Since both sides in the whole Mann/McKitrick thing are only dealing with pointless mathematical masturbation, the whole issue is extrodinarially irrelevant. Whether or not Mann's analysis is worth anything, the fact remains that it fits the sparse historical records and McKitrick's doesn't.
We have winemaking records from the 1400s that show how winemaking moved south from England to France after the warmer 1000-1200s fell off to the colder 1300s-1400s, while McKitrick's graph indicates France would've been too hot for grapes and Norway would've been the big wine producer in the 1400s. Since that's wrong, McKitrick is wrong. Now, Mann might be equally wrong if McKitrick is auditing his data correctly, but that just means the data is incredibly wrong, not that McKitrick knows how hot it was in the 1400s.
The problem is there's more ice above sea-level than below it. If you melt the north pole, the sea-level might go down, but there's a lot more ice on Greenland or Canada or Antarctica which is just sitting on land.
It might, but that's the beauty of corporations, he has to answer to the shareholders, who are seperated from the actual decision-making process enough that they just vote out anybody who makes the stock price go down, whether or not it went down because of a decision they, personally, would have agreed with!
"Sir! Please!" "I'M..." "Oof!" "NOT..." "Rrrgh!" "D OING..." "Ech." "ANYTHING..." "Eeep." "WRONG!" "..." "Shit! If we had a proper free-market economy somebody would've cleaned all this blood off my shoes by now!"
I'm not sure what you're trying to describe. I'd tell you to ASCII a diagram, but that probably wouldn't help. Your problem is with the actual geometry anyway, which I probably wouldn't be able to help you with, so I'm just going to do this quick explaination of what the rubber-sheet crap is supposed to help you visualize and hope it gets somebody somewhere.
We have a ball, it's moving. Let's just say that it's moving through the time dimension of spacetime, for the sake of clarity. We also have a second ball, moving alongside to the first. As far as they're concerned, though, they're stationary. They can't see anything that isn't moving, so they assume both of them are motionless. They're wrong, though. They're moving, and they're also curving spacetime by their mass. Newton's laws still work here, so our balls are trying to move in a straight line. However, since the surface they're moving on has become curved, the shortest distance between points is now also curved. This forces their paths to converge, and since they aren't aware of their motion in the first place, all they see is the motion towards eachother, and the centripedal force pushing them together is gravity.
Re:how does frame dragging relate to warp speed?
on
'Einstein Probe' Delayed
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I don't know shit, but I expect they're probably talking about something like the Alcubierre warp drive.
In the black hole example, those wobbling bits of matter aren't wobbling in their own "frame", it's the space they're sitting on that's wobbling. It's like a moving sidewalk. You can only run at the speed of light, but if you get on the sidewalk that's already going X, then you can run at your top speed but move in relation to the rest of the universe at the speed of light + X.
The Alcubierre drive is a theoretical trick with negative energy and shit where you stretch out space behind you and scrunch it up in front. You sit in something with a hell of a lot of radiation shielding in the middle and as far as you're concerned you're stationary, but outside your little bubble you're zooming along. I think other people have improved it a little, I think there's one that doesn't require negative energy and some that have brought the required energy down to something theoretically possible (like, the energy of a galaxy and not the energy of 10 billion universes).
Hint: It's not mental problems, it's that he's not on your team anymore.
Don't worry, same thing happened with Dennis Miller. He went from kinda annoying but occasionally funny to hateful with nothing but a few well-placed political statements. He's still occasionally funny, I just can't see it anymore. Howard's still just as good as he was last year, he's just making fun of your guy every once and awhile now. Only geniuses like Bill Hicks and Jon Sewart can get away with making fun of somebody's team without making them hate them. Just the way things go, I guess.
And nobody's fucking talking about the first ammendment, we're talking about free speech. Another hint: legality is not morality. Just because there's no law against pissing in your cunt after a fuck doesn't make it polite.
"Tomorrow at 9, Randall goes insane as carbon monoxide poisoning sets in after the air filter failure last week, and the crew begin their slow, agonizing deaths! Don't miss it!"
Nobody cries for the children when they show (real) trauma patients' injuries (bones sticking out!) and surgeries on television. Why should deaths be any different?
That's a pretty shitty joke if it takes that much explaination to make any sense of. Ok, so racist porn site managers aren't exactly the best source in the world for comedy gold, but Jesus, I could come up with a better line than that drunk, and it'd probably be twice as offensive. I'd have worked Kurt Cobain into it, at least. Maybe something about hillbillies being shot with tazers.
The person who owns the tape might be able to put it online with the permission of the next of kin, but appearing on film doesn't make the film your property.
How about "Nobody will buy our stupid shit because we called it Bill Gates Has No Penis and prominently featured an androgynous cartoon nerd on the cover so everybody thinks it's a freakish anime porn movie"?
Phd 3: Seriously, I'm not letting you touch any more radioactive material until you quit talking like 12 year old girls. Phd 1: omg u meenie! Phd 2: u suck so bad.
Slashdot Mirror
Since both sides in the whole Mann/McKitrick thing are only dealing with pointless mathematical masturbation, the whole issue is extrodinarially irrelevant. Whether or not Mann's analysis is worth anything, the fact remains that it fits the sparse historical records and McKitrick's doesn't.
We have winemaking records from the 1400s that show how winemaking moved south from England to France after the warmer 1000-1200s fell off to the colder 1300s-1400s, while McKitrick's graph indicates France would've been too hot for grapes and Norway would've been the big wine producer in the 1400s. Since that's wrong, McKitrick is wrong. Now, Mann might be equally wrong if McKitrick is auditing his data correctly, but that just means the data is incredibly wrong, not that McKitrick knows how hot it was in the 1400s.
The problem is there's more ice above sea-level than below it. If you melt the north pole, the sea-level might go down, but there's a lot more ice on Greenland or Canada or Antarctica which is just sitting on land.
make some suit go "hmmm...
It might, but that's the beauty of corporations, he has to answer to the shareholders, who are seperated from the actual decision-making process enough that they just vote out anybody who makes the stock price go down, whether or not it went down because of a decision they, personally, would have agreed with!
"Sir! Please!"D OING...""
"I'M..."
"Oof!"
"NOT..."
"Rrrgh!"
"
"Ech."
"ANYTHING..."
"Eeep."
"WRONG!
"..."
"Shit! If we had a proper free-market economy somebody would've cleaned all this blood off my shoes by now!"
6 and a half hog's heads.
I'm not sure what you're trying to describe. I'd tell you to ASCII a diagram, but that probably wouldn't help. Your problem is with the actual geometry anyway, which I probably wouldn't be able to help you with, so I'm just going to do this quick explaination of what the rubber-sheet crap is supposed to help you visualize and hope it gets somebody somewhere.
We have a ball, it's moving. Let's just say that it's moving through the time dimension of spacetime, for the sake of clarity. We also have a second ball, moving alongside to the first. As far as they're concerned, though, they're stationary. They can't see anything that isn't moving, so they assume both of them are motionless. They're wrong, though. They're moving, and they're also curving spacetime by their mass. Newton's laws still work here, so our balls are trying to move in a straight line. However, since the surface they're moving on has become curved, the shortest distance between points is now also curved. This forces their paths to converge, and since they aren't aware of their motion in the first place, all they see is the motion towards eachother, and the centripedal force pushing them together is gravity.
I don't know shit, but I expect they're probably talking about something like the Alcubierre warp drive.
In the black hole example, those wobbling bits of matter aren't wobbling in their own "frame", it's the space they're sitting on that's wobbling. It's like a moving sidewalk. You can only run at the speed of light, but if you get on the sidewalk that's already going X, then you can run at your top speed but move in relation to the rest of the universe at the speed of light + X.
The Alcubierre drive is a theoretical trick with negative energy and shit where you stretch out space behind you and scrunch it up in front. You sit in something with a hell of a lot of radiation shielding in the middle and as far as you're concerned you're stationary, but outside your little bubble you're zooming along. I think other people have improved it a little, I think there's one that doesn't require negative energy and some that have brought the required energy down to something theoretically possible (like, the energy of a galaxy and not the energy of 10 billion universes).
According to that shitty Ally McBeal ripoff "Century City", yes.
Or rather some sort of tiny dolphin, that wouldn't need real water.
Or you could fill your case with fish. They're pretty good at pushing things around.
Hint: It's not mental problems, it's that he's not on your team anymore.
Don't worry, same thing happened with Dennis Miller. He went from kinda annoying but occasionally funny to hateful with nothing but a few well-placed political statements. He's still occasionally funny, I just can't see it anymore. Howard's still just as good as he was last year, he's just making fun of your guy every once and awhile now. Only geniuses like Bill Hicks and Jon Sewart can get away with making fun of somebody's team without making them hate them. Just the way things go, I guess.
And nobody's fucking talking about the first ammendment, we're talking about free speech. Another hint: legality is not morality. Just because there's no law against pissing in your cunt after a fuck doesn't make it polite.
Probably more "show up at 3AM with a ladder" engineering.
You save on fuel if you build your return ship out of coconuts.
"Tomorrow at 9, Randall goes insane as carbon monoxide poisoning sets in after the air filter failure last week, and the crew begin their slow, agonizing deaths! Don't miss it!"
Fifty share, easy.
I'm not gonna click, but if that's the Ford ad where the car decapitates the cat with the skylight, that's some funny shit.
Nobody cries for the children when they show (real) trauma patients' injuries (bones sticking out!) and surgeries on television. Why should deaths be any different?
All those people survive to sign a release form.
That's a pretty shitty joke if it takes that much explaination to make any sense of. Ok, so racist porn site managers aren't exactly the best source in the world for comedy gold, but Jesus, I could come up with a better line than that drunk, and it'd probably be twice as offensive. I'd have worked Kurt Cobain into it, at least. Maybe something about hillbillies being shot with tazers.
Congratulations, you're a moron.
Next of kin could arguably put the tape online.
The person who owns the tape might be able to put it online with the permission of the next of kin, but appearing on film doesn't make the film your property.
Good lord, with the old, broken-down asses of all the Van Halen members exposed to open air, we're lucky we're only getting fires.
Your beautiful boys operating system intrigues me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
How about "Nobody will buy our stupid shit because we called it Bill Gates Has No Penis and prominently featured an androgynous cartoon nerd on the cover so everybody thinks it's a freakish anime porn movie"?
Jesus Christ, would the two of you get a room?
Except, conveniently enough, demand for those isotopes is also incredibly rare.
Phd 3: Seriously, I'm not letting you touch any more radioactive material until you quit talking like 12 year old girls.
Phd 1: omg u meenie!
Phd 2: u suck so bad.