Actually, it may not have been the parody that was the problem. It may have been that I done it in the third person. Where I come from we call that sarcasm, legend has it that it's not understood over the pond.
should add, I think everyone know it was nothing to do with Iraq, personally I thought that was blatant enough. on both my post and the one I replied to.
Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humour, it is impossible to create a parody of fundamentalism thata fundamentalist won't object to.
I suppose they could have used 2 hours in a microwave or 40 years under a tanning lamp. But then the radiation may well be x-rays (though they say they tested using a gamer ray source).
It may have been better to put it in terms of how bright the equivalent aura would be if earth had that much radiation in it's atmosphere.
But the article was written by a dentist who drives an SUV, so I doubt he'd have know about things like that.
Thinking about it, why the hell don't they turn the mission into a Movie (as cost effectively as possible) and then release it to generate a load more review.
I mean, I sat through penguins standing pretty much in one place for over an hour, and that was one of the best things I've seen.
Didn't you hear, their going to put a Mosque in it's place. Get all the Muslims in one place, in your own country. Then it's only a short trip to NY with a nuke and get the lots of them in one go. And no need to worry about killing any yanks off, it's alight the Iraqis already done that job for you and made sure the whole are is now unable to sustain American life.
Wow, that guy who done the write up must have got a beta version of the SETI at home project that lets you write your own algorithms. Written his own one, and managed to communicate with the aliens that put the invisible, black monoliths around Jupiter. They then must have told him that they were using the force of Dental X-Rays to perform a denial of service attack on Jupiter and ignite it into a second sun as it overloads with the drilling of requests.
2010 you say, dam shame that NASA's budget got cut, due to the cost of the wars no doubt, and they missed their intended launch window of 2009, otherwise they may have been able to make it their in time. Now there defiantly going to be too late, even if they take a ride on the nipon solar sail and get their at the speed of light.
At least the Zionists will be happy, the Muslim world getting over-thrown, the Jew's back in the holy land and busy fighting off and imprisoning the Muslims around them and now the coming of the second son.
Thing is, it already seems like hell on earth where I'm standing, and I'm pretty sure those few million souls that go to heaven must have already gone, cos I've not met a single on of them, and Christians aren't like they used to be.
So it look like the bible was actually correct after all, they just wrote riders of the apocalypse when they really meant to put, Juno what, 2001/2010 a space odyssey.
Juno is NASA's newest planned mission to Jupiter. As part of the New Frontiers missions, it will focus on cost-effective research of the planetary giant. The project's costs will not exceed USD $700 million, however, budgetary restrictions have caused the original launch date of June 2009 to be pushed back to August 2011.
Apparently, that's about the same as the US has spent on the war in Iraq (ignoring all the other countries [including Iraq] and the none-financial costs)
Due to the secretive nature of Hollywood accounting it is not clear which film currently holds the record as the most expensive film ever made. Some charts have Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End in the top spot which had an estimated cost of $300 million[1] while others have Spider-Man 3 which was officially acknowledged to cost $258 million.[2] Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest and its sequel Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End were produced together on a combined budget of $450 million,[3] making it the most expensive production. More recently there have been reports that Avatar is the most expensive film ever made with speculation that it cost $280 million,[4] which if true would make it the most expensive single-film production.
But then there's the 'real' costs too, how much people spend on movies, just like how much they spent on this project.
For instance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films 1 Avatar 20th Century Fox $2,731,058,342 2009 [# 1] 2 Titanic Paramount Pictures 20th Century Fox $1,843,201,268 1997 [# 2] 3 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King New Line Cinema $1,119,110,941 2003 [# 3] 4 Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest Walt Disney Pictures $1,066,179,725 2006 [# 4] 5 Alice in Wonderland Walt Disney Pictures $1,024,291,110 2010 [# 5] 6 The Dark Knight Warner Bros. $1,001,921,825 2008 [# 6]
If you read the write-up you'll see that later on they say that they are an invisible force field. As we all know from sci-fi movies, force fields protect things. So, they must have meant to say, millions of denial X-rays, not dental X-rays.
It's a type'o, simple as that. Either that or someone forgot to rub out the little horizontal bit on the t to turn it into an i, when they were having a little joke with themselves to lighten up the day, working for the man an all.
Just imagine a vertical black line one pixel wide halfway between two pixels on a white background; most anti-aliassing algorithms would create a medium gray line two pixels wide; your eyes would percieve this as a medium gray line two pixels wide; not a single pixel black line.
1: That's why what he's done is really good, it's basically like sub-pixel shading where there is no half way.
2: in analogue systems, it would be really really weird for something to fall exactly half way between and be exactly one pixel wide. supersample until you get more info.
looks like she's saying things must be in a transient/flux state.
or each action must also be symmetrical and have an 'interface'
and indeed, each symmetry must also have an asymmetry and interface.
this requires latent 'constants' (I can't remember if the laws of super duper symmetry required some things to be constant absolute and some things to be relatively constant) within the system and means that the system must be in a status of continuous flux.
conservation laws (and their a/symmetries) then ensure that the system remains a/symmetrical transcendently.
Yeh, all those basket ball / socker / snooker etc.. players spend all their time brushing up on their calculus between games to make sure their equipped to work the with physics.
apparently they don't teach limits properly in the UK, which is probably why we dropped out soon. Best give the education system a kick up the ass and get them teaching limits properly for the next world cup or away game.
at a base level, you can easily show that everything must be at least comparable, thought equal and opposite and interface.
so you can show that there is up and down and their for there must be something that is neither up nor down (even the grand old duke of York knows that one).
you now can have a set of axioms, which can then be related to mathematics.
mathematics need not be the basis of you axioms, it can be derived.
try applying that to say, matter and space, energy and time, matter/energy and space/ time and see what happens. it get's quite interesting.
you'll need something a bit more than just a ab b for space time. and working out where space comes from in the first place... well it's all a bit random if you ask me.
physics is a set of excremental data and laws, math is just a convenient (at times) way to work with them, and can easily be derived or looked up if needed.
you can also perform 'thought' experiments intuitively, without even reaching for a calculator. and then turn them into real world experiments.
"gifted in mathematics and physics, from an early age"
so, what your saying is, that he most probably had a good idea of how things worked, far beyond what he was taught and most probably before he was taught it?
he may well have taken a lot of stuff on board, thought 'interesting' somewhat useful, but best broken at best, so don't do to much with it. lets go do some patent checking instead. and while I'm at it, seeing as it all looks a bit to crap to really bother with the rest of them, I'll just do some stuff with bromine motion on my tod.
I've got 4 GCSE's, so on book I can do a bit of simple trig (no sign-cosine rules or anything interesting), and a bit of algebra.
little more physics than something like specific heating capacity.
I could work out things like best value smallest of (price/weight) across a number of products when I was pre-school (just under 4)
Oh, I also past the maths extension paper without even bothering to look what was supposed to be in it. and only used any form of aid when taking my math exams when having to do trig (it was as bit late in the day for lookup tables). only 1 question incorrect across 4 papers, and was on the 'easiest' paper.
I should be able to construct things like log or sin tables using Taylor series if you like, though I'd have to work out the Taylor series for them. (log would just be so that the angle and gradient are equal, and sin would be related to Pythagoras, which would relate the length to the squares.)
Oh what's that, you can actually work the maths out just by knowing the basic principals behind things. My god, it's like you don't even need to go to school.
infact the majority of people with aspergers are said to have some kind of 'savant' abilities.
most of the really sucessfull people are dropouts.
people with ADHD/ADD have more startup businesses (at least in the UK), that their so called none disabled counterparts.
and who says that any kind of 'grand' theory of everything is going to be a typical maths / set theory based one. after all maths is still theoretical and based on commonly held assumptions. it's going to be quite a task without that illusive set of all sets.
so, quite possibly a mathematical (as it currently stands) education in physics, may well be the poorest education you get.
the car anology was fine, to use a car and to teach how to use a car doesn't require that you know how to make one. (although I know a number of people who could and don't know squat about maths)
That's like saying all physics is pointless unless you can make a universe.
I did give a small spin example, but it looks like I may have forgotten to submit after preview.
in brief: angular momentum. Can be explained to a good degree of understanding without knowing the math. then but in devisions of 1/4, which relates to spin number (could give formula). Then spin direction as other component. then some experimental examples, and some entanglement, and demonstrations.
touch a bit on the standard model I suppose, but it's known to be a bit of a fudge etc... so is that really teaching physics, or just teaching 'known bad' physics?
I'm sure that it's not going to go into the whole square peg round whole that is QED.
do the rest of it in a similar way and people may well be able to do some research and the like.
Slashdot Mirror
no I'm mixing up 100 millions and billiards ( a thousand million).
a billion is a million million. 'Bi' or 10^(2*6) a 'tri'llion is 10^(3*6).
Go look it up.
Actually, it may not have been the parody that was the problem. It may have been that I done it in the third person. Where I come from we call that sarcasm, legend has it that it's not understood over the pond.
should add, I think everyone know it was nothing to do with Iraq, personally I thought that was blatant enough. on both my post and the one I replied to.
Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humour, it is impossible to create a parody of fundamentalism thata fundamentalist won't object to.
I suppose they could have used 2 hours in a microwave or 40 years under a tanning lamp. But then the radiation may well be x-rays (though they say they tested using a gamer ray source).
It may have been better to put it in terms of how bright the equivalent aura would be if earth had that much radiation in it's atmosphere.
But the article was written by a dentist who drives an SUV, so I doubt he'd have know about things like that.
Feminine is used in the English language for a neuter form of a single entity.
America and her army,
My ship and all who sail in her.
Masculine is used in the English language for a neuter form of a unit of a group.
In chess, move you man.
Did they also change Woman to be Woone? or Woperson?
But then person is no good either, it's got son in it and that's not gender neutral.
So, from now on I'm going to call my partner a Wopeone, that is unless my partner is male in which case I'm gona call him my bitch.
I've been up all night (without any drugs) and I think it's starting to show.
Thinking about it, why the hell don't they turn the mission into a Movie (as cost effectively as possible) and then release it to generate a load more review.
I mean, I sat through penguins standing pretty much in one place for over an hour, and that was one of the best things I've seen.
Didn't you hear, their going to put a Mosque in it's place.
Get all the Muslims in one place, in your own country. Then it's only a short trip to NY with a nuke and get the lots of them in one go.
And no need to worry about killing any yanks off, it's alight the Iraqis already done that job for you and made sure the whole are is now unable to sustain American life.
Wow, that guy who done the write up must have got a beta version of the SETI at home project that lets you write your own algorithms. Written his own one, and managed to communicate with the aliens that put the invisible, black monoliths around Jupiter. They then must have told him that they were using the force of Dental X-Rays to perform a denial of service attack on Jupiter and ignite it into a second sun as it overloads with the drilling of requests.
2010 you say, dam shame that NASA's budget got cut, due to the cost of the wars no doubt, and they missed their intended launch window of 2009, otherwise they may have been able to make it their in time. Now there defiantly going to be too late, even if they take a ride on the nipon solar sail and get their at the speed of light.
At least the Zionists will be happy, the Muslim world getting over-thrown, the Jew's back in the holy land and busy fighting off and imprisoning the Muslims around them and now the coming of the second son.
Thing is, it already seems like hell on earth where I'm standing, and I'm pretty sure those few million souls that go to heaven must have already gone, cos I've not met a single on of them, and Christians aren't like they used to be.
So it look like the bible was actually correct after all, they just wrote riders of the apocalypse when they really meant to put, Juno what, 2001/2010 a space odyssey.
Sorry, the cost of war in Iraq (financially to the US alone) is 100 times that of this mission to Jupiter.
Juno is NASA's newest planned mission to Jupiter. As part of the New Frontiers missions, it will focus on cost-effective research of the planetary giant. The project's costs will not exceed USD $700 million, however, budgetary restrictions have caused the original launch date of June 2009 to be pushed back to August 2011.
Apparently, that's about the same as the US has spent on the war in Iraq (ignoring all the other countries [including Iraq] and the none-financial costs)
http://costofwar.com/
or to put it another way
Due to the secretive nature of Hollywood accounting it is not clear which film currently holds the record as the most expensive film ever made. Some charts have Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End in the top spot which had an estimated cost of $300 million[1] while others have Spider-Man 3 which was officially acknowledged to cost $258 million.[2] Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest and its sequel Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End were produced together on a combined budget of $450 million,[3] making it the most expensive production. More recently there have been reports that Avatar is the most expensive film ever made with speculation that it cost $280 million,[4] which if true would make it the most expensive single-film production.
But then there's the 'real' costs too, how much people spend on movies, just like how much they spent on this project.
For instance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films
1 Avatar 20th Century Fox $2,731,058,342 2009
[# 1]
2 Titanic Paramount Pictures
20th Century Fox $1,843,201,268 1997
[# 2]
3 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King New Line Cinema $1,119,110,941 2003
[# 3]
4 Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest Walt Disney Pictures $1,066,179,725 2006
[# 4]
5 Alice in Wonderland Walt Disney Pictures $1,024,291,110 2010
[# 5]
6 The Dark Knight Warner Bros. $1,001,921,825 2008
[# 6]
If you read the write-up you'll see that later on they say that they are an invisible force field.
As we all know from sci-fi movies, force fields protect things.
So, they must have meant to say, millions of denial X-rays, not dental X-rays.
It's a type'o, simple as that. Either that or someone forgot to rub out the little horizontal bit on the t to turn it into an i, when they were having a little joke with themselves to lighten up the day, working for the man an all.
informative?
"Ozzy Osbourne: New Album First I've done Sober". CNN.com. 13 April 2007. http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Music/04/13/music.ozzy.reut/index.html
cnn link dead, but cited here
I think I could say that about pretty much anyone!
I hope that was your point?
Just imagine a vertical black line one pixel wide halfway between two pixels on a white background; most anti-aliassing algorithms would create a medium gray line two pixels wide; your eyes would percieve this as a medium gray line two pixels wide; not a single pixel black line.
1: That's why what he's done is really good, it's basically like sub-pixel shading where there is no half way.
2: in analogue systems, it would be really really weird for something to fall exactly half way between and be exactly one pixel wide.
supersample until you get more info.
why on earth would you want a straight line?
the blocks he's using are line this .... ..xx
xxxx
xxxx
but 6x6 not 4x4,
so stick them together and you not only get a free AA, but sharper edges.
if you think of a H | V line being downscaled, then sometimes it will fall across 2 pixels either side and sometimes only 1 pixel along the line.
that don't look good!
'Noether's theorem'
looks like she's saying things must be in a transient/flux state.
or each action must also be symmetrical and have an 'interface'
and indeed, each symmetry must also have an asymmetry and interface.
this requires latent 'constants' (I can't remember if the laws of super duper symmetry required some things to be constant absolute and some things to be relatively constant) within the system and means that the system must be in a status of continuous flux.
conservation laws (and their a/symmetries) then ensure that the system remains a/symmetrical transcendently.
Yeh, all those basket ball / socker / snooker etc.. players spend all their time brushing up on their calculus between games to make sure their equipped to work the with physics.
apparently they don't teach limits properly in the UK, which is probably why we dropped out soon. Best give the education system a kick up the ass and get them teaching limits properly for the next world cup or away game.
ok, lets take the following.
at a base level, you can easily show that everything must be at least comparable, thought equal and opposite and interface.
so you can show that there is up and down and their for there must be something that is neither up nor down (even the grand old duke of York knows that one).
you now can have a set of axioms, which can then be related to mathematics.
mathematics need not be the basis of you axioms, it can be derived.
try applying that to say, matter and space, energy and time, matter /energy and space/ time and see what happens. it get's quite interesting.
you'll need something a bit more than just a ab b for space time. and working out where space comes from in the first place... well it's all a bit random if you ask me.
I should say that you could use a axiom based on a subset of the axiom of choice to provide injection into set theory from nothing, not even a set.
but I'll save that for another day.
physics is a set of excremental data and laws, math is just a convenient (at times) way to work with them, and can easily be derived or looked up if needed.
you can also perform 'thought' experiments intuitively, without even reaching for a calculator. and then turn them into real world experiments.
by the way, I derived the math for the newton physics only knowing the law.
(didn't bother to complete it, because well all kinds of things like friction and inertia and center of gravity and density and viscosity and .......)
there's a good reason why you can't patent things such as maths.
"gifted in mathematics and physics, from an early age"
so, what your saying is, that he most probably had a good idea of how things worked, far beyond what he was taught and most probably before he was taught it?
he may well have taken a lot of stuff on board, thought 'interesting' somewhat useful, but best broken at best, so don't do to much with it. lets go do some patent checking instead. and while I'm at it, seeing as it all looks a bit to crap to really bother with the rest of them, I'll just do some stuff with bromine motion on my tod.
I've got 4 GCSE's, so on book I can do a bit of simple trig (no sign-cosine rules or anything interesting), and a bit of algebra.
little more physics than something like specific heating capacity.
I could work out things like best value smallest of (price/weight) across a number of products when I was pre-school (just under 4)
Oh, I also past the maths extension paper without even bothering to look what was supposed to be in it. and only used any form of aid when taking my math exams when having to do trig (it was as bit late in the day for lookup tables). only 1 question incorrect across 4 papers, and was on the 'easiest' paper.
I should be able to construct things like log or sin tables using Taylor series if you like, though I'd have to work out the Taylor series for them. (log would just be so that the angle and gradient are equal, and sin would be related to Pythagoras, which would relate the length to the squares.)
Oh what's that, you can actually work the maths out just by knowing the basic principals behind things. My god, it's like you don't even need to go to school.
infact the majority of people with aspergers are said to have some kind of 'savant' abilities.
most of the really sucessfull people are dropouts.
people with ADHD/ADD have more startup businesses (at least in the UK), that their so called none disabled counterparts.
and who says that any kind of 'grand' theory of everything is going to be a typical maths / set theory based one. after all maths is still theoretical and based on commonly held assumptions. it's going to be quite a task without that illusive set of all sets.
so, quite possibly a mathematical (as it currently stands) education in physics, may well be the poorest education you get.
the car anology was fine, to use a car and to teach how to use a car doesn't require that you know how to make one.
(although I know a number of people who could and don't know squat about maths)
That's like saying all physics is pointless unless you can make a universe.
I did give a small spin example, but it looks like I may have forgotten to submit after preview.
in brief:
angular momentum. Can be explained to a good degree of understanding without knowing the math.
then but in devisions of 1/4, which relates to spin number (could give formula).
Then spin direction as other component.
then some experimental examples,
and some entanglement, and demonstrations.
touch a bit on the standard model I suppose, but it's known to be a bit of a fudge etc... so is that really teaching physics, or just teaching 'known bad' physics?
I'm sure that it's not going to go into the whole square peg round whole that is QED.
do the rest of it in a similar way and people may well be able to do some research and the like.