I think that in planetary terms we can safely assume 5x mass will create an environment of roughly 5g... maybe give or take 20%.
How do you justify that remark? Mars has a mass 1/9 of Earth's but a surface gravity over 1/3 of Earth's. Mercury has a mass 1/18 that of Earth but has gravity slightly higher than that of Mars.
There's just no way you can have confidence within 20% that the gravity will be proportional to the mass.
I just undid a mess like that a couple of years ago (a mess I had introduced several years before that). It was very gratifying to see the dual-maintenance problems vanish.
Law "A statement describing a relationship observed to be invariable between or among phenomena for all cases in which the specified conditions are met: the law of gravity"
Can you picture a speed of 2 miles per second? Can you imagine a car 2 miles away, then one second later it's next to you, then one second later it's 2 miles away again?
Now, just how big a "spring" would you want to use to try to catch that car?
Yes, but you could just accelerate a sardine-can the size of a Gemini capsule to the moon transfer orbit, and have it dock with a cycler that has the movie theater and the jacuzzi to make the trip comfortable. For the cost of accelerating the cycler once, you get to use it for every moon trip.
Ok, clearly this is much more important for a Mars trip, but my point is that just because you have to accelerate your people/cargo to moon transfer orbit doesn't obviate the cycler concept.
The poster to whom you replied suggested that a paper claiming a proof posted on an unreviewed preprint server probably wasn't a good reason to get excited. He's absolutely correct.
Oh, absolutely. They aren't intellectually dishonest because they disagree with me. They are intellectually dishonest because their written opinions are full of disingenuous arguments.
I have read the dissenting opinions.
Sorry then... That wasn't apparent from your original post.
I'm glad they made the right decision, but shocked that it was so close (5-4). I'd expect more intellectual honesty from Supreme Court judges.
Just because four of them disagree with you doesn't make them intellectually dishonest. You should read their dissenting opinions before accusing them of that.
Yep, so instead of slight degradation or interference of your audio signal, you now have the chance of it just being a zero. Which means no sound at all. Just like Satellite technology, instead of fading out slowly as you enter a tunnel you just get 100% drop instantly. Great Success! Holy smokes. I have no idea how to respond to this, because it makes no sense at all. If you ever see an actual published claim that a normal 6-foot ethernet cable in someone's listening room can cause even a single-bit data loss that a $500 cable would prevent, let me know.
On/Off is great for a lot of things, but music... and especially "audiophile" quality it is not. Music on records used to be nice perfect smooth *ANALOG* reproductions of the audio recorded, now we get *DIGITAL* stair-stepped, clipped, and compressed junk. That's a different issue. I thought we were talking about cables.
Audio travelling over thin-ass Ethernet gauge wire has to be one of the dumbest ideas ever in the first place. Optical? fine. It is totally digital, no interference issues, no "directionality," etc. Newsflash: the audio is "totally digital" too.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that in planetary terms we can safely assume 5x mass will create an environment of roughly 5g ... maybe give or take 20%.
How do you justify that remark? Mars has a mass 1/9 of Earth's but a surface gravity over 1/3 of Earth's. Mercury has a mass 1/18 that of Earth but has gravity slightly higher than that of Mars.
There's just no way you can have confidence within 20% that the gravity will be proportional to the mass.
I just undid a mess like that a couple of years ago (a mess I had introduced several years before that). It was very gratifying to see the dual-maintenance problems vanish.
Law "A statement describing a relationship observed to be invariable between or among phenomena for all cases in which the specified conditions are met: the law of gravity"
Usually when people say "ironic" I assume they're using it incorrectly, and I think this is the first time I've been wrong. :-)
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=irony
What if the wire was a big spring?
Can you picture a speed of 2 miles per second? Can you imagine a car 2 miles away, then one second later it's next to you, then one second later it's 2 miles away again?
Now, just how big a "spring" would you want to use to try to catch that car?
Yes, but you could just accelerate a sardine-can the size of a Gemini capsule to the moon transfer orbit, and have it dock with a cycler that has the movie theater and the jacuzzi to make the trip comfortable. For the cost of accelerating the cycler once, you get to use it for every moon trip.
Ok, clearly this is much more important for a Mars trip, but my point is that just because you have to accelerate your people/cargo to moon transfer orbit doesn't obviate the cycler concept.
Don't forget pilots.
Let's see how their servers hold up if their search engine, map server, or web email ever become popular.
For a humourless pedant, you certainly are choosy about the details you latch onto.
You forgot the following:
- Processor architecture
- Processor topology
- Operating System
- At least 4-digit serial number so they don't roll over
I'd suggest a hostname more like this: sjcmarkfilep0001opteron870he4waywinxpsp2
If you want less contrast, why not just turn down the contrast on your monitor?
Don't be dense. Here's his point:
The poster to whom you replied suggested that a paper claiming a proof posted on an unreviewed preprint server probably wasn't a good reason to get excited. He's absolutely correct.
Was there ever a geek who used a BBS and didn't think of this?
Oh, absolutely. They aren't intellectually dishonest because they disagree with me. They are intellectually dishonest because their written opinions are full of disingenuous arguments.
I have read the dissenting opinions.
Sorry then... That wasn't apparent from your original post.
I'm glad they made the right decision, but shocked that it was so close (5-4). I'd expect more intellectual honesty from Supreme Court judges.
Just because four of them disagree with you doesn't make them intellectually dishonest. You should read their dissenting opinions before accusing them of that.
Ok, very interesting. Thanks.
Sorry, I don't know how the TLD system works. Can you be more specific?
How is this any different or worse than the current situation in, say, the .com namespace?
I guess you and I have different definitions of "fulfilling". I find raising my kids fulfilling, yet they don't provide me with any food or lodging.
If jobs were very exciting and fulfilling in and of themselves, we wouldn't need to pay people to do them.
If you don't pay them, they can't afford to do the job, no matter how much they like it.I think people get Operating System (OS) mixed up with Input/Output (I/O) and you end up with O/S.
Do you know what "digital" means?