Neologisms are accepted in english. Not all, however, are created equal. Not every made up word deserves to become an acknowledged part of the language, IMO.
The irony is that the third definition there uses the execrable "is comprised of", which is an incorrect usage of an English word "comprised" whose only meaning is "included". "Is included of" is completely ungrammatical and should be simply "comprises", which means "includes".
While pluralizing an otherwise unpluralizable word in an inventive manner is okay, using a word form as the wrong part of speech is bad grammar, and we do have rules against it.
Most words are not made plural by changing "us" to two "i"s. Doing that makes you look really ignorant only to people who are really ignorant of linguistics.
People keep using it and understanding it. In English. Which is made of words from several other languages, many misused to varying degrees relative to their foreign etymologies.
Dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive. They can tell you what a word you saw means, based on its previously observed contexts, but they can't tell you whether it's right or wrong. If they try, they are wrong.
The correct Latin plural would probably be virera. But we don't speak Latin any more. We only use it for religious sloganeering and high-falutin' biological codices.
That's if it's at all possible to pluralize it even in Latin. It's nearest synonym in English is "slime" or "pus", or the noun sense of "ooze", but we use it for "microphage", giving it countability. Like "water" or "blue" have no true plural in English, we nonetheless have invented "waters" and "blues" to describe situations where the singular form does not encompase the plurality of the context. Our choice of suffix in pluralization when inventing new words is entirely unbounded by any rules, as English has almost none given the many ancient systems it supports innately. So we resort to poetry, and choose one that sounds good.
I'll go with "virii" over "viruses" in almost every situation.
Oh, and I'm not a "pretentious dolt." I'm genuinely superior to you, intellectually.
You'd need 1. a new catalyst to crack the glucose, 2. a new membrane that allows the glucose (or the oxygen) through, and 3. a way to pressurize the glucose (while fuel cells are positive energy balance, they take quite a bit of work input on the feed side that can be bled from the output side). And you'd have to make sure that the electrochemical reaction at the glucose/catalyst interface is the correct net polarity to provide electrons to the circuit, or the reaction at the oxygen/catalyst side won't work.
Book prices will rise to something close to $1000. You'll have to buy patches for $50 mid-term and just before exams. Customer support will also be an a pay-per-incident basis. There will be specially-produced editions for the disabled, at an additional fee, but they will be out of sync with the mainstream edition.
No, actually, I'm a biomedical engineer who does software because at the time I got my degree it paid about 4X as much and had about 400X as many interesting things going on. Now it's about parity on both fronts.
When I said "implant piezo or electromechanical generators in the larger joints" I was using "the movement the chemical reactions in your muscles cause".
Though it occurs to me now that what we need is a battery muscle. A dish-grown copy of a bicep, say, that is implanted somewhere under the skin (horizontally across the forward processes of the pelvis, say, where most people store belly fat as a bulge anyway) attached to a linear electromechanical generator and coopting a nerve from a small, little-used, almost unnecessary, possibly evolutionary-holdover muscle such as the cremaster. It wouldn't be hard to learn how to move that muscle with that nerve. Then, whenever your eye-implanted display shows "LO BATT", you'd think "waggle my nuts" over and over again, and soon it would show the "FULL BATT" icon.
It took years to get 1080-height screens into the mainstream. The collusion between manufacturers meant that computer monitors came out at either 1050 or 1200 height for a long time, but no 1080, even though HDTV had become common. That meant that you couldn't buy one screen to get the best fit for both your TV and your computer, meaning you had to buy 2 screens to do the job right. Then some manufacturers got nailed in court for monopolism, and that broke the embargo. Now 1080-height computer monitors are common, and HDTVs commonly come with computer connectors.
1 kcal (food calorie) is 4187 joules, or watt-seconds.
So 1 watt continuos power is about.00024 kcal/second.
A typical LED will light at 1.7 v and 15 mA, or about 25 mW.
Meaning you need about 6e-6 kcal/second to keep it lit.
Glucose is about 4 kcal per gram, so it would consume about 1.5e-6 grams of glucose per second, roughly 90 ug/minute, or 3.5 mg/hr.
For comparison, an average person walking at average speed burns about 100 kcal/hr, which is about 120 watts, but conversion to external work is only about 25% efficient so you can expect to light a 30-watt incandescent bulb walking on a treadmill, or roughly a thousand LEDs. Note, the conversion from LED to LED display isn't direct, as display LEDs are very small and put out less power than discretes; looking up AMOLED shows you can get away with maybe 100 mw total for something with tens of thousands of pixels, and one person on a treadmill could keep a few hundred of those lit.
But if you don't want a treadmill, you still need to find a way to convert the glucose to electricity. Right now the only way to get from here to there is burning the glucose (i.e., self-propagating exothermic oxidation) to make steam energy to drive a dynamo. Even the processes in neural and muscular action aren't a direct conversion; they're electromechanical systems that first use the splitting of bonds in glucose to activate ion-pumping channels that push charged particles to opposite sides of a membrane; then when the channels are triggered they open wide to allow the charges to flood back across, creating an electromagnetic wave along a neuronal wire (axon) or catalyzing further mechanical action in the large molecular levers and ratchets (actin/myosin) that shorten muscle fibers (myofibrils).
So we're back to needing a mechanical source of electricity and batteries. Maybe implant piezo or electromechanical generators in the larger joints, and do a few jumping jacks every few minutes to recharge.
Slashdot Mirror
Neologisms are accepted in english. Not all, however, are created equal. Not every made up word deserves to become an acknowledged part of the language, IMO.
FTFY
The irony is that the third definition there uses the execrable "is comprised of", which is an incorrect usage of an English word "comprised" whose only meaning is "included". "Is included of" is completely ungrammatical and should be simply "comprises", which means "includes".
While pluralizing an otherwise unpluralizable word in an inventive manner is okay, using a word form as the wrong part of speech is bad grammar, and we do have rules against it.
Most words are not made plural by changing "us" to two "i"s. Doing that makes you look really ignorant only to people who are really ignorant of linguistics.
FTFY
Interestingly, while we intend legal systems to separate good and evil, they're generally written with amoral language.
So while you may not be evil, you would be culpable, liable, criminal, sociopathic, and guilty.
Try here:
http://www.onelook.com/?w=virii
People keep using it and understanding it. In English. Which is made of words from several other languages, many misused to varying degrees relative to their foreign etymologies.
Dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive. They can tell you what a word you saw means, based on its previously observed contexts, but they can't tell you whether it's right or wrong. If they try, they are wrong.
The correct Latin plural would probably be virera. But we don't speak Latin any more. We only use it for religious sloganeering and high-falutin' biological codices.
That's if it's at all possible to pluralize it even in Latin. It's nearest synonym in English is "slime" or "pus", or the noun sense of "ooze", but we use it for "microphage", giving it countability. Like "water" or "blue" have no true plural in English, we nonetheless have invented "waters" and "blues" to describe situations where the singular form does not encompase the plurality of the context. Our choice of suffix in pluralization when inventing new words is entirely unbounded by any rules, as English has almost none given the many ancient systems it supports innately. So we resort to poetry, and choose one that sounds good.
I'll go with "virii" over "viruses" in almost every situation.
Oh, and I'm not a "pretentious dolt." I'm genuinely superior to you, intellectually.
No, some are still mad at each other.
Lulz. One dictionary, and not a very deep one at that.
I saw "Armanian" and all I could think of to post were jokes involving his lawyers filing expensive suits.
Yes there is. Not in Latin, maybe, but in English, certainly. You may not like it, but that's not the determinant.
end up with thought-police?
I don't get why suddenly this Halloween has become the Zombie Festival.
Maybe people didn't get enough of it last Easter and couldn't wait until next Easter.
BTW, has anyone seen anyone selling a Sexy Zombie costume? It's, uh, not for me...
You'd need 1. a new catalyst to crack the glucose, 2. a new membrane that allows the glucose (or the oxygen) through, and 3. a way to pressurize the glucose (while fuel cells are positive energy balance, they take quite a bit of work input on the feed side that can be bled from the output side). And you'd have to make sure that the electrochemical reaction at the glucose/catalyst interface is the correct net polarity to provide electrons to the circuit, or the reaction at the oxygen/catalyst side won't work.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/fuel-cell2.htm
it don't get easier than that!
Will it automatically compile them into a single .pdf file and publish them via torrent?
No, we watch a lot of Food Network, and get more out of it than the usual cook.
He has a monopoly on that, you know.
I expect this:
Book prices will rise to something close to $1000.
You'll have to buy patches for $50 mid-term and just before exams.
Customer support will also be an a pay-per-incident basis.
There will be specially-produced editions for the disabled, at an additional fee, but they will be out of sync with the mainstream edition.
Oh yeah?
Alt-Print Screen
Are the DS and PSP open standards for generalized communication?
Maybe they screwed up by not becoming open standards for generalized communication.
No, actually, I'm a biomedical engineer who does software because at the time I got my degree it paid about 4X as much and had about 400X as many interesting things going on. Now it's about parity on both fronts.
When I said "implant piezo or electromechanical generators in the larger joints" I was using "the movement the chemical reactions in your muscles cause".
Though it occurs to me now that what we need is a battery muscle. A dish-grown copy of a bicep, say, that is implanted somewhere under the skin (horizontally across the forward processes of the pelvis, say, where most people store belly fat as a bulge anyway) attached to a linear electromechanical generator and coopting a nerve from a small, little-used, almost unnecessary, possibly evolutionary-holdover muscle such as the cremaster. It wouldn't be hard to learn how to move that muscle with that nerve. Then, whenever your eye-implanted display shows "LO BATT", you'd think "waggle my nuts" over and over again, and soon it would show the "FULL BATT" icon.
It took years to get 1080-height screens into the mainstream. The collusion between manufacturers meant that computer monitors came out at either 1050 or 1200 height for a long time, but no 1080, even though HDTV had become common. That meant that you couldn't buy one screen to get the best fit for both your TV and your computer, meaning you had to buy 2 screens to do the job right. Then some manufacturers got nailed in court for monopolism, and that broke the embargo. Now 1080-height computer monitors are common, and HDTVs commonly come with computer connectors.
I got tired of it when $WIDGET2 was the wheel.
Now get off my lawn.
I'd use the extra density to create a scotographic 3-D display at 320x180x30 resolution.
What's the point of making a 32" screen with pixels so small you can only see them if your nose is pressed up against the glass?
Anti-aliasing.
Going from one array of discrete cells (the screen) to another (your retina) will result in alignment artifacts.
The fact that you can't see the individual pixels by looking at them doesn't mean you can't tell the difference by looking at the whole picture.
1 kcal (food calorie) is 4187 joules, or watt-seconds.
So 1 watt continuos power is about .00024 kcal/second.
A typical LED will light at 1.7 v and 15 mA, or about 25 mW.
Meaning you need about 6e-6 kcal/second to keep it lit.
Glucose is about 4 kcal per gram, so it would consume about 1.5e-6 grams of glucose per second, roughly 90 ug/minute, or 3.5 mg/hr.
For comparison, an average person walking at average speed burns about 100 kcal/hr, which is about 120 watts, but conversion to external work is only about 25% efficient so you can expect to light a 30-watt incandescent bulb walking on a treadmill, or roughly a thousand LEDs. Note, the conversion from LED to LED display isn't direct, as display LEDs are very small and put out less power than discretes; looking up AMOLED shows you can get away with maybe 100 mw total for something with tens of thousands of pixels, and one person on a treadmill could keep a few hundred of those lit.
But if you don't want a treadmill, you still need to find a way to convert the glucose to electricity. Right now the only way to get from here to there is burning the glucose (i.e., self-propagating exothermic oxidation) to make steam energy to drive a dynamo. Even the processes in neural and muscular action aren't a direct conversion; they're electromechanical systems that first use the splitting of bonds in glucose to activate ion-pumping channels that push charged particles to opposite sides of a membrane; then when the channels are triggered they open wide to allow the charges to flood back across, creating an electromagnetic wave along a neuronal wire (axon) or catalyzing further mechanical action in the large molecular levers and ratchets (actin/myosin) that shorten muscle fibers (myofibrils).
So we're back to needing a mechanical source of electricity and batteries. Maybe implant piezo or electromechanical generators in the larger joints, and do a few jumping jacks every few minutes to recharge.
"I just do eyes."