I'm right and you're wrong. If both trees are planted on earth just before the journey takes place, the tree on earth will grow 12 inches while the tree on the spacecraft will only grlow 1 inch assuming the timelines given in the original post. Read up on the "twin paradox" and why it's not a paradox at all but a mere misunderstanding that is very common and was exhibited by the original poster.
You're wrong. For the guy who travelled at the speed close to C time did slow down. Let's say that at the onset of the journey both planted a bonsai tree that grows at 1 inch per month. Upon the reunion, the earthbound astronaut's plant would be 12 inches tall while the traveller's plant would be only 1 inch high.
The past, future and present are convenient terms used to describe an event's occurence as viewed by a particular observer. Two observers moving at very different speed will observe the same event at different times. what will be one observer's "present" may well be another observer's "past". All three are equallly meaningless in terms of physics.
what you're talking about is not a general law of physics but a specific law of quantum mechanics which is known as the "uncertainty principle". It refers to subatomic particles (photons, electrons etc) but only in terms of so called "complimentary variables". Position and momentum are the most popular and most commonly quoted. Als note that it does not mean our instruments are not precise enough to detect both the momentum and the position of an electron. It means that those two variables are unknowable. The more closely you hone in on one the more uncretain the value of the other. How much precision you are allowed is related to the Planck constant.
Not really. The concept of "now" is relative and depends on the relative velocity of two observers. time is purely relative to observers' relative speed.
well, most physicists do regard wavefunction collapse as more than just a mathematical tool. There appears to be something that really transforms a wave into a stream of particles. we just don't quite understand when and why that happens.
Question for the theoretical physicists in the slashdot crowd:
If one day string theory is validated by an actual experiment what consequences will it have for the various interpretations of Quantum Mechanics? Is it going to give more credibility to any one of the interpretations of QM? Or is this a completely orthogonal issue?
Disclaimer: I know nothing about String Theory but methinks that a true Theory of Everything must provide us with an unambiguous answer for the nature of the collapse of a wavefunction, no?
"The least we can do is put the table back and pay for the broken mirror."
Unless, of course, you subsequently haul all the booze out of the joint "to cover the cost of defeating that evil thug". I heard Halliburton stock was doing extraordinarily well these days.
the Kodak I own is no speed demon either. Between the time the thing saves the previous picture to memory, the time to refocus (in a Kodak that means re-hunt the focal point), the exposure measurement and the shutter lag you're talking 10 seconds+. So much for a "Kodak moment" unless the "Kodak moment" is a picture of a snail on crutches you're not going to have enough time to take the shot.
I doubt that their lenses have any overlap in the focal length. One is a wide angle lens and the other is narrow angle + zoom. Even if they do have a common focal length you'll only be able to use it at the overlapping focal lengths.
You might have to take a photo very quickly or miss the chance.
Except that the camera is the slowest thing in the world. Its shutter lag is enormous and it focuses very slowly too (hunts focus a lot).
Manual white balance is nice if you don't have RAW format available. They do include three preset options to do this through the menu. But those three presets are rarely right.
Oh and it has a 10x zoom with no image stabilisation which makes this camera tooootally useless at the highest focal length unless you lug the tripod everywhere.
This camera has a laundry list of features that are coupled in such way as to make most of the useless. This camera can thus only serve as a point'n shoot and not even a very good one at that.
Rather like something that was very cool circa 1986. This looks like the designer was hibernated for 20 years and they just thawed him to design this camera.
As an (unhappy) owner of DX6490 I can tell you exactly why Kodak is in trouble. It is a camera built for nobody. Some of its features belong in an entry level DSLR while it targets the know-nothings. However, it's quite a challenge to get a decent photo out of it in a point-and-shoot mode. On the other hand, nobody who knows anything about photography will not be willing to put up with the lack of manual focus, lack of RAW format or no manual white balance adjustment.
Why did I buy their camera? Because I'm stupid. Knowing nothing about photography at the time I went to the local mum and pap photo place and asked for advice. They sold me a crap camera that happened to be expensive. I vow never again to rely on anyone else's word when making a significant purchase or buy a Kodak product.
The scan of the map was published in the Polish daily "Wyborcza" but I can't find it on their website anymore. I tried google but without luck. In essence all the cities along the vistula river were to receive the brunt of the nuclear attack. As far as Soviet retaliation was concerned, the usual suspects, including Bonn, London and Brussels were on that map. For Poland alone, 2,000,000+ casualties were forecast.
A few weeks ago Poland revealed (to the dismay of Russia) the nuclear war plans from the days of the warsaw pact. The map was a truly scary prospect. Much of Poland would be annihilated in that nuclear war. Here's one article covering that story. You can find lots more. One interesting disclosure was the war games map with all the nuclear strike sites marked on it.
Not really. If you measure the spin in X axis and then follow by the measuerement of the spin along the Z axis they are complementary and your "knowledge" of the X spin is lost until you measure it again. It has nothing to do with disturbing a particle either. This is all in the nature of quantum equations. your measuerement of a complementary variable "resets" the outcome of your previous results for complementary variable pairs. Therefore you cannot know what the spin was along both X and Z axis for the same particle at a certain point in time.
Exactly. Especially in a city like London. Compare the 100 years old buildings and the one from the seventies.
Two thousand years from now, archeologists will wonder what happened to the world in the twentieth century. With all the cheap looking crap produced in that century they will no doubt assume it was a time of great poverty in the history of Western Europe.
Considering that all those beautiful buildings of the past were built by a society that was much less affluent it is really shameful that we forgone all traces of aesthetics in the name of "high efficiency" which actually means "high entropy".
This is really a meaningless improvement. I doubt I would personally notice even a slight difference on my electricity bill.
We should use electricity frugally but we should use it all the same. It is by far the most versatile form of energy we know. It's easy to transmit, convert, relatively easy to store and can be produced in an environmentally friendly way.
Everything in my house is powered by electricity. Everything. My heating system is based on electric resistance, my stove, washer, drier and all other energy hungry appliances. Even the lawnmower and the edge trimmer are electric. Sounds extreme? Actually it's the most cost effective way to power a house in where I live (Eastern Canada). There is a good concentration of nuclear and hydro power plants and our electricity is less than $0.04 per kWh.
This means that even in the dead of the winter my electricity bill rarely exceeds $300 per month. That's for a 1600sqft home with a full basement (another 800sqft).
I really don't see why say, using a furnace would ever make an economic sense. Power line losses are not that significant. If you include the energy cost of fuel delivery and the energy cost of building and maintaining expensive home furnaces, the argument for electric resistance heat is very strong.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm right and you're wrong. If both trees are planted on earth just before the journey takes place, the tree on earth will grow 12 inches while the tree on the spacecraft will only grlow 1 inch assuming the timelines given in the original post. Read up on the "twin paradox" and why it's not a paradox at all but a mere misunderstanding that is very common and was exhibited by the original poster.
You're wrong. For the guy who travelled at the speed close to C time did slow down. Let's say that at the onset of the journey both planted a bonsai tree that grows at 1 inch per month. Upon the reunion, the earthbound astronaut's plant would be 12 inches tall while the traveller's plant would be only 1 inch high.
The past, future and present are convenient terms used to describe an event's occurence as viewed by a particular observer. Two observers moving at very different speed will observe the same event at different times. what will be one observer's "present" may well be another observer's "past". All three are equallly meaningless in terms of physics.
what you're talking about is not a general law of physics but a specific law of quantum mechanics which is known as the "uncertainty principle". It refers to subatomic particles (photons, electrons etc) but only in terms of so called "complimentary variables". Position and momentum are the most popular and most commonly quoted. Als note that it does not mean our instruments are not precise enough to detect both the momentum and the position of an electron. It means that those two variables are unknowable. The more closely you hone in on one the more uncretain the value of the other. How much precision you are allowed is related to the Planck constant.
Not really. The concept of "now" is relative and depends on the relative velocity of two observers. time is purely relative to observers' relative speed.
well, most physicists do regard wavefunction collapse as more than just a mathematical tool. There appears to be something that really transforms a wave into a stream of particles. we just don't quite understand when and why that happens.
If one day string theory is validated by an actual experiment what consequences will it have for the various interpretations of Quantum Mechanics? Is it going to give more credibility to any one of the interpretations of QM? Or is this a completely orthogonal issue?
Disclaimer: I know nothing about String Theory but methinks that a true Theory of Everything must provide us with an unambiguous answer for the nature of the collapse of a wavefunction, no?
Unless, of course, you subsequently haul all the booze out of the joint "to cover the cost of defeating that evil thug". I heard Halliburton stock was doing extraordinarily well these days.
- Civ II
- Pirates
- Boulder Dash
- Manic Miner
- Elite
Lot's of others too. Generally, older Speccy stuff and some older PC titles. Gawd, that makes me feel so old...Unless you believe some theories that speculate that a brain is a quantum computer. Quackery? Well, there are peer reviewed papers on the subject.
I was talking about my DX6490 and NOT the V570.
the Kodak I own is no speed demon either. Between the time the thing saves the previous picture to memory, the time to refocus (in a Kodak that means re-hunt the focal point), the exposure measurement and the shutter lag you're talking 10 seconds+. So much for a "Kodak moment" unless the "Kodak moment" is a picture of a snail on crutches you're not going to have enough time to take the shot.
I doubt that their lenses have any overlap in the focal length. One is a wide angle lens and the other is narrow angle + zoom. Even if they do have a common focal length you'll only be able to use it at the overlapping focal lengths.
Except that the camera is the slowest thing in the world. Its shutter lag is enormous and it focuses very slowly too (hunts focus a lot).
Manual white balance is nice if you don't have RAW format available. They do include three preset options to do this through the menu. But those three presets are rarely right.
Oh and it has a 10x zoom with no image stabilisation which makes this camera tooootally useless at the highest focal length unless you lug the tripod everywhere.
This camera has a laundry list of features that are coupled in such way as to make most of the useless. This camera can thus only serve as a point'n shoot and not even a very good one at that.
Trust me it isn't. S-K lens is mediocre at best. Way below even the cheapest junk that canon or nikon make.
Rather like something that was very cool circa 1986. This looks like the designer was hibernated for 20 years and they just thawed him to design this camera.
Why did I buy their camera? Because I'm stupid. Knowing nothing about photography at the time I went to the local mum and pap photo place and asked for advice. They sold me a crap camera that happened to be expensive. I vow never again to rely on anyone else's word when making a significant purchase or buy a Kodak product.
The scan of the map was published in the Polish daily "Wyborcza" but I can't find it on their website anymore. I tried google but without luck. In essence all the cities along the vistula river were to receive the brunt of the nuclear attack. As far as Soviet retaliation was concerned, the usual suspects, including Bonn, London and Brussels were on that map. For Poland alone, 2,000,000+ casualties were forecast.
A few weeks ago Poland revealed (to the dismay of Russia) the nuclear war plans from the days of the warsaw pact. The map was a truly scary prospect. Much of Poland would be annihilated in that nuclear war. Here's one article covering that story. You can find lots more. One interesting disclosure was the war games map with all the nuclear strike sites marked on it.
Not really. If you measure the spin in X axis and then follow by the measuerement of the spin along the Z axis they are complementary and your "knowledge" of the X spin is lost until you measure it again. It has nothing to do with disturbing a particle either. This is all in the nature of quantum equations. your measuerement of a complementary variable "resets" the outcome of your previous results for complementary variable pairs. Therefore you cannot know what the spin was along both X and Z axis for the same particle at a certain point in time.
Already been done.
Two thousand years from now, archeologists will wonder what happened to the world in the twentieth century. With all the cheap looking crap produced in that century they will no doubt assume it was a time of great poverty in the history of Western Europe.
Considering that all those beautiful buildings of the past were built by a society that was much less affluent it is really shameful that we forgone all traces of aesthetics in the name of "high efficiency" which actually means "high entropy".
We should use electricity frugally but we should use it all the same. It is by far the most versatile form of energy we know. It's easy to transmit, convert, relatively easy to store and can be produced in an environmentally friendly way.
Everything in my house is powered by electricity. Everything. My heating system is based on electric resistance, my stove, washer, drier and all other energy hungry appliances. Even the lawnmower and the edge trimmer are electric. Sounds extreme? Actually it's the most cost effective way to power a house in where I live (Eastern Canada). There is a good concentration of nuclear and hydro power plants and our electricity is less than $0.04 per kWh. This means that even in the dead of the winter my electricity bill rarely exceeds $300 per month. That's for a 1600sqft home with a full basement (another 800sqft).
I really don't see why say, using a furnace would ever make an economic sense. Power line losses are not that significant. If you include the energy cost of fuel delivery and the energy cost of building and maintaining expensive home furnaces, the argument for electric resistance heat is very strong.
Universal Electric Vehicle has the Spyder in pre-production stage.
Commuter cars has the little electric commuter thing that looks quirky but supposedly works really well.
Electric cars will be back in vogue sooner than most people think.
I disagree