It's funny that the slashdot teaser - and your response - both latch onto the "private" part of the picture, as though there was inherent reason to dread private enterprise when providing some important service, to presume government would do better.
I don't know anything about the physics of this paper.
But I love figure 3 (also highlighted at the aps.org URL), because it highlights outliers from the theory, and points to the supplementary information for theories about why those points didn't fit the otherwise nice curve.
Bringing attention to errors as well as successes - that's good honest work.
The authors of a license, even the GPL, cannot simply redefine the pre-established legal concept of "derivation" (absence of which implies irrelevance of license, no matter what the licensor prefers).
... well, considering the supposedly the purpose of the medallion was to keep meanie drivers out of cabs, then they should reflect the deemed safety of the -driver-, not the car.
The trick is that the light source varies with different samples. What this apparatus appears to be computing is a dot product (overall image intensity) with a series of 2D wavelets. Then inverse-transform the coefficients to a 2D image.
Thanks for the links. I was indeed feeling a little lazy.
"How should the writer of the article know what you want to know?"
That seemed like a natural enough question. The writer ought to set the context. If we were talking about only a pittance of generation overall, then its exact decomposition of renewable vs. not would not be interesting. As it is, scotland produces some 15% of the UK total, so not too shabby.
... plus they don't talk about energy *consumed* in scotland, only generated. It would be more useful if there were a statement that scotland is a net importer vs. exporter of electricity.
OK. So the original question remains how the temperature of the object can be multiple degrees cooler, in the steady state, than the ambient air. Why would those two heat flows not apprx. balance?
If the air is in contact with the painted surface (at constant pressure etc.), will the warmer air not transfer its heat, so as to produce an equilibrium of equal temperatures?
The paper seems even lamer than that: part 1 - REC failed part 2 - Hansen says we're doomed part 2a - we'd be doomed even if REC succeeded part 3 - solution: "spend more money on R&D"
Slashdot Mirror
I do believe the grandparent was fully aware, and speaking ironically.
"We like it that way,"
Wonder if you'd like 50% or 90% or whatever better, because it would pay for more stuff like your socialized healthcare and stuff and more stuff.
be thankful I don't take it all
"An evidence-based mindset on the state of the world would bring many benefits."
Perhaps evidence can be gathered to support that hypothesis.
It's funny that the slashdot teaser - and your response - both latch onto the "private" part of the picture, as though there was inherent reason to dread private enterprise when providing some important service, to presume government would do better.
bravo
We reject [this] false choice.
Sorry, that was certainly not the intent. Of course "the" (this particular topic: AGW) was implied, and everyone else understood it that way.
"utilizing the scientific process honestly, let alone correctly"
Well ok, mistakes happen ... but these don't meet the suggested criterion of "ignoring science entirely".
"skeptics would like [to own the term skeptic]"
And the people's front of judea would like the splitters to call themselves the front of judean people.
"other than that, the story was accurate"
"the denier ignores [science] entirely"
Do such people actually exist? (e.g., "scientist X, Y, Z don't have credibility with me" is not "ignoring science entirely".)
I'd really like to hear what Bennett Haselton has to say about that.
Read some of Michael Totten's series on Cuba.
It's not much better than North Korea, if you get beyond the goo served up by the michigan documentator.
I don't know anything about the physics of this paper.
But I love figure 3 (also highlighted at the aps.org URL),
because it highlights outliers from the theory, and points
to the supplementary information for theories about why
those points didn't fit the otherwise nice curve.
Bringing attention to errors as well as successes - that's
good honest work.
Well sure, but the point is that it's not up to the whims of the license or licensor what those legal terms mean. They exist outside.
The authors of a license, even the GPL, cannot simply redefine the pre-established legal concept of "derivation" (absence of which implies irrelevance of license, no matter what the licensor prefers).
... well, considering the supposedly the purpose of the medallion was to keep meanie drivers out of cabs, then they should reflect the deemed safety of the -driver-, not the car.
The trick is that the light source varies with different samples. What this apparatus appears to be computing is a dot product (overall image intensity) with a series of 2D wavelets. Then inverse-transform the coefficients to a 2D image.
Thanks for the links. I was indeed feeling a little lazy.
"How should the writer of the article know what you want to know?"
That seemed like a natural enough question. The writer ought to set the context. If we were talking about only a pittance of generation overall, then its exact decomposition of renewable vs. not would not be interesting. As it is, scotland produces some 15% of the UK total, so not too shabby.
... plus they don't talk about energy *consumed* in scotland, only generated. It would be more useful if there were a statement that scotland is a net importer vs. exporter of electricity.
OK. So the original question remains how the temperature of the object can be multiple degrees cooler, in the steady state, than the ambient air. Why would those two heat flows not apprx. balance?
If the air is in contact with the painted surface (at constant pressure etc.), will the warmer air not transfer its heat, so as to produce an equilibrium of equal temperatures?
"it becomes cooler than the surrounding air by around 9F (5C)"
Sorry, not possible, as per the first law of thermodynamics.
The paper seems even lamer than that:
part 1 - REC failed
part 2 - Hansen says we're doomed
part 2a - we'd be doomed even if REC succeeded
part 3 - solution: "spend more money on R&D"