For eclipse, just archive your workspace directory (and subdirectories) and move it to another machine. There are two problems with this, though, if you're moving from *nix to Windows:
1. You can't have any filenames that use Windows reserved words like PRN, CON, etc. They won't copy.
2. You can't have 2 filenames in the same Windows directory that only differ by case - for example TButton and tButton and tbutton and Tbutton.
That doesn't have to do with things changing because you could see something or not, but because you keep forcing it into a specific state through interaction.
(sigh) You're doing it wrong - that link you gave is the wrong one . The article the summary links to has a link to the correct (and non-paywalled) article at arXiv.org. Have a nice day:-)
The GP is wrong. The article I linked to is NOT pay-walled, and contains the link to the arXiv.org paper. Either they didn't read the article (so they didn't know that there was already a link to arXiv) or they're just trying to make something out of nothing - kind of like this experiment did:-)
The thing that's interesting isn't the energy-to-matter conversion, but the fact that the impact should blow the atom to smitherines. When we come across stuff like that (that makes you go "Hmm, that's strange") it's worth investigating to learn more.
Each of those is still not as efficient as just say "hey" over the wall. Each has a pro and con. You don't need everyone to be physically at work, and excluding people who work best remotely would be bad, but don't think electronic communications is an actual perfect replacement for being in a close proximity of each other.
I hate it when people do that. If it were harder to communicate (say, in different buildings) they'd think things through more before asking questions; those that they didn't solve on their own, they'd at least have thought it through, be able to explain the problem much more clearly, and understand the solution when it's shown to them.
I noticed that you ignored the case of objects approaching each other, each with a substantial fraction of the velocity of c. I used that thought experiment to pose the question of how they interact, because we know from observation that they do, even though each one is approaching the other faster than c. From the frame of reference of one, the other never exits, unless time and space are not continuous at the smallest scales.
Let's make it two planets approaching each other, as seen from an observer slightly off to the side at the center point where they should collide. Does the observer see two objects collide? Yes. Do the objects interact? Yes. They don't just zoom through each other instantaneously for their own frames of reference and not for others, same as photons moving toward each other.
People are too focused on the "receding" behavior, and not the "approaching" behavior, and what it implies.
If we posit a standard distribution for the length of time that a particle from the quantum foam can exist, then it's inevitable that some will stay in existence for a very long time - long enough to start clumping together as larger chunks of matter. At that point, it's no longer a part of the quantum foam, but "real" particles. Maybe that's how this universe started - the particles in the vacuum came together in the Big Bang, and will do so in the future. All that's needed is some sort of distribution of the length of time that a quantum foam particle can exist, and lots of time and space.
There's a huge difference between "interrupting yourself" after you've completed a section of code, and someone else interrupting you while you're in the middle of it. Taking a break helps.
No, it's not manager to engineer communication that's the problem. It's engineer to engineer communication. That is far far more important, and the thing that gets lost.
It doesn't get lost if you've got good people. But you know the saying - 1st-rate people hire 1st-rate people, 2nd-rate people hire 3rd-rate people. If you're not hiring people who can communicate with each other, you haven't hired 1st-rate people, so maybe the root of the problem is the hiring process?
Bosses would never go for it, because it will mean paying overtime - LOTS of overtime. They keep their jobs only as long as they can get the maximum effort from their underlings for the minimum expense.
One simple mechanism for reversing the expansion that I came up with while walking the dogs: As "space" gets thinned out, the length of time that particles can exist before returning to the quantum foam gets longer, until it passes a threshold and is no longer "part of the foam." Given enough of this, the added mass causes the universe to reverse its expansion.
If you want face-to-face, use skype or another video chat program. It's been shown that takes about 15 minutes to "recover" from an interruption . Now when you personally wander over to a developer and interrupt him/her "just to see how it's going", you've burned 15 minutes. It's why so many devs find themselves at their most productive at night, when nobody is interrupting them.
An interrupt is defined as "any
distraction that makes a developer stop his planned activity to respond to the interrupt’s initiator".
There were three types of interrupts defined: personal visits, telephone calls and emails. Personal visits
and telephone calls caused 90 percent of all interrupts and email caused the rest. The results showed
the effort spent on interrupts required approximately 20 minutes for each occurrence, including the
time spent handling the interrupt, and that the average developer receives three to five interrupts per
day. This consumes roughly 1 to 1.5 hours per day of the developer’s time.
Obviously at one point these objects were closer together. Therefore, they had some (maybe infinitesimal, but still not zero) effect on each other, either through bending of space/time, or through gravitons (take your pick which). If two galaxies are receding from each other in exactly opposite directions, and from a frame of reference between the two each is apparently receding at 2/3 c, then neither object appears in the other's frame of reference. However both can influence, and be influenced by, the object between the two, so even though we can't see them, they' still continue to (indirectly) affect our visible universe, and us. Anything that affects us, even indirectly, is still by definition "in our universe." We just can't detect it directly.
Or, simpler, shine two flashlights at each other. The photons from both are traveling at c relative to you, the observer. It should not be possible for them to interact with each other because they're traveling towards each other, relative to each other, at 2c. But observation tells us they interact. To an observer on either photon, it appears as if the other photon doesn't exist, since it would "disappear" at the same time that it "appeared" (or worse, disappear before it appeared). Time of its' existence in the other's frame of reference is zero, but they still interact, even with relative velocities greater than c, and information IS exchanged.
The only apparent way out of this is to say that time and space are both quantized at our scale. Time doesn't flow smoothly, but rather is a series of "ticks". So, even if the theoretical frame of reference of each photon viz the other is well over c, for a minimum of 1 tick (since you can't have half a tick) they can interact. Of course, this brings with it another set of problems, but that's the fun of it.
To get very far away from us they started receding from us at a higher speed than objects that are closer. However, nobody can point to where an object "disappeared" - it's all conjecture unsupported by experiment or direct observation. Who knows, maybe when the fabric of the universe gets too thin, the repulsive force becomes an attractive force. We simply don't know enough yet.
If B and C are close enough to be gravitationally bound then A will lose contact with both of them at the same time.
Objects don't have to be gravitationally bound to influence each other. A rogue plantoid passing through our system isn't gravitationally bound to it, but our gravity still can modify its path.
But can those far-away galaxies still interact with their closest neighbors? Yes.
And they interact with others that are closer to us.
Wash, lather, rinse, repeat enough times, and they still indirectly interact. They have not exceeded C in relation to all their neighbors.
Slashdot Mirror
1. You can't have any filenames that use Windows reserved words like PRN, CON, etc. They won't copy.
2. You can't have 2 filenames in the same Windows directory that only differ by case - for example TButton and tButton and tbutton and Tbutton.
No 3d for me. I only have one good eye, you insensitive clod!
That doesn't have to do with things changing because you could see something or not, but because you keep forcing it into a specific state through interaction.
Seeing IS interacting :-)
Scientists were surprised with penicillin.
(sigh) You're doing it wrong - that link you gave is the wrong one . The article the summary links to has a link to the correct (and non-paywalled) article at arXiv.org. Have a nice day :-)
The GP is wrong. The article I linked to is NOT pay-walled, and contains the link to the arXiv.org paper. Either they didn't read the article (so they didn't know that there was already a link to arXiv) or they're just trying to make something out of nothing - kind of like this experiment did :-)
The thing that's interesting isn't the energy-to-matter conversion, but the fact that the impact should blow the atom to smitherines. When we come across stuff like that (that makes you go "Hmm, that's strange") it's worth investigating to learn more.
The quantum zeno effect is one example.
Each of those is still not as efficient as just say "hey" over the wall. Each has a pro and con. You don't need everyone to be physically at work, and excluding people who work best remotely would be bad, but don't think electronic communications is an actual perfect replacement for being in a close proximity of each other.
I hate it when people do that. If it were harder to communicate (say, in different buildings) they'd think things through more before asking questions; those that they didn't solve on their own, they'd at least have thought it through, be able to explain the problem much more clearly, and understand the solution when it's shown to them.
I noticed that you ignored the case of objects approaching each other, each with a substantial fraction of the velocity of c. I used that thought experiment to pose the question of how they interact, because we know from observation that they do, even though each one is approaching the other faster than c. From the frame of reference of one, the other never exits, unless time and space are not continuous at the smallest scales.
Let's make it two planets approaching each other, as seen from an observer slightly off to the side at the center point where they should collide. Does the observer see two objects collide? Yes. Do the objects interact? Yes. They don't just zoom through each other instantaneously for their own frames of reference and not for others, same as photons moving toward each other.
People are too focused on the "receding" behavior, and not the "approaching" behavior, and what it implies.
If we posit a standard distribution for the length of time that a particle from the quantum foam can exist, then it's inevitable that some will stay in existence for a very long time - long enough to start clumping together as larger chunks of matter. At that point, it's no longer a part of the quantum foam, but "real" particles. Maybe that's how this universe started - the particles in the vacuum came together in the Big Bang, and will do so in the future. All that's needed is some sort of distribution of the length of time that a quantum foam particle can exist, and lots of time and space.
There's a huge difference between "interrupting yourself" after you've completed a section of code, and someone else interrupting you while you're in the middle of it. Taking a break helps.
Or even simpler (and closer to the truth) "We screwed up. We didn't code a check for the start date."
No passing the blame off to some imaginary "bug".
No, it's not manager to engineer communication that's the problem. It's engineer to engineer communication. That is far far more important, and the thing that gets lost.
It doesn't get lost if you've got good people. But you know the saying - 1st-rate people hire 1st-rate people, 2nd-rate people hire 3rd-rate people. If you're not hiring people who can communicate with each other, you haven't hired 1st-rate people, so maybe the root of the problem is the hiring process?
Bosses would never go for it, because it will mean paying overtime - LOTS of overtime. They keep their jobs only as long as they can get the maximum effort from their underlings for the minimum expense.
One simple mechanism for reversing the expansion that I came up with while walking the dogs: As "space" gets thinned out, the length of time that particles can exist before returning to the quantum foam gets longer, until it passes a threshold and is no longer "part of the foam." Given enough of this, the added mass causes the universe to reverse its expansion.
An interrupt is defined as "any distraction that makes a developer stop his planned activity to respond to the interrupt’s initiator". There were three types of interrupts defined: personal visits, telephone calls and emails. Personal visits and telephone calls caused 90 percent of all interrupts and email caused the rest. The results showed the effort spent on interrupts required approximately 20 minutes for each occurrence, including the time spent handling the interrupt, and that the average developer receives three to five interrupts per day. This consumes roughly 1 to 1.5 hours per day of the developer’s time.
Obviously at one point these objects were closer together. Therefore, they had some (maybe infinitesimal, but still not zero) effect on each other, either through bending of space/time, or through gravitons (take your pick which). If two galaxies are receding from each other in exactly opposite directions, and from a frame of reference between the two each is apparently receding at 2/3 c, then neither object appears in the other's frame of reference. However both can influence, and be influenced by, the object between the two, so even though we can't see them, they' still continue to (indirectly) affect our visible universe, and us. Anything that affects us, even indirectly, is still by definition "in our universe." We just can't detect it directly.
Or, simpler, shine two flashlights at each other. The photons from both are traveling at c relative to you, the observer. It should not be possible for them to interact with each other because they're traveling towards each other, relative to each other, at 2c. But observation tells us they interact. To an observer on either photon, it appears as if the other photon doesn't exist, since it would "disappear" at the same time that it "appeared" (or worse, disappear before it appeared). Time of its' existence in the other's frame of reference is zero, but they still interact, even with relative velocities greater than c, and information IS exchanged.
The only apparent way out of this is to say that time and space are both quantized at our scale. Time doesn't flow smoothly, but rather is a series of "ticks". So, even if the theoretical frame of reference of each photon viz the other is well over c, for a minimum of 1 tick (since you can't have half a tick) they can interact. Of course, this brings with it another set of problems, but that's the fun of it.
To get very far away from us they started receding from us at a higher speed than objects that are closer. However, nobody can point to where an object "disappeared" - it's all conjecture unsupported by experiment or direct observation. Who knows, maybe when the fabric of the universe gets too thin, the repulsive force becomes an attractive force. We simply don't know enough yet.
I want people in close proximity to each other to facilitate communication with each other, project sponsors, and end users
Telephone, email, text, chat, I'm sure they know how to use at least one of these ...
But they were already interacting before this all started.
Maybe it's time to change their name to "Unter"?
Prove it, say, with gravity.
If B and C are close enough to be gravitationally bound then A will lose contact with both of them at the same time.
Objects don't have to be gravitationally bound to influence each other. A rogue plantoid passing through our system isn't gravitationally bound to it, but our gravity still can modify its path.
But can those far-away galaxies still interact with their closest neighbors? Yes.
And they interact with others that are closer to us.
Wash, lather, rinse, repeat enough times, and they still indirectly interact. They have not exceeded C in relation to all their neighbors.