If its existance doesn't depend on the physical, how the hell is it related to physics? You're basically asking physics to explain your particular philosophical interpretation of time, which is an absurd request to say the least.
The only way that we can measure time is by events. If you want to try to extend the definition of a physical quantity beyond that which can ever be observed, directly or indirectly, you may as well call it religion.
A slightly more accurate translation: (4 years of high-school spanish )
This comment is very stupid. If you are going to send an email to many people, it is not possible to change the language for everyone. This is the problem at hand. And many of the words in these languages are similar to the same ones in English, for example (shouldn't that have been 'por ejemplo'?) "sex" in Spanish is "sexo," and "pornography" is "pornografía."
As for the people advocating grammatical filters, it's not very hard to get around that. Just send your text through the fish once or twice, and see if any computer can parse that shit.
English-Spanish-English:
Like for the people who plead the grammar filters, he is not very hard to obtain around that. Hardly it sends its text through the fish once or twice, and sees if any computer can analyze that excrement.
English-German-French-English:
As for the people who support grammatical filters, to receive is not very hard, around whose
send simply your text by fish once or twice, and see, if a computer can analyze these
Scheisse.
The only trouble is getting humans to recognize it. Alternatively you, could just insert! random punctuation mark's and Capitalization in? Your text". I wonder; if any( filter could understand, this).? Its' human readable-after just? a moment so, it wouldn't be! much more/ of an. obstacle to understanding The message than some people's terrible. Grammar!! Combine, with 1337 sp34k! for Keywords like fuc|< and/ $h1t, and your text! Is completely Filter-?proof.
I recommend 7.62x51mm NATO. The recoil's a bit annoying, but well worth it for the power. That's assuming you're talking small arms. If you want something bigger, there's nothing like a 120mm M256 with a depleted-uranium sabot round to make them see your point of view.
That wasn't funny, was it? Oh well. I'll try harder next time.
The potential for fault-tolerance is interesting, though. If physical damage to the system occurs, the chip can simply reconfigure itself to not use the damaged portion. It will be slower than the undamaged version, but it would still work. For example, if you started the chip decoding an audio file, and then started deactivating portions of the processor, the playback would gradually slow down. I wonder if the designers have played "Bicycle Built for Two" on it yet.:)
"The new high-performance computers, developed... in Midvale, Utah..."
They'd better get an office in Urbana, Illinois before they get around to making the 9000 model.
The article is in the "Featured Views" section of the publication. I dunno about you, but a heading like that translates as "Take with 100-1000mg NaCl" to me.
Yes I'm aware that a full gram is a very big grain of salt.
If you want to convert people to Christianity, I advise you to remember the words of St. Augustine:
"Spread Christianity wherever you go, and when necessary, use words."
If, on the other hand, your purpose was to troll, then I advise you to go stick your head in a running blender. I'm sure you can make it fit.
That was a 2-d image projected off the surface by the mirror mentioned in the last comment. Looks kinda cool, but the image gets a bit distorted and there's no real 3rd dimension to it. IIRC, it was a pretty crappy game too. You can get the same optical effect from that table-top mirage thingy, the one you put some coins or something in the bottom of. The image is projected above the device by a pair of parabolic mirrors. Here's the first link that I got from Google. There's an explanation a bit more than halfway down the page.
The term "dark matter" does not, in general, refer to matter any different from what you're made of. The distinction is that it is not emitting light, like stars, and so is not easily observed at any significant distance. Astrophysical models tell us that the matter we see as stars and dust clouds falls short of the total mass of the galaxy. The missing mass is collectively referred to as dark matter. As this article explains, previously unobserved dim white dwarfs may comprise a significant percentage of that mass.
There has been much speculation about the possible existance of non-baryonic dark matter. Non-baryonic just means not composed of protons, neutrons, or their unstable cousins. Nobody has offered any good explanation of the precise nature of this matter, if it even exists.
Vladimir Solovyov was the first commander on board Mir. He is now mission control flight commander. Seeing it go down would be painful enough, let alone giving the order to begin the final deorbit burn.
Re:Will there be any salvagable remains?
on
Mir Deathwatch
·
· Score: 2
As several articles have mentioned, this region of ocean is routinely used for dumping old spacecraft. I remember reading that several Progress vehicles have been dropped there over the last couple decades. If anybody wanted some cool (if slightly singed) space junk, the ocean floor in that area would be the place to look. Too bad getting to the bottom would be a rather expensive proposition in itself, much less finding relatively tiny chunks of metal in several thousand square miles of sea floor.
Re:Pilots are taking bets
on
Mir Deathwatch
·
· Score: 1
And if they aim it just right, adios Redmond! An easier target, though, would be Bill Gates' Hawaiian island. Much closer to the intended target area.
Quite true. I didn't intend to suggest teaching particle physics in high school (though it might be fun to try). I was saying that the earlier poster succeeded in explaining a lot of stuff very quickly and accurately, and that such ability is needed in many high schools.
As for my science classes, the first ones just repeated the same material over and over, adding a tiny bit more detail each year. Once I got to a class specifically focused on physics, it was just another incremental increase in the amount of detail and homework. The really sad part is that almost no mathematical background was expected on the part of the students. Screw calculus, that class was taught without the benefit of anything past first year algebra. The result was a bunch of students trying to remember dozens of formulas, not realizing that most of them were just permutations or combinations of others. I remember spending significantly more time helping my classmates than doing work. The rest of my time in that class was spend reading books about much more interesting physics and/or designing simple nuclear weapons. Now that I'm in 400-level physics courses, I sometimes long for the days before integrals. Then I remember how much high school sucked, and go back to the problem.
>BTW, remember that I may be wrong. IANAPhysicist.
Why not? You sound as if you've got basic particle physics down pretty well. That's gotta be the most concise, while correct, explanation of those ideas I've ever seen. Maybe you should just get a job at a high school and improve the quality of instruction there.
Just a moment ago, they were preparing for the final round, to break the tie. Then it cut to a view of Mission Control, with nothing happening. Now they're showing a view of the Earth from some orbiting body, probably the Space Shuttle. The view of the Earth is cool, but what the hell happened to the robots?
Sometimes decent music, sometimes not. For example, right now they're playing the goddamnmotherfucking macarena. I guess even geeks can have disturbingly bad taste.
Was I, now? I have never claimed to be better than anyone else. Smarter, maybe. Better, no. I rarely disrupted class. When I claimed I was smarter than the teachers, it was not because I got in trouble. It was because they could not understand the material they were supposed to be teaching, when I could understand it just from reading the book. I am now in my second year of college, and am taking more advanced math and science courses than all but 2 or 3 of my teachers ever did. The funny thing is that my classmates told me I was smarter than the teachers far more often than I told anyone else the same thing.
Admittedly, I am not an outgoing person. This does not make me dumb. As for friends, I had no "dirty group of three or four." I tended to associate with others who thought for themselves. There are more people like this than you might think. My friends included other geeks, several potheads, and even 2 guys on the football team.
My reason and understanding of human nature are no worse than yours. You read one 3 line long post on slashdot, and you think you know who I am. I will not venture to guess what you were like in high school, as that cannot be told from a single comment.
You say you hated people who had few friends, or played card games, or disrupted class, or played with computers, or said they were smarter than teachers. Where the hell do you get off hating a person because of these things? Did you ever actually get to know these people? Just because they don't act like you and your friends does not give you, or anyone else, reason to hate them.
As for your suggestion to get help, I must say that I agree. If any students reading this do fit any if those characteristics, find someone who will help you immediately. Find someone who will help you learn. Find someone who will help you get access to computers. Find someone who will help you resist the pressure to conform, to stop acting smarter than the teachers, to sit down and shut up. Find someone who will help you pursue your interests, and never let someone like this anonymous coward discourage you.
Holy shit, you're right! He even showed that he's smarter than his teacher(s), and has yet to recieve punishment. I tells ya, that place needs more discipline. If we let our kids spend all day in school thinking, there's no telling what could happen to our country.
Anybody know what the theorem actually states? The article was quite vague in that area, even for mainstream press. I'd really like to know some details of the discovery.
Dr. Ross presents a lot of nubmers without much support. In addition, I expect a very high degree of bias in information on a site entitled "Reasons to Believe." For example, the chart at the bottom quotes the probability of a star being solitary, as opposed to part of a binary or other multi-star system, as being 20%. Estimates of this probabiltiy range from the quoted 20% to a much more frequently cited 50%. Funny that the person trying to scientifically disprove evolution chooses the most extreme value considered credible, without any note that there are many other estimates. I would also like to know how white dwarf binary systems relate to fluorine formation. Fluorine is also not required in any great concentration, and is produced in Sun-like stars as part of the NOF cycle.
Of the 66 values quoted on the website, only the first 15 or 20 pertain to the formation of life in general. All others are only required for the formation of humans. I'm sure I could find more holes, but I don't feel like doing more research into Dr. Ross' numbers as I could use some sleep.
In addition, 20 of the 89 citations are to Dr. Ross' own publications, every single one of which is in Facts & Faith. If Dr. Ross ever gets his work sufficiently well accepted by the scientific community to be published in a non-religious journal, let me know.
I don't think you made all this up, not anymore anyway. I do, however, strongly suspect that your single source is less than credible. He seems best known for his work in trying to scientifically disprove evolution, and also seems to recieve very little recognition from his colleagues. I have yet to find any reference to Dr. Ross which is not in a religious context.
Yes, there are some restrictions on what stars could support life. But a fairly large percentage of stars go a hell of a long time between noticable interactions with other stars.
As for stellar age, the question wasn't of whether human-like life could exist, but whether any life could exist. We pretty well know that there was life on Earth 3 billion years ago.
Planets might have to hold an atmosphere to support life, but they might not. Look at Europa. There's a good chance it could support life beneath its surface, but its atmosphere is almost nonexistant. I really don't see a reason to have an upper bound on the size of a planet for the purposes of supporting life. Something the size of a bacterium isn't too concerned with climbing stairs.
Life on Earth has adapted to some amazing environments. Tube worms survive in water around 400 degrees Celsius (~750 degrees Fahrenheit), live symbiotically with chemotrophic bacteria. And I do not now, nor have I ever worked for NASA, so I am not confusing Kelvin and Fahrenheit.:)
I haven't studied the matter in depth, but I thought most movement of water on Earth was due to convection currents. The Gulf Stream doesn't oscillate with the lunar orbit. I can see tides playing some role, but I seriously doubt that life is entirely dependant on tides.
Slashdot Mirror
The only way that we can measure time is by events. If you want to try to extend the definition of a physical quantity beyond that which can ever be observed, directly or indirectly, you may as well call it religion.
This comment is very stupid. If you are going to send an email to many people, it is not possible to change the language for everyone. This is the problem at hand. And many of the words in these languages are similar to the same ones in English, for example (shouldn't that have been 'por ejemplo'?) "sex" in Spanish is "sexo," and "pornography" is "pornografía."
As for the people advocating grammatical filters, it's not very hard to get around that. Just send your text through the fish once or twice, and see if any computer can parse that shit.
English-Spanish-English:
Like for the people who plead the grammar filters, he is not very hard to obtain around that. Hardly it sends its text through the fish once or twice, and sees if any computer can analyze that excrement.
English-German-French-English:
As for the people who support grammatical filters, to receive is not very hard, around whose send simply your text by fish once or twice, and see, if a computer can analyze these Scheisse.
The only trouble is getting humans to recognize it. Alternatively you, could just insert! random punctuation mark's and Capitalization in? Your text". I wonder; if any( filter could understand, this).? Its' human readable-after just? a moment so, it wouldn't be! much more/ of an. obstacle to understanding The message than some people's terrible. Grammar!! Combine, with 1337 sp34k! for Keywords like fuc|< and/ $h1t, and your text! Is completely Filter-?proof.
That wasn't funny, was it? Oh well. I'll try harder next time.
"The new high-performance computers, developed ... in Midvale, Utah..."
They'd better get an office in Urbana, Illinois before they get around to making the 9000 model.
Yes I'm aware that a full gram is a very big grain of salt.
So it was, if you meant Assisi. Can't remember where I got my original reference, but a quick Google search proves you correct.
"Spread Christianity wherever you go, and when necessary, use words."
If, on the other hand, your purpose was to troll, then I advise you to go stick your head in a running blender. I'm sure you can make it fit.
Sorry for being so OT, but I saw the name Cpt. Fwiffo and W2.MOD immediately started running through my head. Talk about efficient use of brain cells.
That was a 2-d image projected off the surface by the mirror mentioned in the last comment. Looks kinda cool, but the image gets a bit distorted and there's no real 3rd dimension to it. IIRC, it was a pretty crappy game too. You can get the same optical effect from that table-top mirage thingy, the one you put some coins or something in the bottom of. The image is projected above the device by a pair of parabolic mirrors. Here's the first link that I got from Google. There's an explanation a bit more than halfway down the page.
There has been much speculation about the possible existance of non-baryonic dark matter. Non-baryonic just means not composed of protons, neutrons, or their unstable cousins. Nobody has offered any good explanation of the precise nature of this matter, if it even exists.
Here am I sitting in a tin can
[not so]Far above the world
Planet Earth is blue, and there's nothing I can do...
Vladimir Solovyov was the first commander on board Mir. He is now mission control flight commander. Seeing it go down would be painful enough, let alone giving the order to begin the final deorbit burn.
As several articles have mentioned, this region of ocean is routinely used for dumping old spacecraft. I remember reading that several Progress vehicles have been dropped there over the last couple decades. If anybody wanted some cool (if slightly singed) space junk, the ocean floor in that area would be the place to look. Too bad getting to the bottom would be a rather expensive proposition in itself, much less finding relatively tiny chunks of metal in several thousand square miles of sea floor.
And if they aim it just right, adios Redmond! An easier target, though, would be Bill Gates' Hawaiian island. Much closer to the intended target area.
As for my science classes, the first ones just repeated the same material over and over, adding a tiny bit more detail each year. Once I got to a class specifically focused on physics, it was just another incremental increase in the amount of detail and homework. The really sad part is that almost no mathematical background was expected on the part of the students. Screw calculus, that class was taught without the benefit of anything past first year algebra. The result was a bunch of students trying to remember dozens of formulas, not realizing that most of them were just permutations or combinations of others. I remember spending significantly more time helping my classmates than doing work. The rest of my time in that class was spend reading books about much more interesting physics and/or designing simple nuclear weapons. Now that I'm in 400-level physics courses, I sometimes long for the days before integrals. Then I remember how much high school sucked, and go back to the problem.
Why not? You sound as if you've got basic particle physics down pretty well. That's gotta be the most concise, while correct, explanation of those ideas I've ever seen. Maybe you should just get a job at a high school and improve the quality of instruction there.
Just a moment ago, they were preparing for the final round, to break the tie. Then it cut to a view of Mission Control, with nothing happening. Now they're showing a view of the Earth from some orbiting body, probably the Space Shuttle. The view of the Earth is cool, but what the hell happened to the robots?
Sometimes decent music, sometimes not. For example, right now they're playing the goddamnmotherfucking macarena. I guess even geeks can have disturbingly bad taste.
Admittedly, I am not an outgoing person. This does not make me dumb. As for friends, I had no "dirty group of three or four." I tended to associate with others who thought for themselves. There are more people like this than you might think. My friends included other geeks, several potheads, and even 2 guys on the football team.
My reason and understanding of human nature are no worse than yours. You read one 3 line long post on slashdot, and you think you know who I am. I will not venture to guess what you were like in high school, as that cannot be told from a single comment.
You say you hated people who had few friends, or played card games, or disrupted class, or played with computers, or said they were smarter than teachers. Where the hell do you get off hating a person because of these things? Did you ever actually get to know these people? Just because they don't act like you and your friends does not give you, or anyone else, reason to hate them.
As for your suggestion to get help, I must say that I agree. If any students reading this do fit any if those characteristics, find someone who will help you immediately. Find someone who will help you learn. Find someone who will help you get access to computers. Find someone who will help you resist the pressure to conform, to stop acting smarter than the teachers, to sit down and shut up. Find someone who will help you pursue your interests, and never let someone like this anonymous coward discourage you.
Holy shit, you're right! He even showed that he's smarter than his teacher(s), and has yet to recieve punishment. I tells ya, that place needs more discipline. If we let our kids spend all day in school thinking, there's no telling what could happen to our country.
Anybody know what the theorem actually states? The article was quite vague in that area, even for mainstream press. I'd really like to know some details of the discovery.
No, wait, wrong species. Wrong phylum, even. Sorry.
Of the 66 values quoted on the website, only the first 15 or 20 pertain to the formation of life in general. All others are only required for the formation of humans. I'm sure I could find more holes, but I don't feel like doing more research into Dr. Ross' numbers as I could use some sleep.
In addition, 20 of the 89 citations are to Dr. Ross' own publications, every single one of which is in Facts & Faith. If Dr. Ross ever gets his work sufficiently well accepted by the scientific community to be published in a non-religious journal, let me know.
I don't think you made all this up, not anymore anyway. I do, however, strongly suspect that your single source is less than credible. He seems best known for his work in trying to scientifically disprove evolution, and also seems to recieve very little recognition from his colleagues. I have yet to find any reference to Dr. Ross which is not in a religious context.
As for stellar age, the question wasn't of whether human-like life could exist, but whether any life could exist. We pretty well know that there was life on Earth 3 billion years ago.
Planets might have to hold an atmosphere to support life, but they might not. Look at Europa. There's a good chance it could support life beneath its surface, but its atmosphere is almost nonexistant. I really don't see a reason to have an upper bound on the size of a planet for the purposes of supporting life. Something the size of a bacterium isn't too concerned with climbing stairs.
Life on Earth has adapted to some amazing environments. Tube worms survive in water around 400 degrees Celsius (~750 degrees Fahrenheit), live symbiotically with chemotrophic bacteria. And I do not now, nor have I ever worked for NASA, so I am not confusing Kelvin and Fahrenheit. :)
I haven't studied the matter in depth, but I thought most movement of water on Earth was due to convection currents. The Gulf Stream doesn't oscillate with the lunar orbit. I can see tides playing some role, but I seriously doubt that life is entirely dependant on tides.
I guess it's not a solar sail, but it would give you some propulsion.