it has been just fine for some guy to fly a drone above a tornado
I suspect that might be out of most drones' capabilities. The article has that link linked to another article, but it's about drones flying over a train crash. That article has a link to what appears to be the relevant story, which is about someone flying a drone over the aftermath of a tornado.
A Globular Cluster Toward M87 with a Radial Velocity
Why don't they say "away from" at "(+)1000 km/s"? (if I've got that right; the somewhat hilarious "artist's impression" indicates, as does the headline, that the cluster is moving away from M87).
You say it "appears to be travelling in the opposite direction," but does it? It never gets any closer or any further away. Both ships are travelling around a common center, but relative to each other, are they in fact (as far as time dilation is concerned) stationary?
So if both spaceships perceive that the other's clock is moving more slowly, what will they perceive if the spaceships come together to compare clocks?
You can simplify (or in the light my above thought, perhaps even "make valid") this particular question a bit by considering the twin paradox instead. The same thing happens - the twin who stays at home considers the travelling twin's clock to be slower, but so does the traveller. And it's the same on the home trip, too, even though the traveller is now moving towards the stay-at-home. What breaks the symettry of the situation is that only one of them undergoes acceleration at the start, turnaround, and end points.
If the traveller had stayed at Alpha Centauri and his lazy twin had ventured out to follow him at the same speed, their clocks would match.
I suspect that the same applies to the circling ships - the clocks will match if neither breaks symmetry, otherwise they won't. And if the symmetry break is done only at non-relativistic speeds - i.e., both twins slow to a stop, then one tootles over to the other at 10km/h - the clocks will practically match.
Sam Raimi's 'Spider-Man,' which made its debut in 2002, proved (along with Brian Singer's 'X-Men,' released in 2000) that superhero movies could appeal to the mass market, provided they were done right.
Really? That was the movie that proved superhero movies could work?
You are not everyone else. The things you like are not neccesarily the things everyone else likes. The things you don't like are not automatically unworthy of existence just because you don't like them.
In short, get over yourself.
If you think this post doesn't apply to you, you're either right or very, very wrong.
They may (I'm not certain that they do this, but I can't imagine why they wouldn't) record the audience reactions with separate microphones [...] but most of what you hear on TBBT when it is aired in the way of audience laughter is laughtrack.
If you don't know whether or not they use separate mics (which seems perfectly plausible), how do you know most of it is a laugh track?
There were plenty of "other ways" to program in 1983 - maybe not in government departments, but the public already had the ZX80, the ZX81, the ZX Spectrum, the Vic 20, the Commodore 64, the BBC B...
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. But I can't help being impressed by how quickly the drone stabilised - let alone stayed airborne - after the first collision.
it has been just fine for some guy to fly a drone above a tornado
I suspect that might be out of most drones' capabilities. The article has that link linked to another article, but it's about drones flying over a train crash. That article has a link to what appears to be the relevant story, which is about someone flying a drone over the aftermath of a tornado.
From my limited understanding, isn't in something to do with the line-of-sight requirement and/or capability of autonomy?
Either is capable of falling out of the sky and killing you, of course, so I'm not sure how much the distinction really matters.
It's Friday and I've had a long day. Why you gotta go putting conceptual bombs like that in my brain?
A Globular Cluster Toward M87 with a Radial Velocity
Why don't they say "away from" at "(+)1000 km/s"? (if I've got that right; the somewhat hilarious "artist's impression" indicates, as does the headline, that the cluster is moving away from M87).
What's the significance of the negative velocity?
What breaks my spelling of the word "symmetry" is another matter entirely.
You say it "appears to be travelling in the opposite direction," but does it? It never gets any closer or any further away. Both ships are travelling around a common center, but relative to each other, are they in fact (as far as time dilation is concerned) stationary?
So if both spaceships perceive that the other's clock is moving more slowly, what will they perceive if the spaceships come together to compare clocks?
You can simplify (or in the light my above thought, perhaps even "make valid") this particular question a bit by considering the twin paradox instead. The same thing happens - the twin who stays at home considers the travelling twin's clock to be slower, but so does the traveller. And it's the same on the home trip, too, even though the traveller is now moving towards the stay-at-home. What breaks the symettry of the situation is that only one of them undergoes acceleration at the start, turnaround, and end points.
If the traveller had stayed at Alpha Centauri and his lazy twin had ventured out to follow him at the same speed, their clocks would match.
I suspect that the same applies to the circling ships - the clocks will match if neither breaks symmetry, otherwise they won't. And if the symmetry break is done only at non-relativistic speeds - i.e., both twins slow to a stop, then one tootles over to the other at 10km/h - the clocks will practically match.
It should be patently obvious.
And every other member of any armed force. It's sort of what a war is. What's your point?
That may be how your mom does it, but most people get changed behind their windows.
And, oh, hey
Don't you mean "oh-hey, oh-hey"?
I'd say ravens are more feathery.
There is no arbiter doling out just desserts
Nor, indeed, deserts (as in, things you deserve - from the same root).
What's that in jigawatts?
Sam Raimi's 'Spider-Man,' which made its debut in 2002, proved (along with Brian Singer's 'X-Men,' released in 2000) that superhero movies could appeal to the mass market, provided they were done right.
Really? That was the movie that proved superhero movies could work?
*ahem* http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...
C'moooon. I don't really think anyone's looking back on Spider-Man as a classic now, let alone in another 24 years' time.
It gets real abstract.
Well, which is it?
Man, you are so awesome.
That's what you wanted to hear, right?
Since you don't recall, Lincoln therefore wasn't shot in a theatre.
Logic, that.
"You'd best put seatbelts on your ears, Roy. 'Cause I'm going to take them for the ride of their lives!"
Just a reminder to everyone:
You are not everyone else. The things you like are not neccesarily the things everyone else likes. The things you don't like are not automatically unworthy of existence just because you don't like them.
In short, get over yourself.
If you think this post doesn't apply to you, you're either right or very, very wrong.
They may (I'm not certain that they do this, but I can't imagine why they wouldn't) record the audience reactions with separate microphones [...] but most of what you hear on TBBT when it is aired in the way of audience laughter is laughtrack.
If you don't know whether or not they use separate mics (which seems perfectly plausible), how do you know most of it is a laugh track?
to make people at home think it's better
And is therefore, in a way, actually better.
The aim is to entertain people. It's human nature to laugh harder when others are laughing.
It doesn't work so well when they've pre-recorded a segment, of course, because the timing's all off.
Well, there was definitely at least one tit in the car.
I've ran 3 red lights either arguing with or being baffled or insulted by yapping women passengers.
There's more than one common factor here.
The other way you could program in 1983.
There were plenty of "other ways" to program in 1983 - maybe not in government departments, but the public already had the ZX80, the ZX81, the ZX Spectrum, the Vic 20, the Commodore 64, the BBC B...