That specific example (1/3) does not directly apply indeed, except as historical background information. The the others on the other hand do, and only one is necessary to empirically disprove your initial claim: "You will not cool to below it."
Of course, you can posture that "A radiator in space will not cool down to below CMB background". That statement is true, but the goal is not to cool down the radiators, but other parts of the assembly.
I have the impression that you just didn't think things through or spent any time verifying your statement(s), perhaps because of what seemed reasonable and logical to you at the time. No shame in that, but if you are going to use others to test your assertions, it suggest that it is generally appreciated if you acknowledged your mistakes early.
Since cold is the absence of heat, yes, space is very cold indeed. I did not mean to infer otherwise.
"Space has a background temperature. You will not cool to below it."
I believe otherwise. CMB has a thermal black body spectrum at a temperature over 2.7 K. Back in 2003 MIT was able to lower the temperature of sodium gaz below 1 nanokelvin.
http://news.mit.edu/2003/cooli...
Gravity Probe B (2004-2005) was using gyroscopes housed within superfluid helium, maintaining a required temperature of under 2 kelvins.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There has also just been a launch of the Cold Atom Lab on May 21'st this year, which may allow temperatures as low as 1 pK.
Heat can be thought of atoms vibrating with more or less energy depending on how 'hot' things are.
If you want to cool something down, a good way to do it is to put these energetic atoms in contact with others 'cool' ones which have less energy. Put ice in hot water and energy levels out.
I could understand mod 2 interesting, only because it is the kind of thing one might say in a person to person discussion not because he truly believes in it, but because he wants to hear the best argument(s) against it.
I for one would simply point out that it took this event to be able to link open source to "massive layoffs". Perhaps this is the only ways Oracle would ever do this. Regardless, it is done.
I'm sure these find Java experts will find their way.
You are cherry picking, but I am not sure to what end. China does things the US doesn't do and visa versa. Again, your analogy disregards the fact that corporations, especially the one you mention, uses the government and lobbyists to swipe tech not only from corporations, but from pretty much everybody and everything that they can exploit.
It almost sounds like you are trying to make a case the US is not doing something China is doing out of pure ethics, which is not credible. China is not going to be 'guilted' into changing its behavior, especially from the standard bullying tactics the US.
A new approach, including respect as a framework, should be envisioned. This is the only hope to entice good will.
"I would hope people would be grown up enough to tolerate those who are not friendly, patient, welcoming, considerate or respectful"
Indeed. As far as IT coworkers, I would take competent over all of those combined.
Further, I can always let someone know he/she is not being one of the above, but you cannot let anyone know they are not competent unless you are willing to be labeled as one or all of the above.
Assuming that by 'what people do' you mean what most people do.
If you get that impression from television, try watching less of it (even cut the cord) and if you get it from your surroundings, meet new people.
On the other hand, if you are seduced by the apparent results of these self serving opportunists and wishes to emulate their behavior, I wish you the worse.
Hopefully, you are stating what you are observing and not proposing a modus operandi.
This behavior is not a new thing and has been shown to be the precursor to the fall of empires.
Slashdot Mirror
Could you also explain what you meant by "Also very very hot in some places.."?
To summarize;
(1) "Space has a background temperature. You will not cool to below it."
Was nuanced, and was meant as:
(2) "You cannot cool the system as a whole to below the reservoir entropy. Period. All stop." ?
I am quite comfortable that I understood both the conversation and the technology we were talking about.
"You cannot cool the system as a whole to below the reservoir entropy. Period. All stop."
See, you changed it again.
Better luck with yourself.
That specific example (1/3) does not directly apply indeed, except as historical background information. The the others on the other hand do, and only one is necessary to empirically disprove your initial claim: "You will not cool to below it."
Of course, you can posture that "A radiator in space will not cool down to below CMB background". That statement is true, but the goal is not to cool down the radiators, but other parts of the assembly.
I have the impression that you just didn't think things through or spent any time verifying your statement(s), perhaps because of what seemed reasonable and logical to you at the time. No shame in that, but if you are going to use others to test your assertions, it suggest that it is generally appreciated if you acknowledged your mistakes early.
Since cold is the absence of heat, yes, space is very cold indeed. I did not mean to infer otherwise.
"Space has a background temperature. You will not cool to below it."
I believe otherwise. CMB has a thermal black body spectrum at a temperature over 2.7 K. Back in 2003 MIT was able to lower the temperature of sodium gaz below 1 nanokelvin.
http://news.mit.edu/2003/cooli...
Gravity Probe B (2004-2005) was using gyroscopes housed within superfluid helium, maintaining a required temperature of under 2 kelvins.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There has also just been a launch of the Cold Atom Lab on May 21'st this year, which may allow temperatures as low as 1 pK.
https://coldatomlab.jpl.nasa.g...
https://science.nasa.gov/scien...
There are more precise explanations, but I'll try to put it in layman's terms;
Space is mostly empty and thus NOT good at transferring heat.
This is why a vacuum flask works:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Heat can be thought of atoms vibrating with more or less energy depending on how 'hot' things are. If you want to cool something down, a good way to do it is to put these energetic atoms in contact with others 'cool' ones which have less energy. Put ice in hot water and energy levels out.
In space, there is nothing to transfer to, so you have to irradiate (using radiators)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Getting very cold is not trivial, and can be problematic:
http://www.sciencemag.org/news...
"so that Russians could access it.."
Citation? Actually, never mind.
Incredible!
No need to worry about CO2 Anymore, because it is "Cheaper Than Scientists Thought".
So cheap, that this 'new' Thought, will be demonstrated... soon... very soon.
Two weeks.. from the looks of it.
I could understand mod 2 interesting, only because it is the kind of thing one might say in a person to person discussion not because he truly believes in it, but because he wants to hear the best argument(s) against it.
I for one would simply point out that it took this event to be able to link open source to "massive layoffs". Perhaps this is the only ways Oracle would ever do this. Regardless, it is done.
I'm sure these find Java experts will find their way.
You are cherry picking, but I am not sure to what end. China does things the US doesn't do and visa versa. Again, your analogy disregards the fact that corporations, especially the one you mention, uses the government and lobbyists to swipe tech not only from corporations, but from pretty much everybody and everything that they can exploit.
It almost sounds like you are trying to make a case the US is not doing something China is doing out of pure ethics, which is not credible. China is not going to be 'guilted' into changing its behavior, especially from the standard bullying tactics the US.
A new approach, including respect as a framework, should be envisioned. This is the only hope to entice good will.
Horseshit.
Stealing is one of the 'commercial side''s favorite game.
Its just a matter of being big enough to kill your the competition you steal from.
Funniest part of your analogy is the Corporation you named.
The fact that someone did mod this down as off-topic is hilarious.
:)
Thanks
I am not a particle physicists, but in that list, they would seem to have the upper hand.
Although, I presume that they would tend to make every physical effect into a particle or wave, or both.
That would also take care of computers, the world and the CEO's ranting about computers.
Also a warning of what could happen if you rely on computers to educate your children.
Who cares. Nobody knows the answer to that question for sure.
The original question is obviously just a bootstrap for discussions. Would you rather we started another submission just for that?
Mod me off topic for this:
10 GOTO 10
Their research maybe inconsequential to you, but they are not wasting your time.
You are doing that perfectly well yourself.
"This has been one of the more ridiculous debates in the FOSS realm, far outdistancing the Emacs-vi rift", said Larry Cafiero
I know I'm taking a chance here, but how different could his skin color possibly be?
"I would hope people would be grown up enough to tolerate those who are not friendly, patient, welcoming, considerate or respectful"
Indeed. As far as IT coworkers, I would take competent over all of those combined.
Further, I can always let someone know he/she is not being one of the above, but you cannot let anyone know they are not competent unless you are willing to be labeled as one or all of the above.
"I have no TV. I know no people who feel the urge to spew propaganda."
Kudos for that.
If its worth anything, this sub-thread allowed me to get to know you a little better, and I mean that in a positive way.
"The path covers an astounding total angular distance of 2883523, for a distance of 32 089.7 kilometers.
This path is visually the same one as found by kepleronlyknows, thus proving his assertion."
Assuming that by 'what people do' you mean what most people do.
If you get that impression from television, try watching less of it (even cut the cord) and if you get it from your surroundings, meet new people.
On the other hand, if you are seduced by the apparent results of these self serving opportunists and wishes to emulate their behavior, I wish you the worse.
Hopefully, you are stating what you are observing and not proposing a modus operandi.
This behavior is not a new thing and has been shown to be the precursor to the fall of empires.
Correct to a point, but it is a mute point.
One does not have to rely on claims from either sides to observe what is really happening.
Nice try, but we both know which side has brought up the level of discourse to what it is.
Lets not confuse a dripping tap with Niagara Falls.