Superman can just turn back time, then use his super-speed to fly to the galaxy that is "far far away" and confront Vader. In fact, he could confront Vader when he was just whiney Anaken, smash the crap out of his pod racer, and leave his dessicated corpse on the sands of Tatooine. That would save us from the second half of episode I, and all of episodes II and III.
As for the force, though, with proper control and concentration "size matters not." I still don't think that the force can overcome temporal engineering.
To the scientific understanding at the time, there was evidence of the aether. It had been observed that light exhibited wave-like characteristics, and could, in fact, be understood as a wave. At that time, all waves were known to travel through a medium. There were no waves that could travel without one. There was no other medium in the vacuum of space, so it was decided that there must be an aether.
A perfectly valid scientific theory, as it was also falsifiable - as demonstrated by Michelson and Morley. When it was falsified, it required a major change in how the scientific communtiy thought about light. It is entirely possible that we'll see something similar with dark matter. Sure, an unobserved WIMP could explain things like the rotation of galaxies at their current rates. But, what happens when we get out there and don't find any? What then? Well, maybe it will require a major change in how we think about gravity. Maybe there's an entirely new force out there, that's weak enough that we can't see it on terrestrial or even solar scales. Who knows?
As has been explained before, and will doubtless be explained again, ID is not a scientific theory, and does not hold the same value as the scientific theory of the existence of dark matter.
If dark matter exists (ie, the theory), it can explain certain observed phenomena. However, where it differs from ID is that the theory can be used to make falsifiable predictions about things we have not yet measured. Using the theory as a base point, we can predict what will happen in certain regions of space if there are WIMPs there. We can predict how the universe is going to expand or contract. If any of these predictions are wrong, then the theory that there is dark matter is also wrong.
On the other hand, intelligent design does not offer any falsifiable predictions. There is no way to test the "theory" (in this case, non-scientific) to determine if it is false. If you can devise a test that would prove ID to be false, then that would elevate it to the status of a scientific theory. It still wouldn't be a useful theory, however, as it does not offer any predictions as to how unobserved phenomena will react when we do get a chance to observe them.
Dark matter is there because the math behind it explains the current set of observations, and because there is a way to prove that the current set of observations is not due to dark matter. Intelligent design is there because Christians are upset about the removal of their god from the science classroom.
All checked luggage is individually searched by trusted members of the president's family. No carry-on luggage is allowed. No clothing is allowed for passengers. Passengers are to be sedated for the entire trip. All passengers undergo full-body MRI scan prior to being loaded onto planes. Pilots and co-pilots can only be fully trusted members of the president's family. Only one commercial plane allowed in US airspace at any time, escorted at all times by three fighter jets. All US cities covered by impact-resistant kevlar domes. Every US resident, citizen, or tourist requires mandatory "compliance device" inserted into skull - a small explosive device that can be detonated the instant terrorist activities are detected.
A CFL uses 75% less energy than an incandescent light bulb and lasts at least 6 times longer. A power plant will emit 10mg of mercury to produce the electricity to run an incandescent bulb compared to only 2.4mg of mercury to run a CFL for the same time.
They also report 4mg of mercury is used in the production of an average CFL. However, the caveat is that all of this energy must be produced by a coal-burning power plant to reach those levels of mercury. Here in Ontario, 51% of our power is nuclear, and a large percentage is hydro-electric. Say worst-case 25% of our electricity is produced by coal. That means running incandescents would generate 2.5mg of mercury, versus 0.6mg for the CFL. Total CFL mercury=4.6mg, greater than that of the incandescent bulbs.
Now my own counter-argument: Sure, 75% of our power is produced by nuclear and hydro-electric, but fossil fuel plants are what are used for the on-demand energy, as they are easiest to start and stop. Chances are that when the demand goes down by 1MW, they shut down 1MW worth of coal-fired power generation. In that case, you will glean the full mercury-reduction benefit from using CFLs. Plus, as long as they are disposed of properly, the 4mg in the bulb does not get released to the environment.
Hey, I'm proud of some of my lumps of poo. I'll even leave them in the toilet for my wife to admire at a later date and time. There's nothing more gratifying than squeezing off a twice-round-the-bowl.
A UK-based budget airline? Why the hell should I know about that. I'm an AMERICAN! If for some strange reason, I wanted to fly to your pansy-assed country, I'd fly with AMERICAN Airlines. At least I know they're looking after my safety by making sure no terrorists can smuggle liquid explosives aboard. Can you say the same? I didn't think so. Now go sit back in front of your "telly" and watch that pushover prime minister of yours roll over and sit up while our President gives him dog treats.
Ah, but who is to say what really harms a human? If a single missle could fall on a single house and eliminate one man who is responsible for the deaths of thousands, and left unchecked, possibly millions more, wouldn't allowing that missile to fall constitute greater good than harm?
To alleviate this, I propose the zeroth law of GPL programs:
The Program and its derivative work will neither be modified or executed to harm humanity, or through inaction allow humanity to come to harm.
with a corresponding alteration of the first, second, and third laws of GPL programming to reflect the higher priority of the zeroth law.
Granted, parsing that sentence is terrible, but maybe you can consider it as "nor through inaction permit any human being to be harmed when normal running of the program would prevent said harm." If a human were to get shot in the leg on the other side of the earth from a robot, and there was nothing that robot could have done to possibly prevent it, it would not suffer any damage or distress.
If you're looking for a real-world example, consider a program which controls an unstable equilibrium of some terrible neutron emitting substance. Editing the program so that you have a clause like:
if entersRoom(liberalHippie)
STOP endif
the program itself isn't harming the liberal hippie. It's the out-of-control neutron flux that's doing the harm, but that's only occurring because the program is unnaturally inactive.
Blech. Typing that up left a bad taste in my mouth.
Since the percentage of your home's value changes (360/78 ~ 4.6, 540/112 ~ 4.8), I suspect that your municipality in Utah uses the same method. Rather than a fixed percentage of your home's value, that value is multiplied by something called the "mill rate" (that 0.0046% or 0.0048%). By doing this, the government collecting the property taxes doesn't have to face a decrease in revenue when property values dive in a housing market crash.
I don't know how property taxes work in the states, but in my home town, across-the-board house values increasing doesn't lead to increased property taxes. Basically the municipality decides how much money they want from taxes (call it X). Then, they value your house (Y), and add up the values of all the properties in the city (Z). The taxes you peronally pay are equal to X * Y / Z.
Last year my assessed value increased by 8%, but since the average was 11%, I actually ended up paying a smaller percentage of the total property taxes collected by the city.
When it is closer to the Earth the tides are bigger
I don't know if the distance from the Earth to the Moon has an effect on the size of the tides. The major variation in tides (with spring tides being highest, and neap tides being lowest) occurs on a 14-day cycle, and is related to the angle formed between the earth, sun and moon. When all three are aligned, the gravity of the sun and moon work together, causing the highest (spring) tides. When the sun and the moon are at right angles with respect to the earth, they work against one another, resulting in the lowest (neap) tides.
I won a free coffee from Williams by knowing this. The question of the day was "What is the phase of the moon during a neap tide?"
That's why it's so cold there. All that ice means water, all that water means pirates, and all those pirates means an end to global warming. Yea, for verily I have been touched by his noodly apendage.
As long as you keep your airway open when ascending, you won't risk the horribly nasty death of exploded lungs. Our instructors told us to simply say "aaaaaaaahhhh" all the way up, and that would do the trick. I think I can probably remember to say "aaaaaahhhh!" while surfacing if something catastrophic happened to my air supply!
Almost all recreational divers practice what is called "no decompression" diving. The time spent at depth is limited (with a fairly healthy safety margin) such that the diver can safely ascend without risk of nitrogen bubbles precipitating out of the blood or body tissues. For extra safety measures, we also throw in a 5 minute stop at 15 feet, for deeper dives (60ft+), but that is not absolutely required. It just makes things safer.
Also, under the PADI system, someone with Open Water Certification is recommended not to dive any deeper than 60 feet (~20m) for the first year, and no deeper than 100 feet (~30m) when more experienced. I'm not sure where you got the 15m number.
There is also no reason to ascend any faster than your bubbles from 60 or even 100 feet, even if you only have one lungful of air. 60ft/minute ascent rate means a little over a minute to get to the surface. As explained in previous comments, the air in your lungs expands as you rise, so it will always feel like your lungs are full even as you are letting air escape. Just don't hold your breath, or you risk embolism.
You should never have to reshuffle a sentence to avoid the use of the word "me". That's part of the problem. We are all taught at a young age that it's "John and I went to the store" rather than "John and me went to the store." That's fine, but unfortunately, we're not told why, so we just avoid the whole "John and me" construction, regardless of whether or not it is correct. Example:
"The rock fell on John and me."
This is a perfectly grammatically correct sentence, but because of incorrect teaching when young, people will try to avoid the "John and me", changing the sentence to either:
"John and I were hit by the rock," which uses passive voice instead of active, and makes for a phrase with less impact, or:
"The rock fell on John and myself," which is completely incorrect.
If you are ever planning on learning a second language (required in Canada, recommended anywhere in the world), knowing the rules of grammar of your first language are incredibly helpful. My grade 9 French teacher tried to teach us the difference between subjects and objects, and how to conjugate verbs according to them, but we were unable to even pick out what the subjects & objects of a sentence were in English, let alone French.
That woman spent one month teaching us English grammar, at which point everything she was trying to teach us about French became clear and simple.
I would also posit that grammar should still be taught in elementary school. My wife has a degree in English Rhetoric and Professional Writing, and has chastized me about my incorrect use of words. Now that I know the rules, anything breaking them grates on me, lowering my opinion of the person using those terms. How hard is it to learn the difference between me (object), myself (reflexive object) and I (subject)?
To be clear, "evolution" has been used to refer to both the theory of evolution, and the fact of evolution.
Evolution has been observed in the lab. Speciation has occurred amongst short-lived laboratory animals. This is the fact that evolution does occur.
The "theory of evolution" is a scientific theory that posits a reason for the diversity of species we see today. The theory of evolution can never be proven as true, though it could theoretically be proven false. Nothing can be done to prove false the fact of evolution, and that it has been observed in labs.
Slashdot Mirror
Superman can just turn back time, then use his super-speed to fly to the galaxy that is "far far away" and confront Vader. In fact, he could confront Vader when he was just whiney Anaken, smash the crap out of his pod racer, and leave his dessicated corpse on the sands of Tatooine. That would save us from the second half of episode I, and all of episodes II and III.
As for the force, though, with proper control and concentration "size matters not." I still don't think that the force can overcome temporal engineering.
To the scientific understanding at the time, there was evidence of the aether. It had been observed that light exhibited wave-like characteristics, and could, in fact, be understood as a wave. At that time, all waves were known to travel through a medium. There were no waves that could travel without one. There was no other medium in the vacuum of space, so it was decided that there must be an aether.
A perfectly valid scientific theory, as it was also falsifiable - as demonstrated by Michelson and Morley. When it was falsified, it required a major change in how the scientific communtiy thought about light. It is entirely possible that we'll see something similar with dark matter. Sure, an unobserved WIMP could explain things like the rotation of galaxies at their current rates. But, what happens when we get out there and don't find any? What then? Well, maybe it will require a major change in how we think about gravity. Maybe there's an entirely new force out there, that's weak enough that we can't see it on terrestrial or even solar scales. Who knows?
As has been explained before, and will doubtless be explained again, ID is not a scientific theory, and does not hold the same value as the scientific theory of the existence of dark matter.
If dark matter exists (ie, the theory), it can explain certain observed phenomena. However, where it differs from ID is that the theory can be used to make falsifiable predictions about things we have not yet measured. Using the theory as a base point, we can predict what will happen in certain regions of space if there are WIMPs there. We can predict how the universe is going to expand or contract. If any of these predictions are wrong, then the theory that there is dark matter is also wrong.
On the other hand, intelligent design does not offer any falsifiable predictions. There is no way to test the "theory" (in this case, non-scientific) to determine if it is false. If you can devise a test that would prove ID to be false, then that would elevate it to the status of a scientific theory. It still wouldn't be a useful theory, however, as it does not offer any predictions as to how unobserved phenomena will react when we do get a chance to observe them.
Dark matter is there because the math behind it explains the current set of observations, and because there is a way to prove that the current set of observations is not due to dark matter. Intelligent design is there because Christians are upset about the removal of their god from the science classroom.
All checked luggage is individually searched by trusted members of the president's family.
No carry-on luggage is allowed.
No clothing is allowed for passengers.
Passengers are to be sedated for the entire trip.
All passengers undergo full-body MRI scan prior to being loaded onto planes.
Pilots and co-pilots can only be fully trusted members of the president's family.
Only one commercial plane allowed in US airspace at any time, escorted at all times by three fighter jets.
All US cities covered by impact-resistant kevlar domes.
Every US resident, citizen, or tourist requires mandatory "compliance device" inserted into skull - a small explosive device that can be detonated the instant terrorist activities are detected.
That would probably be a good start.
Quoth the EPA report on CFL's and mercury:
A CFL uses 75% less energy
than an incandescent light bulb and lasts at least 6 times
longer. A power plant will emit 10mg of mercury to produce
the electricity to run an incandescent bulb compared to only
2.4mg of mercury to run a CFL for the same time.
They also report 4mg of mercury is used in the production of an average CFL. However, the caveat is that all of this energy must be produced by a coal-burning power plant to reach those levels of mercury. Here in Ontario, 51% of our power is nuclear, and a large percentage is hydro-electric. Say worst-case 25% of our electricity is produced by coal. That means running incandescents would generate 2.5mg of mercury, versus 0.6mg for the CFL. Total CFL mercury=4.6mg, greater than that of the incandescent bulbs.
Now my own counter-argument: Sure, 75% of our power is produced by nuclear and hydro-electric, but fossil fuel plants are what are used for the on-demand energy, as they are easiest to start and stop. Chances are that when the demand goes down by 1MW, they shut down 1MW worth of coal-fired power generation. In that case, you will glean the full mercury-reduction benefit from using CFLs. Plus, as long as they are disposed of properly, the 4mg in the bulb does not get released to the environment.
Hey, I'm proud of some of my lumps of poo. I'll even leave them in the toilet for my wife to admire at a later date and time. There's nothing more gratifying than squeezing off a twice-round-the-bowl.
A UK-based budget airline? Why the hell should I know about that. I'm an AMERICAN! If for some strange reason, I wanted to fly to your pansy-assed country, I'd fly with AMERICAN Airlines. At least I know they're looking after my safety by making sure no terrorists can smuggle liquid explosives aboard. Can you say the same? I didn't think so. Now go sit back in front of your "telly" and watch that pushover prime minister of yours roll over and sit up while our President gives him dog treats.
Ah, but who is to say what really harms a human? If a single missle could fall on a single house and eliminate one man who is responsible for the deaths of thousands, and left unchecked, possibly millions more, wouldn't allowing that missile to fall constitute greater good than harm?
To alleviate this, I propose the zeroth law of GPL programs:
The Program and its derivative work will neither be modified or executed to harm humanity, or through inaction allow humanity to come to harm.
with a corresponding alteration of the first, second, and third laws of GPL programming to reflect the higher priority of the zeroth law.
-Giskard
Granted, parsing that sentence is terrible, but maybe you can consider it as "nor through inaction permit any human being to be harmed when normal running of the program would prevent said harm." If a human were to get shot in the leg on the other side of the earth from a robot, and there was nothing that robot could have done to possibly prevent it, it would not suffer any damage or distress.
If you're looking for a real-world example, consider a program which controls an unstable equilibrium of some terrible neutron emitting substance. Editing the program so that you have a clause like:
if entersRoom(liberalHippie)
STOP
endif
the program itself isn't harming the liberal hippie. It's the out-of-control neutron flux that's doing the harm, but that's only occurring because the program is unnaturally inactive.
Blech. Typing that up left a bad taste in my mouth.
Since the percentage of your home's value changes (360/78 ~ 4.6, 540/112 ~ 4.8), I suspect that your municipality in Utah uses the same method. Rather than a fixed percentage of your home's value, that value is multiplied by something called the "mill rate" (that 0.0046% or 0.0048%). By doing this, the government collecting the property taxes doesn't have to face a decrease in revenue when property values dive in a housing market crash.
I don't know how property taxes work in the states, but in my home town, across-the-board house values increasing doesn't lead to increased property taxes. Basically the municipality decides how much money they want from taxes (call it X). Then, they value your house (Y), and add up the values of all the properties in the city (Z). The taxes you peronally pay are equal to X * Y / Z.
Last year my assessed value increased by 8%, but since the average was 11%, I actually ended up paying a smaller percentage of the total property taxes collected by the city.
It's grammar, not grammer. Unless you're talking about Kelsey.
When it is closer to the Earth the tides are bigger
I don't know if the distance from the Earth to the Moon has an effect on the size of the tides. The major variation in tides (with spring tides being highest, and neap tides being lowest) occurs on a 14-day cycle, and is related to the angle formed between the earth, sun and moon. When all three are aligned, the gravity of the sun and moon work together, causing the highest (spring) tides. When the sun and the moon are at right angles with respect to the earth, they work against one another, resulting in the lowest (neap) tides.
I won a free coffee from Williams by knowing this. The question of the day was "What is the phase of the moon during a neap tide?"
That's why it's so cold there. All that ice means water, all that water means pirates, and all those pirates means an end to global warming. Yea, for verily I have been touched by his noodly apendage.
I predict a schedule over-run of 10 years and a cost over-run of at least two times what was budgeted.
Huh. Well, that's still better than Boston's Big Dig.
Do you know why there's no crime? Most of these people go to church!
Ugh. I was hooked until this part.
If it weren't for engineering for engineering's sake, we'd never have . . .
the treadmill bike!
(PS - you've gotta watch the videos. They're hilarious.)
No, but I suspect your click-through ad revenue will drop significantly.
As long as you keep your airway open when ascending, you won't risk the horribly nasty death of exploded lungs. Our instructors told us to simply say "aaaaaaaahhhh" all the way up, and that would do the trick. I think I can probably remember to say "aaaaaahhhh!" while surfacing if something catastrophic happened to my air supply!
Almost all recreational divers practice what is called "no decompression" diving. The time spent at depth is limited (with a fairly healthy safety margin) such that the diver can safely ascend without risk of nitrogen bubbles precipitating out of the blood or body tissues. For extra safety measures, we also throw in a 5 minute stop at 15 feet, for deeper dives (60ft+), but that is not absolutely required. It just makes things safer.
Also, under the PADI system, someone with Open Water Certification is recommended not to dive any deeper than 60 feet (~20m) for the first year, and no deeper than 100 feet (~30m) when more experienced. I'm not sure where you got the 15m number.
There is also no reason to ascend any faster than your bubbles from 60 or even 100 feet, even if you only have one lungful of air. 60ft/minute ascent rate means a little over a minute to get to the surface. As explained in previous comments, the air in your lungs expands as you rise, so it will always feel like your lungs are full even as you are letting air escape. Just don't hold your breath, or you risk embolism.
You should never have to reshuffle a sentence to avoid the use of the word "me". That's part of the problem. We are all taught at a young age that it's "John and I went to the store" rather than "John and me went to the store." That's fine, but unfortunately, we're not told why, so we just avoid the whole "John and me" construction, regardless of whether or not it is correct. Example:
"The rock fell on John and me."
This is a perfectly grammatically correct sentence, but because of incorrect teaching when young, people will try to avoid the "John and me", changing the sentence to either:
"John and I were hit by the rock," which uses passive voice instead of active, and makes for a phrase with less impact, or:
"The rock fell on John and myself," which is completely incorrect.
If you are ever planning on learning a second language (required in Canada, recommended anywhere in the world), knowing the rules of grammar of your first language are incredibly helpful. My grade 9 French teacher tried to teach us the difference between subjects and objects, and how to conjugate verbs according to them, but we were unable to even pick out what the subjects & objects of a sentence were in English, let alone French.
That woman spent one month teaching us English grammar, at which point everything she was trying to teach us about French became clear and simple.
I would also posit that grammar should still be taught in elementary school. My wife has a degree in English Rhetoric and Professional Writing, and has chastized me about my incorrect use of words. Now that I know the rules, anything breaking them grates on me, lowering my opinion of the person using those terms. How hard is it to learn the difference between me (object), myself (reflexive object) and I (subject)?
Some monstrism.
To be clear, "evolution" has been used to refer to both the theory of evolution, and the fact of evolution.
Evolution has been observed in the lab. Speciation has occurred amongst short-lived laboratory animals. This is the fact that evolution does occur.
The "theory of evolution" is a scientific theory that posits a reason for the diversity of species we see today. The theory of evolution can never be proven as true, though it could theoretically be proven false. Nothing can be done to prove false the fact of evolution, and that it has been observed in labs.
Somebody compare Internet privacy law to hunting and fishing licenses
I know there's a "Dick Cheney" and "shot in the face" joke in here somewhere . . .