The US electorate should give consideration to the opinions of citizens from countries, chiefly from Europe, that have left humanity with a legacy of global warfare, colonialization, slavery, exploitation and political instability, abroad in their former colonies, and at home?????????
That's a nice straw man you have there. Shame if anything were to happen to it...
Maybe the war in Iraq does not help against terrorism. Maybe trampling citizen rights in the name of fighting terror does not make for a better world in the long run.
(rant) Of course, anyone who dares point this out is probably in league with the terrorists. So no need to acknowledge that there are other points of view.
Thanks for the explanation. I did not realise these amps are used in audio applications. But still, the analog solid state amps I referred to should still be pretty common in home audio systems. The even/odd harmonics issue is normally brought up when discussing analog tube and analog solid state amps. It probably predates the appearance of digital amps.
What are 'digital' amps? You cannot mean solid state (transistor) amplifiers, because these are definitely analog, for any meaningful definition of the word.
Keep in mind however, that people rarely confront burglars, since burglars prefer empty houses.
If you do opt for the gun, be physically, mentally and juristically proficient in its use and take adequate steps to prevent your children/cats/hamsters from playing with it.
I have always understood "On [some general subject]" to mean "here are some thoughts about this subject, I do not claim to provide an exhaustive treatment, maybe someone finds this interesting." So this would be the opposite of boastful.
On the other hand, maybe he was using false humility and was really doubly boastful.
You mean a stall speed of LESS than 24 knots, as it says in the FAR, you just forgot to invert that part of the phrase.
A lower stall speed is better/safer than a higher one, since it increases the speed range at which the airplane can be operated. Below the stall speed, no lift is generated, so you want that to happen either when you are very high (so you can recover) or very low (as the final part of your landing.)
It is actually the angle-of-attack of the wings that determines when the plane stalls. It is just the case that the slower you get, the less lift you get and the faster the plane moves downward, so the plane sees a wind that comes from the front and from below, which results in an increased angle-of-attack. While the stall speed can vary with different conditions, the maximum angle-of-attack at which the plane stalls is always the same for a specific plane.
Keep in mind that this will only be useful to prevent something like algae growth in clean tap water, e.g. in when you fill your emergency drinking water supply with water that is already safe to drink.
How to test every possible (natural) number in a mathematical proof of a theorem? Obviously not by taking every number out of a box, applying your Theorem-Test-Calipers, throwing it back in and proceeding to the next;-)
With mathematical objects, there usually a method to systematically go over all objects and apply the theorem's statement, even if there are infinitely many such objects. One nice technique for natural numbers is complete induction: You prove that your theorem is true for n=1, and you prove that, if it is true for some n, then it is also true for n+1. Thus, for every n, you have a chain of true statements that go back to n=1, for which you have proven explicitly that your theorem holds. This is explained here: http://user.it.uu.se/~pierref/courses/AD1/Slides/a nalysisB.pdf
This way, we can prove a statement for an infinite number of numbers in a finite amount of writing.
The only thing in this experiment that has anything to do with quantum physics is the working principle of the laser. The double/four slit interference thingy is adequately explained by plain old wave physics. As others have pointed out, single-photon interference is indded strange, but very hard to do with $20 equipment, if at all.
The author of the article seems to be very confused.
Also, I would like people to stop talking of "proving theories", because it is not possible to do so. Proofs can only be done in cases where you have control over the system in which you want to prove your theorem, e.g. in mathematics it is possible to deliver the proof that all even numbers are divisible by 2 because it was you who defined numbers, even, and divisible in the first place and you have a method of checking your theorem with every natural number. This kind of check is not possible in the natural sciences. You can make a nice model of electromagnetic radiation (the Maxwell equations) and do some mathematical checks on it, but in order to really prove it, you would have to physically take every possible combination of particles in this universe and observe their electromagnetic interaction, preferably without disturbing them with your detectors (which is hard to impossible). So you usually settle for making only some experiments with a tiny fraction of a fraction of the matter in the universe.
Therefore, theories can only ever by falsified. Those, we can trust to be false. The best thing we can have is a theory that explains the currently known facts, makes some predictions for facts that we will know in the near future, and never gives results that contradict reality. These theories, we can trust a little.
Yes, about every 7th grade physics teacher in Germany (and presumably every other country with a halfway decent education system) has done the water wave version of this experiment with his pupils. The light version is usually done in 11th grade (used to be done with big clunky expensive "LASERS" in my time.)
I am really amazed that anyone with a highschool education can take the bullshit physics in the article seriously. And the article is much too lame to be a joke.
If energy becomes cheap how do we discard the byproduct of it use which is mostly heat?
We will have to do something like the puppeteers in Ringworld, i.e. move the earth to an orbit farther and farther away from the sun, as our energy consumption increases.
That will mean that the years will be longer, but it will also mean WE WILL ALL GET YOUNGER!!
If I'm buying a LICENSE, then I should be able to use my one LICENSE however I wish, independent of the media.
If you mean "should" as in "no one should starve
becaus he is poor," you may be right. In the real world, however, the license could just as well read "license to put data into your one approved player,
and do whatever said one approved player allows you to
do."
Stranded copper works best, because (i think, this could be wrong) amperage travels along the outside of wire.
That is only an issue for high frequency (Mega- and Gigahertz) applications, where you have the so-called skin effect. But there, it will not help if the strands are touching each other, since the whole thing would look like a solid to the rf anyway.
I once used a 6 kW 2--30 MHz tube amplifier. Its coils were done using metal tubing. Since the inner part would not carry current, it was simply left out. They were also silver plated, to prevent corrosion of the important outer layer and to improve conductance. Unfortunately, since we would too often put the rf power into unmatched loads (a plasma experiment), the amplifier would heat up and the silver would melt off the coils. Many a time our technician and a fellow PhD student would disassemble the whole thing for repairs, replacing molten and burnt up components. I sometimes wonder where all the evaporated teflon insulator material ended up.
Second dumb question: they're writing a research paper about three rats? Did they mention controls?
They were not doing an epidemical study, a few animals should be enough to investigate the physical process of ozone generation, without looking at the physiological impact.
Third dumb question: How do KiloVolts relate to Ozone production? Shouldn't current also be a part of this?
The currents should be very small. They are probably hard to measure, since the whole phenomenon is basically electrostatic.
Who reviews this stuff?
Someone with more physics sense than you, obviously.
Static charge is not plasma. Plasma requires complete ionization, and static doesn't even come close.
Yes. No. Yes.
Plasmas are more or less gases of
electrically charged particles, so statically charged solids are not plasmas. But for a gas to be a plasma, it is neither necessary for every atom to be ionised, nor is it necessary for any atom to be fully ionized. I used to work with magnetically confined Argon plasmas (http://www.ieap.uni-kiel.de/plasma/ag-stroth) where about 10--30% of the Argon atoms were ionised. At temperatures of several ten thousand kelvin, most of the Argon was only singly ionised, i.e. it still had most of its electrons left. And yet, the system was dominated by the plasma effects, with the room temperature neutral gas just forming a background against which the charged particles rubbed.
Many hundreds of thousands of civilians were indeed killed by those raids, but during the day those same "innocent civilians" were out making bombs, planes and tanks in Germany's armament factories.
I very much doubt that the tens of thousands of refugees from the east that crowded Dresden at that time were contributing anything to the German war machine. Maybe it was different in Hamburg.
One stated goal of the bombings was to crush the morale of the Germans, which turned out not to be very effective.
One might argue (I wouldn't) that the bombings were necessary to win against the evil empire, but they were still an atrocity.
Blacklist operators are not blocking you. Individual users block you because they made a personal decision to act on certain suggestions made by blacklist operators. You cannot force them to receive your email if they want to use blacklists. You will be laughed out of court.
The real problem is that you can secure your party more than one half of the seats with less than one half of all votes. Extreme example: there are three districts with three voters each and you optimise the district boundaries such that two of your voters (1) are in two of the disctricts (110, 110, 000), netting you 2/3 of the seats with only 4/9 of the voters. The concentration of voters you mention in your post actually weakens their impact.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a nice straw man you have there. Shame if anything were to happen to it...
chl
(rant) Of course, anyone who dares point this out is probably in league with the terrorists. So no need to acknowledge that there are other points of view.
chl
chl
chl
This is certainly wrong in its absoluteness.
Keep in mind however, that people rarely confront burglars, since burglars prefer empty houses.
If you do opt for the gun, be physically, mentally and juristically proficient in its use and take adequate steps to prevent your children/cats/hamsters from playing with it.
chl
On the other hand, maybe he was using false humility and was really doubly boastful.
chl
A lower stall speed is better/safer than a higher one, since it increases the speed range at which the airplane can be operated. Below the stall speed, no lift is generated, so you want that to happen either when you are very high (so you can recover) or very low (as the final part of your landing.)
It is actually the angle-of-attack of the wings that determines when the plane stalls. It is just the case that the slower you get, the less lift you get and the faster the plane moves downward, so the plane sees a wind that comes from the front and from below, which results in an increased angle-of-attack. While the stall speed can vary with different conditions, the maximum angle-of-attack at which the plane stalls is always the same for a specific plane.
chl
Surely
Did you just say Jehov...ouch!!
chl
chl
With mathematical objects, there usually a method to systematically go over all objects and apply the theorem's statement, even if there are infinitely many such objects. One nice technique for natural numbers is complete induction: You prove that your theorem is true for n=1, and you prove that, if it is true for some n, then it is also true for n+1. Thus, for every n, you have a chain of true statements that go back to n=1, for which you have proven explicitly that your theorem holds. This is explained here: http://user.it.uu.se/~pierref/courses/AD1/Slides/a nalysisB.pdf
This way, we can prove a statement for an infinite number of numbers in a finite amount of writing.
chl
Also, I would like people to stop talking of "proving theories", because it is not possible to do so. Proofs can only be done in cases where you have control over the system in which you want to prove your theorem, e.g. in mathematics it is possible to deliver the proof that all even numbers are divisible by 2 because it was you who defined numbers, even, and divisible in the first place and you have a method of checking your theorem with every natural number. This kind of check is not possible in the natural sciences. You can make a nice model of electromagnetic radiation (the Maxwell equations) and do some mathematical checks on it, but in order to really prove it, you would have to physically take every possible combination of particles in this universe and observe their electromagnetic interaction, preferably without disturbing them with your detectors (which is hard to impossible). So you usually settle for making only some experiments with a tiny fraction of a fraction of the matter in the universe.
Therefore, theories can only ever by falsified. Those, we can trust to be false. The best thing we can have is a theory that explains the currently known facts, makes some predictions for facts that we will know in the near future, and never gives results that contradict reality. These theories, we can trust a little.
chl
I am really amazed that anyone with a highschool education can take the bullshit physics in the article seriously. And the article is much too lame to be a joke.
chl
We will have to do something like the puppeteers in Ringworld, i.e. move the earth to an orbit farther and farther away from the sun, as our energy consumption increases.
That will mean that the years will be longer, but it will also mean WE WILL ALL GET YOUNGER!!
chl
If you mean "should" as in "no one should starve becaus he is poor," you may be right. In the real world, however, the license could just as well read "license to put data into your one approved player, and do whatever said one approved player allows you to do."
chl
That is only an issue for high frequency (Mega- and Gigahertz) applications, where you have the so-called skin effect. But there, it will not help if the strands are touching each other, since the whole thing would look like a solid to the rf anyway.
I once used a 6 kW 2--30 MHz tube amplifier. Its coils were done using metal tubing. Since the inner part would not carry current, it was simply left out. They were also silver plated, to prevent corrosion of the important outer layer and to improve conductance. Unfortunately, since we would too often put the rf power into unmatched loads (a plasma experiment), the amplifier would heat up and the silver would melt off the coils. Many a time our technician and a fellow PhD student would disassemble the whole thing for repairs, replacing molten and burnt up components. I sometimes wonder where all the evaporated teflon insulator material ended up.
chl
I can just see the fights about "broken shards" and recounts. Thanks, but no thanks.
chl
We did not. We died an early, lonely death because no one knew we needed help. HTH.
chl
They were not doing an epidemical study, a few animals should be enough to investigate the physical process of ozone generation, without looking at the physiological impact.
The currents should be very small. They are probably hard to measure, since the whole phenomenon is basically electrostatic.
Someone with more physics sense than you, obviously.
chl
Yes. No. Yes.
Plasmas are more or less gases of electrically charged particles, so statically charged solids are not plasmas. But for a gas to be a plasma, it is neither necessary for every atom to be ionised, nor is it necessary for any atom to be fully ionized. I used to work with magnetically confined Argon plasmas (http://www.ieap.uni-kiel.de/plasma/ag-stroth) where about 10--30% of the Argon atoms were ionised. At temperatures of several ten thousand kelvin, most of the Argon was only singly ionised, i.e. it still had most of its electrons left. And yet, the system was dominated by the plasma effects, with the room temperature neutral gas just forming a background against which the charged particles rubbed.
chl
Your memory fails you. IAAPP, and in physics at least, 'plasma' always refers to partially or totally ionised gasses.
chl
I very much doubt that the tens of thousands of refugees from the east that crowded Dresden at that time were contributing anything to the German war machine. Maybe it was different in Hamburg.
One stated goal of the bombings was to crush the morale of the Germans, which turned out not to be very effective.
One might argue (I wouldn't) that the bombings were necessary to win against the evil empire, but they were still an atrocity.
chl
chl
chl
Can you say exploit?
chl