You're describing an electrical current -- although it bears pointing out that a current between A and B does not involve any electrons actually moving from A to B, but moving only very small distances.
These, on the other hand, are polarization currents. Every person on the planet capable of reading the linked article could know that.
China holds less than a quarter of the US debt held by foreign entities, which is itself about a quarter of the total US government debt. So, China holds roughly an eighth of the US debt. (Japan holds slightly less -- about 5% of the total.)
That's not even a majority, much less a "vast" majority.
600k Euros / year isn't bad for an exploratory research program. The article suggests that they're funding multiple such efforts, searching for promising ideas that can be furthered by later funding -- which is often how these things are done.
With some back-of-the-envelope calculations, you can see that the thermal energy put into the environment by direct heat production and waste heat (produced by using energy) is dwarfed by the heat retained as a result of the greenhouse gases emitted to produce the heat or energy. (On RealClimate, they walk through this for a "coal vs. solar panels" example -- solar panels can produce substantial waste heat.) So, a first-order answer (and a sufficient one, as long as the world is getting most of its energy from fossil fuels) is that "how much energy did it take, and where did the energy come from" is all there is to the heating produced by a system.
Contrary to intuition, "the decades" start on zero, whereas the centuries start on one. For example, "the 90s" refers to 1990-1999, but "the 17th century" refers to 1601-1700.
The first part is true, but the second part isn't. The logical cluster size and its implications are all in software and dependent on the filesystem. It's entiirely possible to have filesystems that put multiple small files into a single logical cluster and, for that matter, into a single physical sector. This does mean things are a bit more complicated, though.
The real answer is simply that a sector is the size of a unit of data that can be read from or written to a hard drive. That constrains how the operating system accesses the disk, which has performance implications for different disk-use strategies.
That's qualitative reasoning for a question that ought have a quantitative answer. The energy your cell phone dumps into your head should be well-known. How about estimates for radio, TV, etc?
Insightful. It is almost certain that, in the future, there will be a natural event that causes significant climate change. It's almost certain that a respectable fraction of the population will be negatively impacted by it. This says nothing of current or future man-made events that cause significant climate change. Dealing with these issues is something that we will, at some point in the future, need to address robustly (or figure out how to deal with).
The primary dangers in sea-level rise are "tipping points" (a term I, for some reason, dislike) -- sharp nonlinear transitions. The simple progression of sea level rise gives you very little sea level rise, but if you cross a threshold where a lot of land-bound ice melts over a period of time, you can suddenly (in the climatological/geological sense of "suddenly") get substantial ocean rise.
The IPCC reports correctly point out that there are quite a few potentially negative tipping points (and a few positive ones) that we may be approaching, but predicting what exactly will happen with them is extremely difficult. The major risk they present is in their unpredictability. Even the IPCC "worst-case" scenarios are not actually worse-case, because they (rightly) do not include these unpredictable transitions.
Slashdot Mirror
You're describing an electrical current -- although it bears pointing out that a current between A and B does not involve any electrons actually moving from A to B, but moving only very small distances.
These, on the other hand, are polarization currents. Every person on the planet capable of reading the linked article could know that.
But they can do it in Star Trek!
Current doesn't necessarily involve something actually moving from point A to point B either.
It also seems to only include your most-recent boss kill (for example, it says when I last killed Marrowgar, but not any of the previous times).
The RSS feed doesn't include gear changes, but does include boss kills (in addition to achievements and gear acquisition).
Sadly, absolutely nothing seems to support this.
Except for your example two paragraphs up, where you note that Thunderbird both supports and recommends SSL-encrypted connections.
Studies cited on Wikipedia disagree with your "askmen.com" article -- male pattern baldness is primarily X-linked.
The current Chinese government has only been at it for about 60 years.
China holds less than a quarter of the US debt held by foreign entities, which is itself about a quarter of the total US government debt. So, China holds roughly an eighth of the US debt. (Japan holds slightly less -- about 5% of the total.)
That's not even a majority, much less a "vast" majority.
Male pattern baldness is actually inherited from your mother's side: it's carried on the X chromosome.
600k Euros / year isn't bad for an exploratory research program. The article suggests that they're funding multiple such efforts, searching for promising ideas that can be furthered by later funding -- which is often how these things are done.
I think the lethal dosage of nutmeg is about 3 nuts. Hemlock, some mushrooms, and some berries also have low lethal doses.
With some back-of-the-envelope calculations, you can see that the thermal energy put into the environment by direct heat production and waste heat (produced by using energy) is dwarfed by the heat retained as a result of the greenhouse gases emitted to produce the heat or energy. (On RealClimate, they walk through this for a "coal vs. solar panels" example -- solar panels can produce substantial waste heat.) So, a first-order answer (and a sufficient one, as long as the world is getting most of its energy from fossil fuels) is that "how much energy did it take, and where did the energy come from" is all there is to the heating produced by a system.
Contrary to intuition, "the decades" start on zero, whereas the centuries start on one. For example, "the 90s" refers to 1990-1999, but "the 17th century" refers to 1601-1700.
The first part is true, but the second part isn't. The logical cluster size and its implications are all in software and dependent on the filesystem. It's entiirely possible to have filesystems that put multiple small files into a single logical cluster and, for that matter, into a single physical sector. This does mean things are a bit more complicated, though.
The real answer is simply that a sector is the size of a unit of data that can be read from or written to a hard drive. That constrains how the operating system accesses the disk, which has performance implications for different disk-use strategies.
Yes, well, the person you were responding to did make exactly the same mistake.
So far, it hasn't.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/
It's a poor wording, but that's a very important warning. The presence of LN2 tanks presents a significant asphyxiation risk.
That's qualitative reasoning for a question that ought have a quantitative answer. The energy your cell phone dumps into your head should be well-known. How about estimates for radio, TV, etc?
Damn it, you beat me to it.
There has been a sharp increase in anti-AGW climate articles since climate gate. Funny, that...
Insightful. It is almost certain that, in the future, there will be a natural event that causes significant climate change. It's almost certain that a respectable fraction of the population will be negatively impacted by it. This says nothing of current or future man-made events that cause significant climate change. Dealing with these issues is something that we will, at some point in the future, need to address robustly (or figure out how to deal with).
The primary dangers in sea-level rise are "tipping points" (a term I, for some reason, dislike) -- sharp nonlinear transitions. The simple progression of sea level rise gives you very little sea level rise, but if you cross a threshold where a lot of land-bound ice melts over a period of time, you can suddenly (in the climatological/geological sense of "suddenly") get substantial ocean rise.
The IPCC reports correctly point out that there are quite a few potentially negative tipping points (and a few positive ones) that we may be approaching, but predicting what exactly will happen with them is extremely difficult. The major risk they present is in their unpredictability. Even the IPCC "worst-case" scenarios are not actually worse-case, because they (rightly) do not include these unpredictable transitions.
I agree that statutory rape is a bit of a crock (19 yr old boy and 17 year old girl scenarios)
The correct phrasing here is probably, "statutory rape can be a bit of a crock".