Actually, in the Deutschen Museum there is a concept demonstration of such an engine. (By Daimler-Chrysler)
Basically, the same chambers are used for the three stages, and blockers are used to block the air entry and the turbojet when required. (The motor changes shape)
Of course, its heavier than a single engine design, but not that much heavier than the heaviest single design would be. So not that much heavier than Turbo-Jet...
It wouln't be lost as heat, since it's work, and work can be perfectly (ok, maybe 94%) transformed from one form to another. (The energy would be used to accelerate, not to heat)
Though the energy used in the morning when they power the train the first time would be lost at the end of the day. (If they don't keep the spinning at night)
There is more instructions on a ppc than on a pentium.
That the P2 has 5 execution(int) units, a faster L2 cache, that the ppc doesn't have.(but the normal x86 instructions translate to one or two smaller ones)
The ppc has 3 eu(int), but a bigger l1 cache.
The benchmark using enhanced drivers (mmx, 3d-now) are working way better than unenhanced drivers.
The CISC term can't be applied to the P2, or say it's a RISC processor running CISC code. (although that's more like the K6-2)
It's seems to me that since cpus with more instructions tends to increase, I think that the CISC concept is not that bad. (the ppc has more instructions)
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, in the Deutschen Museum there is a concept demonstration of such an engine. (By Daimler-Chrysler)
...
Basically, the same chambers are used for the three stages, and blockers are used to block the air entry and the turbojet when required. (The motor changes shape)
Of course, its heavier than a single engine design, but not that much heavier than the heaviest single design would be. So not that much heavier than Turbo-Jet
It's even worse, they managed to spell
"Heirate Mich"(marry me) false.
Seems strange to me that a non-automatized entry was required.
Hieraten? What would that be, counsel me?
Kann ein Muttersprachler etwas daruber sagen?
I haven't verified the binary translation, but the german sentence seems garbled. (It does not look like the Altavista output is correct)
... And the order is wrong ...
...
einen, akkusativ sing? dativ plur? can't go with sein.
Or sein is a verb? but einen can't be linked unless its dativ
If we are to take the German is correct, which is not my opinion, I would say:
I think to be presumable to them.
And I would have said in german:
Ich denke, vermutlich einen zu sein.
Would any fluent german speaker correct me?
Wenn the original writer makes lots of mistakes, it becomes quite hard to deciher if those are not consistent
Perhaps, but these are the melting points.
Usually, metals are ductile at half their fusion points.
For example, at 1000K Titanium start to deform. Like rubber.
Also, fusion is not the only problem. Corrosion (in a wider sense chemic stability) is also a factor.
Just like that, what kind of German is it?
Es sieht nicht so gut aus.
(Ve, wir, zie, sie, deze, den und andere)
Well, that's not really informative.
The Quebecois treats the anglophones of PQ the same way the normal Canadians treats the Quebecois.
It's more casual teasing than hate.
Probably not legit ...
Not a very nice tag in the page:
http://www.whyescrow.com/register.html
It wouln't be lost as heat, since it's work, and work can be perfectly (ok, maybe 94%) transformed from one form to another. (The energy would be used to accelerate, not to heat)
Though the energy used in the morning when they power the train the first time would be lost at the end of the day. (If they don't keep the spinning at night)
Then why isn't it done all time?
Because the fastest is not the most useful.
The computer is not a single isolated piece of hardware, it is connected with devices and used by PEOPLE, and you can't move them around that easily.
A think that a computer's power is reflected by its use, not by megaflops.
The results count, not only the potential.
Then the top 500 is useless, since it doesn't describe the task.
We should search for the most useful computer in the world. That would lead to a great debate.
Did you know that :
There is more instructions on a ppc than on a pentium.
That the P2 has 5 execution(int) units, a faster L2 cache, that the ppc doesn't have.(but the normal x86 instructions translate to one or two smaller ones)
The ppc has 3 eu(int), but a bigger l1 cache.
The benchmark using enhanced drivers (mmx, 3d-now) are working way better than unenhanced drivers.
The CISC term can't be applied to the P2, or say it's a RISC processor running CISC code. (although that's more like the K6-2)
It's seems to me that since cpus with more instructions tends to increase, I think that the CISC concept is not that bad. (the ppc has more instructions)