Escape velocity is the speed required to exert a force "upwards" (away from the centre of gravity) greater than the force that gravity has upon the object that is attempting to escape.
No. There is no direct relationship between speed and force. Speed does not require any force. Change in speed is what requires force. F = ma, remember?
You're wasting your own time because your opponent is right. First of all, thrust is not the same as velocity. There is no such thing as "10 m/s" of thrust. Thrust is force. That is, kg m / s^2.
Given an initial upward velocity, no matter how slow, all you need to continue at that velocity is to counteract the force of gravity exactly. Given enough fuel, you can achieve any altitude you wish at any speed you wish, as long as your upward thrust continues to equal or overcome the force of gravity. Escape velocity refers to objects that are thrown; i.e. have no thrust of their own.
Of course, if you run out of fuel you start falling back down again. But no one is arguing otherwise.
As for black holes, a rocket cannot escape because space-time is so deformed that it would take an infinite amount of energy to cross the event horizon from within.
They used 127 instead of 128 because 127 is prime. So is 23. So when the aliens get this string of 370967 bits and decide to try making a picture out of it, there's only one way to make it line up evenly: 127 by 127 by 23. Let's just hope they don't try making 127 pages of 127 by 23, fail to make any sense out of it, and give up. I guess that isn't very likely.
If all of the world's six billion people were each guaranteed a 99.9999999% chance of surviving every year, six thousand people would die in the first thousand years. About six million people would be dead in a million years. In a billion years, 3.8 billion would be dead. In ten billion years, only about 270,000 of the original six billion would remain. The probability of anyone being alive after one hundred billion years is about 0.0000000000000000000000000000000002.
One hundred billion years is a loooooong time, but this example shows that if you really want to live forever, you need to make damn sure you don't get into any accidents.
You're confusing atomic mass with atomic number. 11 is the atomic number of sodium and approximately the atomic mass of boron. 23 is approximately the atomic mass of sodium. So Mr. Handelman is right.
Funny, both my father and I have had absolutely no problem with Gateway. I've owned two Gateway systems that have functioned just fine, except for a monitor that went bad on my first machine, well after I had refitted it almost completely with updated hardware and the warranty had expired. If I don't build my next computer from scratch I'll probably end up buying another Gateway.
All of you people saying "What next, they're going to edit the WTC out of every movie ever made?" have COMPLETELY missed the point. Dachshund seems to be the only person who got it:
In their defense, I would like to think that Hollywood is doing it to new movies simply to keep them from seeming dated upon release.
That's all! That's it! It really is as simple as that!
The stream of carbon dioxide, already only a fraction of current processes, can be sequestered or used for oil and gas recovery through existing pipelines.
This could be a good answer to the question, "What's the point of low-emission electric cars if they're just going to draw from a grid that is powered with high-emission techniques?" If power plants use this carbon fuel cell technology, little to no CO2 emissions will be released to the atmosphere.
The question now is, how nature-friendly is the generation of the fuel itself?
You're welcome to correct me on this if you can, but I think your logic is confused. Consider it this way: If you roll ten ten-sided dice, the probability of correctly predicting the outcome is 1 in 10-to-the-10th. Once you roll, though, the probability of getting what you got is 1. Otherwise, the outcome would still be uncertain even after you rolled, and you'd be sitting there rolling your set of dice, each time crying out, "Wow! I rolled 7312580462! The chance of rolling that was 1 in ten billion! What an incredible coincidence!" And then, "Wow! I rolled 4365784965! The chance of rolling *that* was also 1 in ten billion! With this luck, I should buy a lottery ticket!"
If you adapt this scenario to something that generates purely random real numbers, the principles are the same. The probability of *predicting* the outcome is 0. But once you run the generator and get a number, the probability of having gotten what you got is 1.
Into the chamber was injected pure hydrogen, the spark ignites the hydrogen...
Wait a sec...How do you ignite pure hydrogen? Doesn't there need to be something there for it to react with? I mean, H2 is the lowest
energy state for pure hydrogen, isn't it?
An IID has already been developed. Unfortunately,
during its first successful test it changed the laws of physics in such a way that the IID's existence was no longer possible.
What happens if you shake it?
How durable is it? Flash Memory, et al., has much less space but is solid state. Seems like on a platter, the closer together the bits are the easier is must be to damage the machinery necessary to access it. You don't worry so much about your laptop's hard drive because you don't remove it much and it's more massive, which means it has more inertia, making it harder to jostle.
But I wouldn't dare carry a naked hard drive in my bag, let alone one of these itty bitty hard drives. Of course, IANA expert and could be completely wrong. Thoughts?
Re:I dunno ... the Big Crunch woulda been cool....
on
Universe is Flat
·
· Score: 3
Free quarks in a low-energy state? Where did you
get this information?
I was talking to a string theorist friend of mine
about this final infinite period in the life of
the universe, and we both agreed that all you'd
have left is electrons and neutrinos (maybe also
protons, but they might not ever decay).
On a side note, it was already known that the
universe would never recollapse. Recent findings
show that the expansion of the universe is
accelerating, and there is no reason to believe
that this acceleration will ever taper off.
Here's a guy who really seems to know what he's
talking about:
Slashdot Mirror
Escape velocity is the speed required to exert a force "upwards" (away from the centre of gravity) greater than the force that gravity has upon the object that is attempting to escape.
No. There is no direct relationship between speed and force. Speed does not require any force. Change in speed is what requires force. F = ma, remember?
You're wasting your own time because your opponent is right. First of all, thrust is not the same as velocity. There is no such thing as "10 m/s" of thrust. Thrust is force. That is, kg m / s^2.
Given an initial upward velocity, no matter how slow, all you need to continue at that velocity is to counteract the force of gravity exactly. Given enough fuel, you can achieve any altitude you wish at any speed you wish, as long as your upward thrust continues to equal or overcome the force of gravity. Escape velocity refers to objects that are thrown; i.e. have no thrust of their own.
Of course, if you run out of fuel you start falling back down again. But no one is arguing otherwise.
As for black holes, a rocket cannot escape because space-time is so deformed that it would take an infinite amount of energy to cross the event horizon from within.
They used 127 instead of 128 because 127 is prime. So is 23. So when the aliens get this string of 370967 bits and decide to try making a picture out of it, there's only one way to make it line up evenly: 127 by 127 by 23. Let's just hope they don't try making 127 pages of 127 by 23, fail to make any sense out of it, and give up. I guess that isn't very likely.
If all of the world's six billion people were each guaranteed a 99.9999999% chance of surviving every year, six thousand people would die in the first thousand years. About six million people would be dead in a million years. In a billion years, 3.8 billion would be dead. In ten billion years, only about 270,000 of the original six billion would remain. The probability of anyone being alive after one hundred billion years is about 0.0000000000000000000000000000000002.
One hundred billion years is a loooooong time, but this example shows that if you really want to live forever, you need to make damn sure you don't get into any accidents.
Huh? Just move the decimal point.
You're confusing atomic mass with atomic number. 11 is the atomic number of sodium and approximately the atomic mass of boron. 23 is approximately the atomic mass of sodium. So Mr. Handelman is right.
Somebody mod the parent "+1 Funny".
I haven't laughed so hard in a long time! 13...14...15...16...17...18...19...20. Okay, now I can post this.
"On", "Off", and "Door".
Funny, both my father and I have had absolutely no problem with Gateway. I've owned two Gateway systems that have functioned just fine, except for a monitor that went bad on my first machine, well after I had refitted it almost completely with updated hardware and the warranty had expired. If I don't build my next computer from scratch I'll probably end up buying another Gateway.
In their defense, I would like to think that Hollywood is doing it to new movies simply to keep them from seeming dated upon release.
That's all! That's it! It really is as simple as that!
This could be a good answer to the question, "What's the point of low-emission electric cars if they're just going to draw from a grid that is powered with high-emission techniques?" If power plants use this carbon fuel cell technology, little to no CO2 emissions will be released to the atmosphere.
The question now is, how nature-friendly is the generation of the fuel itself?
I know people I work with who still haven't achieved adult-level language skills...
:-/
Speaking of which...here's a quote from the article:
If it looks intelligent and it sounds intelligence, then it must be intelligent.
Whatever happened to proofreading?
How is a bionic suit going to keep nurses from hurting patients? ;)
If you adapt this scenario to something that generates purely random real numbers, the principles are the same. The probability of *predicting* the outcome is 0. But once you run the generator and get a number, the probability of having gotten what you got is 1.
I accept your point. I was just being a smart ass, poking fun at your choice of words. I hope that doesn't offend you. :-)
I mean, what does IA stand for?
nearly infinitely?
Wait a sec...How do you ignite pure hydrogen? Doesn't there need to be something there for it to react with? I mean, H2 is the lowest energy state for pure hydrogen, isn't it?
An IID has already been developed. Unfortunately, during its first successful test it changed the laws of physics in such a way that the IID's existence was no longer possible.
So, what are you trying to say? ;-)
What happens if you shake it? How durable is it? Flash Memory, et al., has much less space but is solid state. Seems like on a platter, the closer together the bits are the easier is must be to damage the machinery necessary to access it. You don't worry so much about your laptop's hard drive because you don't remove it much and it's more massive, which means it has more inertia, making it harder to jostle. But I wouldn't dare carry a naked hard drive in my bag, let alone one of these itty bitty hard drives. Of course, IANA expert and could be completely wrong. Thoughts?
s/s\/Anaheim\/Burback\//s\/Anaheim\/Burbank\//
Huh, huh-huh, he said "stiffen".
I was talking to a string theorist friend of mine about this final infinite period in the life of the universe, and we both agreed that all you'd have left is electrons and neutrinos (maybe also protons, but they might not ever decay).
On a side note, it was already known that the universe would never recollapse. Recent findings show that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, and there is no reason to believe that this acceleration will ever taper off.
Here's a guy who really seems to know what he's talking about:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/end.html