. It will *not* tip over on the other end of the swing. Also note that with each swing the amplitude decrases. Note that the shape and size of the object doesn't matter. A big honking rocket will behave the same. You don't have to read shit to do a simple experiment and see it for yourself. Just because the object that "landed" crooked is a rocket doesn't mean that coservation of energy gives up when faced with dollar the almighty.
Sorry, you prompted an angry response by not being reasonable anymore.
With no air friction it will be rocking back and forth "forever". With air friction it will rock shorter than that. Remember that an empty booster is light for its size. Energy conservation tells us it will not tip over simply from landing at an angle, as long as the center of mass's projection on the ground is within the support polygon, and as long as there is no imparted swing velocity due to factors other than gravitational settling. Whatever energy it gains going from -angle to zero degrees, it must use up going from zero to +angle. That's all there's to it. Just like you don't expect a pendulum's swings to increase in amplitude past initial angle, you can't expect this pendulum to do so either.
You can do hundreds of thousands of frames per second if you've got a nuclear bomb for a flashlight. To do thousands of frames per second in an inside location, you need so much light people's eyes hurt. Have a look at lighting in vehicle crash labs. It's not pleasant to be around when it's on. High frame rates are certainly possible, but you need light, lots of it.
The momentum issue of coming down at an angle is really simple. Such a system is inherently stable with air friction, as long as the wind doesn't blow the wrong way around, that is.
When it touches down with the whole stage at an angle, the settling down to vertical converts the potential energy to kinetic energy of rotation around some horizontal axis. Air friction dissipates some of it, because it's the whole damn rocket moving, and it's a "big" sail. So when it shifts weight to the opposite legs and starts to raise the center of mass, it won't deflect as much: there isn't enough energy left to raise the center of mass far enough, thus the angle of deflection will be slower, if by a tiny bit. It will probably rock a couple of times and settle. It'd be rather simple to test for this using a dummy model with same moment of inertia.
My major concern is that the angle of landing may be a tad excessive with the center of mass being so low, and it may be hard for the legs to accommodate that. If the engines are much heavier than the rest of the body (tankage and shell), it'd would be the likely dealbreaker.
I think as long as the landing "gear" (legs?) are designed to accommodate such a situation, it'd be OK. It's probably a weight vs. reliability tradeoff. They'll probably figure out how likely it is to lose the center engine. Then they'll figure how does the cost of decreased performance due to weight increase compare to the cost of losing a F9 1st stage once in a while on landing. Oh, the joys of engineering ;)
Isn't their thrust vectoring good enough to get the thrust vector going through the center of mass even from a side engine? It'd be landing a bit crooked, admittedly.
The fuel and oxidizer is not in the engines, it's in the shared tanks. Losing an engine increases fuel consumption only because when you accelerate slower, you bleed off air drag slower.
Agreed.
A mid-range car would have about 10 CPUs in it, easy. High-end cars -- a few times that many.
I think that on a modern x86 implementation, with the CISC instructions you can use about a cacheline worth of BP-relative RAM just as it were registers. It's no slower than using registers, or so it seems. There's some instruction rewriting going on that makes it so, I bet.
The CPU may not exactly be a generic chip, probably a core in an ASIC that's got some dedicated DSP pipes, but small CPUs are quite powerful *and* low power these days. TI's MSP line, for example.
Oh well, that part, yes :) +1
I wish we lived in a world where I could calmly tell you straight in your face that you're a deluded conspiracy nut. Alas, I can't. There will be probably an Ivy MBA somewhere who will think of this, implement it, and get a bunch of golden parachutes for his efforts :(
All this functionality you speak of is in software. Sure someone has to code it all up, test it, etc., but the only complexity to the device itself is a CPU of sufficient processing power and memory. That's all. You could make it play chiptunes all day if you wanted to.
Thanks, it just had to be said. +1
Normally one would bite the bullet and use a power converter to step up from a single cell's voltage to something more useful. I've had a Rio MP3 player a decade+ ago and sure as heck it didn't have to use germanium semiconductors! Heck, I don't know if this germanium story isn't some made up BS. I find it hard to believe. Do they run their own germanium fab? A power converter would maybe waste 20% of battery's capacity. Doesn't sound like a hard tradeoff to make vs. running a germanium semiconductor fab.
I've seen an audiologist's office in Europe where the latex impression is scanned and sent to the lab digitally. They use 3D printing technology to recreate the shape. I've also been to that lab, and it was a rather streamlined industrial process, little custom manual labor was involved. No one was connecting any #32 wires, that's for sure.
From that description I think that Starkey is simply running an outdated manufacturing process and using an outdated product design, that's all.