Most gamma radiation passes through your body without ever interacting.
These scientists were worried about radioactive contamination, not acute radiation exposure. The defense against contamination is to keep the emitters from getting inside your body.
If you are doing heat transfer calculations in systems that use the Fahrenheit scale for measuring temperature then you absolutely need the Rankine scale.
There are plenty of real-world systems that measure boiler temperature and cooling water temperature in Fahrenheit.
In Europe you will if and only if the politicians think that you will vote the "right" way.
If for some reason the popular vote doesn't go their way they'll just pass the same thing without giving the public the option of voting on it next time.
If you think that wealth is stored in banks you are dangerously deluded and should be locked up as a danger to yourself and others.
Banks store currency, not wealth.
Currency has absolutely no value apart the goods and services that can be purchased with it, so the statement that a bank has more wealth stored in it than the entire GDP of the world is nonsensical.
Think about it - an infinite amount currency can be created in an instant with a few keystrokes but will this increase the amount of food that exists on the planet? What about the amount of energy or housing?
Its absolutely true when you add up the financial instruments circulating around the globe they total the entire GDP of the world several times over. THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING.
It means that more promises have been made than the actual productive output of the globe can fulfill.
Since it's not possible to keep those promises unless you think we can quickly increase world GDP by a factor of 10 without incurring any new debt, the unfulfillable promises will be broken.
As far as the Swiss go, their central bank blew their wad already propping up the euro.
You can keep believing that wealth is created magically by creating new financial instruments instead of being produced by human effort but reality is going apply a cluestick to the back of your head in short order.
The funny thing is that the people handing out those entitlements in the US are bedrock right wing conservatives Democrats/Republicans and they are more crass at doing this than many European Social Democrats.
That's because the Republicans are actually a little smarter about their wealth redistribution than the Democrats.
Democrats and traditional socialists want to redistribute wealth from people who are currently alive and producing. Those people tend to complain about having their wealth stolen.
Republicans figured out that you can borrow the money instead, effectively stealing it from the future. Since the future tax-slaves that were expected to pay for all this hadn't been born they weren't around to complain.
By your definition "true" socialism has never existed on the national scale, anywhere.
So long as you can privately own a factory in your country, it's not socialistic.
If the State owns the factory yet an oligarch receives the lion's share of the wealth created at it then does it matter if you call the property "private" or not?
When voting apathy gets out of hand the government may decide that "Hey, no-one is voting anyway, maybe we should just have property owners be the only people allowed to vote"
Actually that's a pretty good idea, certainly for any election that involved property tax revenue. Why should I as a non-property owner be able to vote on how much you will be forced to pay in taxes on your property to provide me with services?
I've just pointed out your logical fallacy. You're also assuming that everybody who does intensively studied the subject will conclude that there is a such thing as "sensible socialism" in the first place.
yes, the europe which provided bailout money to all the banks in a blink, WITHOUT printing money, DESPITE the fact that it was american wall street that caused the intoxication of world financial assets and hence american's responsibility.
Would they have been able to do that with American money funneled through the IMF and the Federal Reserve? Do you know what percent of the TARP money went to Europe?
Why did Henry Paulson lobby so vigorously to repeal the leverage limits on US banks? Because he argued that those limits were keeping American banks from competing with European banks which were already operating with leverage many times higher than what our laws allowed.
Speaking of the "Too Big to Fail" banks, how many of them are actually American institutions in the first place? How many of the primary dealers and the stockholders of the Federal Reserve?
europe is going to go bankrupt.
If you think that your crisis is confined to Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Iceland and the UK you're a fool.
Put whatever label you want on it - it's the forcible redistribution of wealth from the masses to whomever the elites deem worthy (typically themselves). It's an ancient scam that's fundamentally the same no matter what flavor of it is practiced in any particular country.
You're confused because you think socialism is designed to benefit you instead of the oligarchs.
The government uses a variety of methods to redistribute wealth from the population to the corporations and throws the peasants just enough to chain them to the system so that they don't revolt.
with the country rushing headlong toward socialism and therefore an impending economic collapse
Toward socialism? We're waist-deep it. Unfortunately for Europe they're up to their necks so we'll get the privilege of watching it blow up in their faces just before it explodes in ours.
But there's more to it than that - you have the number of photons per second and the wavelength of each photon.
If you really wanted to capture all the information carried by light passing through an area you need an infinite pixels density and each pixel would to generate a two dimensional histogram (number of photons received at each wavelength).
Even that is an approximation because photons contain other forms of information as well - spin, polarization and velocity.
This is far more information than can be mapped to a linear function and our eyes only capture a tiny fraction of it.
Dems don't just give stuff away. They give other people's stuff away.
That all politicians, actually.
Democrats want to steal from people in the present that they don't like and give to people that they do like.
Republicans are a bit smarter, as they steal from the future and most of them aren't born yet so they aren't around to complain about the theft, unlike all the people that the Democrats want to steal from.
Neither party supports the concept of not stealing from one group of people in order to buy votes.
Slashdot Mirror
Any particular series of bits is information.
Most gamma radiation passes through your body without ever interacting.
These scientists were worried about radioactive contamination, not acute radiation exposure. The defense against contamination is to keep the emitters from getting inside your body.
Don't forget about the 300 million or so people who don't really want to convert to the metric system.
0 - 100 on the Farenheit scale does a pretty good job of approximating the temperature extremes in temperate climates.
What you need to know is this:
0 degrees is too cold.
100 degrees is too hot.
That's not true at all.
If you are doing heat transfer calculations in systems that use the Fahrenheit scale for measuring temperature then you absolutely need the Rankine scale.
There are plenty of real-world systems that measure boiler temperature and cooling water temperature in Fahrenheit.
What happens to Washington when all the richest people move to Florida or Texas to avoid the tax?
At least the ignorant rednecks don't need to worry about being helpless if a rabid wild animal decides to invade their homes.
In Europe you will if and only if the politicians think that you will vote the "right" way.
If for some reason the popular vote doesn't go their way they'll just pass the same thing without giving the public the option of voting on it next time.
If you think that wealth is stored in banks you are dangerously deluded and should be locked up as a danger to yourself and others.
Banks store currency, not wealth.
Currency has absolutely no value apart the goods and services that can be purchased with it, so the statement that a bank has more wealth stored in it than the entire GDP of the world is nonsensical.
Think about it - an infinite amount currency can be created in an instant with a few keystrokes but will this increase the amount of food that exists on the planet? What about the amount of energy or housing?
Its absolutely true when you add up the financial instruments circulating around the globe they total the entire GDP of the world several times over. THIS IS NOT A GOOD THING.
It means that more promises have been made than the actual productive output of the globe can fulfill.
Since it's not possible to keep those promises unless you think we can quickly increase world GDP by a factor of 10 without incurring any new debt, the unfulfillable promises will be broken.
As far as the Swiss go, their central bank blew their wad already propping up the euro.
You can keep believing that wealth is created magically by creating new financial instruments instead of being produced by human effort but reality is going apply a cluestick to the back of your head in short order.
The theory is a myth that has never existed on a national scale.
I don't say this often but you are a fucking moron and unworthy of further conversation.
That's because the Republicans are actually a little smarter about their wealth redistribution than the Democrats.
Democrats and traditional socialists want to redistribute wealth from people who are currently alive and producing. Those people tend to complain about having their wealth stolen.
Republicans figured out that you can borrow the money instead, effectively stealing it from the future. Since the future tax-slaves that were expected to pay for all this hadn't been born they weren't around to complain.
By your definition "true" socialism has never existed on the national scale, anywhere.
If the State owns the factory yet an oligarch receives the lion's share of the wealth created at it then does it matter if you call the property "private" or not?
Property taxes and excessively-low interest rates are at the root of that problem.
Actually that's a pretty good idea, certainly for any election that involved property tax revenue. Why should I as a non-property owner be able to vote on how much you will be forced to pay in taxes on your property to provide me with services?
I've just pointed out your logical fallacy. You're also assuming that everybody who does intensively studied the subject will conclude that there is a such thing as "sensible socialism" in the first place.
Please step away from the crack pipe.
Would they have been able to do that with American money funneled through the IMF and the Federal Reserve? Do you know what percent of the TARP money went to Europe?
Why did Henry Paulson lobby so vigorously to repeal the leverage limits on US banks? Because he argued that those limits were keeping American banks from competing with European banks which were already operating with leverage many times higher than what our laws allowed.
Speaking of the "Too Big to Fail" banks, how many of them are actually American institutions in the first place? How many of the primary dealers and the stockholders of the Federal Reserve?
If you think that your crisis is confined to Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Iceland and the UK you're a fool.
Please point out the country in which your statement is not true.
You're begging the question just by using the term "sensible socialism".
Put whatever label you want on it - it's the forcible redistribution of wealth from the masses to whomever the elites deem worthy (typically themselves). It's an ancient scam that's fundamentally the same no matter what flavor of it is practiced in any particular country.
You're confused because you think socialism is designed to benefit you instead of the oligarchs.
The government uses a variety of methods to redistribute wealth from the population to the corporations and throws the peasants just enough to chain them to the system so that they don't revolt.
Toward socialism? We're waist-deep it. Unfortunately for Europe they're up to their necks so we'll get the privilege of watching it blow up in their faces just before it explodes in ours.
You win the thread.
But there's more to it than that - you have the number of photons per second and the wavelength of each photon.
If you really wanted to capture all the information carried by light passing through an area you need an infinite pixels density and each pixel would to generate a two dimensional histogram (number of photons received at each wavelength).
Even that is an approximation because photons contain other forms of information as well - spin, polarization and velocity.
This is far more information than can be mapped to a linear function and our eyes only capture a tiny fraction of it.
That all politicians, actually.
Democrats want to steal from people in the present that they don't like and give to people that they do like.
Republicans are a bit smarter, as they steal from the future and most of them aren't born yet so they aren't around to complain about the theft, unlike all the people that the Democrats want to steal from.
Neither party supports the concept of not stealing from one group of people in order to buy votes.