I think, ultimately, what critical thinking means is to internalize the ideology of your employer, i.e. you're hired to make decisions that account for everything that fits your employer's methods and goals. This is necessary because there are many, many minute decisions for the employee to make that the employer simply cannot dictate to the employee in every case. The book "Disciplined Minds" called this ideological discipline, and discussed it at length in terms of professional level work, where the professional is trusted to maintain the company ideology within the narrow range of creativity defined by their job. Makes sense to me.
Why not?!
The fact that it fits on a diskette means that a lot of bloat must have been cut out, leaving functionality. This means faster (and potentially better) software that uses the system's resources more efficiently.
I'd mod you up if I had points, so instead I'll just say that I think there is truth to what you have said. Researchers, professors in particular, are very busy people and can only spend so much time on a thorough review of a submitted article. Finding some way to help automate this would be a great research project and a great help to the whole process.
Pedal powered generators have been used to power remote communications for a long time:
http://www.antiqueradio.com/traeger_pedal_07-99.html
That's possibly better than wasting your camp fuel to achieve a charge. Maybe the trick is not to charge the phone, but to run the generator when you need the phone, as these pedal powered radios were operated.
While I'm sure they have their good reasons for this exercise, I don't think this is the sort of military behavior a "free" society should ever have to experience. Why can't they do it in simulation or in the middle of the desert? Why like this now?
I can only imagine being in traffic when this happens...
If the expanded metal mesh that the stucco is trowed onto overlaps
correctly the house is nearly opaque to RF. Use Al or Cu screen
to support insulation in the roof and tie the walls and roof together
and your "hat" is complete.
Do not forget that doors and windows allow electromagnetic energy to pass.
Aluminized mirrors are also good shields. That geek with mirrors on the walls
and ceiling was on to something.
Interesting. I didn't realize stucco required metal. I thought it was only cement and ceramic.
Respect people. Having or not having lots of specific knowledge (read: being a nerd) is not a sufficient condition for respect. Try to see where others are coming from. Maybe they've never been put in the situation you are in, such that nerdiness is so important. You will find that other people who are worth being around will respect you. Your problems with arrogance will be no more. Maybe some of your arrogant friends will act this way too. At least you care already.
P.S. Your post has a high level of vocabulary. That could be off-putting to a lot of people. Your first goal in speaking should be to communicate. That doesn't always mean using the most specific words. Good luck!
One really great advantage to this is the energy density of gasoline. Though the process for producing is inefficient, gasoline and other hydrocarbons are still really good at being stable and energy dense. That is one reason why we've been driving hydrocarbon fueled vehicles instead of battery powered vehicles for so long. Gasoline is fairly stable for a long time and quite energy dense. A gallon in an efficient vehicle can go many miles, using relatively simple technology.
Only recently has battery technology become competitive in this regard. Of course, this doesn't solve the atmospheric CO2 level problem. Or the problem of obtaining energy in the first place. This (if it works at all) could be another tool in making renewable energy more viable.
You also need the right materials. Not just anything can be a gun barrel. I'm not a fan of bans, but perhaps the best compromise in this situation is to ban the 3D printable materials that could be formed into guns, not the printers, plans, and other 3D printable materials.
You teach, to a small extent, teach about the process of determining new facts. I don't think it should be a large part of a given course, and in fact it may be better for faculty to point students to the seminar series in the department of their choice.
This was largely my experience up through high school. Science was taught as a body of facts, and less so taught as a process. When process was mentioned, it was taught as THE scientific method...which is not exactly how research is done! The whole body-of-facts approach makes it boring to most people.
Beginning in undergraduate courses, it was somewhat better. Mainly the beginning undergraduate courses were all about getting one up to date on a few centuries of research, and there just wasn't time to discuss the frontiers of the field. Really good teachers made time for it, and stressed that there is much more to be learned. I don't think any graduate school science course, at least among the physics ones I've taken, have treated the field that way. The underlying assumption was that there is much more to be learned. But that's why there is graduate school.
If they are to build it, I would visit a Tesla museum with my children, especially if they can have hands-on attractions. What kid wouldn't be inspired by a live Tesla coil? I know I was when I was a child.
Slashdot Mirror
Who will fund you when you're "lost in the woods"?
I think, ultimately, what critical thinking means is to internalize the ideology of your employer, i.e. you're hired to make decisions that account for everything that fits your employer's methods and goals. This is necessary because there are many, many minute decisions for the employee to make that the employer simply cannot dictate to the employee in every case. The book "Disciplined Minds" called this ideological discipline, and discussed it at length in terms of professional level work, where the professional is trusted to maintain the company ideology within the narrow range of creativity defined by their job. Makes sense to me.
Why not?! The fact that it fits on a diskette means that a lot of bloat must have been cut out, leaving functionality. This means faster (and potentially better) software that uses the system's resources more efficiently.
Reminds of this, of course: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1605#comic
I'd mod you up if I had points, so instead I'll just say that I think there is truth to what you have said. Researchers, professors in particular, are very busy people and can only spend so much time on a thorough review of a submitted article. Finding some way to help automate this would be a great research project and a great help to the whole process.
Pedal powered generators have been used to power remote communications for a long time: http://www.antiqueradio.com/traeger_pedal_07-99.html That's possibly better than wasting your camp fuel to achieve a charge. Maybe the trick is not to charge the phone, but to run the generator when you need the phone, as these pedal powered radios were operated.
So I should be able to use my HAM radio on board!
While I'm sure they have their good reasons for this exercise, I don't think this is the sort of military behavior a "free" society should ever have to experience. Why can't they do it in simulation or in the middle of the desert? Why like this now? I can only imagine being in traffic when this happens...
Isn't all of this useless without a good energy source? Rockets and mining operations don't run on wishful thinking.
It is called a stucco house.
If the expanded metal mesh that the stucco is trowed onto overlaps correctly the house is nearly opaque to RF. Use Al or Cu screen to support insulation in the roof and tie the walls and roof together and your "hat" is complete.
Do not forget that doors and windows allow electromagnetic energy to pass.
Aluminized mirrors are also good shields. That geek with mirrors on the walls and ceiling was on to something.
Interesting. I didn't realize stucco required metal. I thought it was only cement and ceramic.
Respect people. Having or not having lots of specific knowledge (read: being a nerd) is not a sufficient condition for respect. Try to see where others are coming from. Maybe they've never been put in the situation you are in, such that nerdiness is so important. You will find that other people who are worth being around will respect you. Your problems with arrogance will be no more. Maybe some of your arrogant friends will act this way too. At least you care already.
P.S. Your post has a high level of vocabulary. That could be off-putting to a lot of people. Your first goal in speaking should be to communicate. That doesn't always mean using the most specific words. Good luck!
I need a tinfoil house!
One really great advantage to this is the energy density of gasoline. Though the process for producing is inefficient, gasoline and other hydrocarbons are still really good at being stable and energy dense. That is one reason why we've been driving hydrocarbon fueled vehicles instead of battery powered vehicles for so long. Gasoline is fairly stable for a long time and quite energy dense. A gallon in an efficient vehicle can go many miles, using relatively simple technology.
Only recently has battery technology become competitive in this regard. Of course, this doesn't solve the atmospheric CO2 level problem. Or the problem of obtaining energy in the first place. This (if it works at all) could be another tool in making renewable energy more viable.
It would fly as well as a suggestion by someone who didn't bother to RTFA. ;-)
You also need the right materials. Not just anything can be a gun barrel. I'm not a fan of bans, but perhaps the best compromise in this situation is to ban the 3D printable materials that could be formed into guns, not the printers, plans, and other 3D printable materials.
You teach, to a small extent, teach about the process of determining new facts. I don't think it should be a large part of a given course, and in fact it may be better for faculty to point students to the seminar series in the department of their choice.
This was largely my experience up through high school. Science was taught as a body of facts, and less so taught as a process. When process was mentioned, it was taught as THE scientific method...which is not exactly how research is done! The whole body-of-facts approach makes it boring to most people.
Beginning in undergraduate courses, it was somewhat better. Mainly the beginning undergraduate courses were all about getting one up to date on a few centuries of research, and there just wasn't time to discuss the frontiers of the field. Really good teachers made time for it, and stressed that there is much more to be learned. I don't think any graduate school science course, at least among the physics ones I've taken, have treated the field that way. The underlying assumption was that there is much more to be learned. But that's why there is graduate school.
Neat! I had no idea this existed.
If they are to build it, I would visit a Tesla museum with my children, especially if they can have hands-on attractions. What kid wouldn't be inspired by a live Tesla coil? I know I was when I was a child.
I did this too. These industrial strength keyboards are totally worth washing and continuing their use.