The only way to reliably test the so-called "solar constant," whose value at the mean Sun-Earth distance is a little over 1 1/3 kilowatts per square meter of surface, is from outer space. Atmosphere and other factors are going to vary any measurement too much.
Here is a web site that talks about changes in this Solar Constant, measured since 1979. The greatest has been about.3% output.
Why is the Sun stable? 1) if the Sun's output weren't stable, temperatures would fluctuate so fast life on Earth wouldn't be in its present form. 2) We are here -- hence things must have been stable. 3) Follow the following physics I dug up about Hydrostatic Equilibrium: http://www.astronomynotes.com/starsun/s3.htm Solar Luminosity---huge energy output! The first basic question about the Sun is how bright is it? It puts out A LOT of energy every second. How much? The answer from our measurements is 4 × 1026 watts. Such a large number is beyond most of our comprehension, so let's put the Sun's total energy output (ie., its luminosity) in more familiar units. It is equal to 8 × 1016 of the largest power plants (nuclear or hydroelectric) on the Earth. Our largest power plants now can produce around 5,000 Megawatts of power. Another way to look at this is that the sun puts out every second the same amount of energy as 2.5 × 109 of those large power plants would put out every year---that's over two billion!... Hydrostatic Equilibrium Controls the Reaction Rates Hydrostatic equilibrium is the balance between the thermal pressures from the heat source pushing outwards and gravity trying to make the star collapse to the very center. I will discuss hydrostatic equilibrium in more depth (no pun intended) in a later section. The nuclear fusion rate is very sensitive to temperature. It increases as roughly temperature4 for the proton-proton chain and even more sharply (temperature15) for the Carbon-Nitrogen-Oxygen chain. So a slight increase in the temperature causes the fusion rate to increase by a large amount and a slight decrease in the temperature causes a large decrease in the fusion rate. Now suppose the nuclear fusion rate speeds up for some reason. Then the following sequence of events would happen: 1) the thermal pressure would increase causing the star to expand; 2) the star would expand to a new point where gravity would balance the thermal pressure; 3) but the expansion would lower the temperature in the core---the nuclear fusion rate would slow down; 4) the thermal pressure would then drop and the star would shrink; 5) the temperature would rise again and the nuclear fusion rate would increase. Stability would be re-established between the nuclear reation rates and the gravity compression.
Personally, I think there are fluctuations --from minute to minute. Kind of like the waves on the ocean can make the water level change dramatically at small samples. But the Level of the ocean as an average is very, very stable. So I think that the thermal output of the Sun is very, very stable -- sunspot activity on 11 year cycles or not. There are a lot of dynamic forces that very constantly and very quickly in the 4-stage fusion process of the sun, but they all average out. Any drastic change over time would be huge. Since it has been here 4 Billion years -- the Net process has to be stable. Right? In our Stratosphere, Ozone atmosphere convert much of the Ulraviolet light into Infrared light -- heat. Out magnetosphere is created by our earth's metal core. This creates a giant electrical generator that keeps producing lightning (interaction between magnetic field and charged particles from sun) so a more energetic Sun would produce more lighting and more Ozone co
Going back go pack animals vs. executing people who use combustion engines.
Hyper meet bole.
I'm suprised that the only Green solution you propose isn't eating babies. Then you could talk about how this would please Pro-Choice, PETA, and Green-peace.
If oil is running out -- and it's when, not if, it stands to reason that the country that is on an alternative energy path sooner rather than later is going to be in the catbird seat with new technology and being a world leader.
If we even have another ice age -- wouldn't it also be nice to reduce pollution anyway, so all our kids don't have to get asthma treatments?
And if the sun is heating things up, and not human activity (which I find hard to believe, when you look at little human changes like 30 million miles of asphalt, hectares of swampland in the Loiusiana coast converted to dry land -- those sorts of little changes too numerous to mention). Doesn't it make sense to look at ways to reduce carbon anyway? So that we heat up less fast.
And instead of trying to bet the farm, based on happy-talk by people with no scientific background guessing about all the Global Warming benefits -- isn't it better to plan for "worst case scenarios" -- you know, in case they happen?...as a solution is that if combustion is still a cheaper method of energy production, stopping it will still require the use of a World Police State to enforce the global ban on combustion, since the majority of people will still choose the cheapest option.
Yes, and we would have to shoot people who use incandescent bulbs, because, you know, saving $35 a year on LED light bubls that use less electricity and never burn out is just going to be so hard to enforce. Or moving people to electric cars that need almost no repairs, have faster excelleration, less moving parts, and will be cheaper to refuel, would be so hard to do.
Listen, a few government subsidies here, a few pollution taxes there... it has only been through the conserted efforts of the "old technology" companies like Big Oil and the huge automotive industries wasteful infrastructure that has created this problem. You can barely see pavement most of the day for all the cars on the road -- don't you think it would be pretty damn easy to have a train replace a lot of traffic.
Why do we not have more trains going everywhere this mass of humanity needs to go? They are cheaper to provide per person. There are a lot of advances such as light rail to make it more practical. It would save huge amounts of energy. And people forced to drive cars and stare at the tail lights of other cars for an hour a day could do something else with their time. It's a no-brainer.
In fact, most of the simple solutions that could save us huge amounts are pretty easy; for example, an $10,000 SUV tax. Pay per the pound for your vehicle on taxes or something like that. The result? Higher fleet efficiency. Just 7% more efficiency would mean no need to import oil from the Middle East. Fleet standards have been going DOWN the past 6 years.
But let's keep letting oil company paid for talk-show hosts frame the argument. If Kyoto protocals were so draconian, why are more than 200 mayors implementing them without the help of the federal government AND saving money for their cities? Why does saving energy and resource result in LOWER COSTS? Why do people listen to fat-cats who are always wrong?
I'm suprised nobody brought to court by the RIAA hasn't argued that they already paid for the Music/Video because all their blank media has a Levy (tax) based on the industry losing money to copying.
So you paid for it.
If the RIAA doesn't like the deal, then they can either end the Levy or increase it -- it seems to be their ballgame. But you cannot accept money for a service, and then say it wasn't enough -- can you? How can they presume a tax based on theft? Isn't that a subsidy for usage?
And I agree with teknomage1 -- about 99.5% of my DVDs and CDs has had my data backed up, or passed around or distributed -- not the RIAA's lost music. Most of the music I have is from my Wife's CD collection on a hard drive to run her iPod. CDs and DVDs of music just gather dust.
It seems the Bush and Blair governments have much in common these days. They create problems that THEY already have the solution to.
The US is working on a National ID system, because apparently, Illegals can get work. But that is by design, to help businesses lower wages.
How hard would it be, to create a system where you Social Security System was KNOWN, but you used a pass code to handshake with the government that YOU and only you are a person allowed to use it? If anyone gets the private pass code, you use your master code and create another one.
But Bush already has family investments in a solution provider. Like they have investments in Kaufman, who does much of the educational testing -- seems to be the only group that actually benefits from NO Child Left Behind.
And a lot of these "bad guys" have the blessings of the Governments -- they won't be hindered by the changes.
No the problem and the solution is all built along the idea that YOU are what our governments are worried about.-
There is no provision agains the "Company" doing the spying. The call doesn't need to be routed back to the US -- probably the audio is processed at sites around the world, and on flagged calls are sent back for review.
If the actual call is rerouted to the US, it doesn't have to go to the government -- just a disavowed third-party.
That's what we were seeing with AT&T and other Telcos. Poindexter is working in the private sector for the private business equivalent of TIMA. You also have companies like ChoicePoint, which collects voting data to help rig votes (as used in Mexico, and provided for by the latest patriot act). I'll add all the "Oops" we lost our database incidents to this conspiracy, now numbering in the millions. I'd say if one party got all the stolen data that has just been reported, it would comprise about 5%-10% of the us population -- heavily weighted towards college kids and military.
Add this to the GPS tracking chip built into all phones (but not necessarily for the customer) since 2005.
By privatizing spying and the military, the Powers that Be don't have to worry about congress or the American public.
This sort of "business shopping" also results in states almost giving away resources like coal.
And even if it doesn't result in a benefit of more jobs... all that a business needs to do is make 1 person happy.
State Representatives should not be allowed to sign NDA agreements. This is so much like Dick Cheney's private meeting with energy lobbyists. Private deals with Public Representatives? No. Therein lies fascism.
I like Google as a company, but now they are starting to act like every other company when they get big or become a monopoly. THEY are not what is important; the general welfare of the people is what is important. People will have jobs and get paid for doing them regardless of what the name on the door is -- but only IF, Governments don't kow-tow and compete for a race to the bottom to get the business.
You can get a clearer picture if you imagined this was a tire manufacturer. NC gives them a waver on pollution standards, but keeps it from the public. They get a tax break and set up shop in a low income neighborhood so nobody complains about the smoke stacks. The state representatives don't have the right to low-ball the value of their citizens. That might not have happened in this case -- but you don't know with NDAs involved. They could have offered a deal where the DA would not allow any lawsuits for two years or perhaps a favorable legal environment. Tell me that Disney doesn't enjoy that in Orlando, Florida.
One or two companies can do this and we don't notice. But we are about to notice with the avalanche of Companies enjoying more rights than people. Just wait for the surprise headline; "People more contaminated than realized... it appears self-regulation didn't work."
How could I "copy" a dance move, unless I had the same body?
Who has a copyright on head shakes, snapping fingers, or on "showing the hand?" Or do you get a copyright on a certain number of coordinated moves and the simple ones are free domain. It's amazing that so many things became part of our culture, and nobody thought to copyright them. Who would now be licensing the Rhumba today? Copyright was designed to help the consumer, to avoid confusion in the marketplace. Can anyone "sell me" the Funky Chicken dance?
Quick, somebody at CopyLeft find a version of the "Funky Chicken" and preserve it for us to use.
All your arguments sound like the same crap they said about Vietnam; "handcuffing our troops."
You know, I just don't want to be somewhere that we have to be that brutal.
Iraq is about Oil, and Saudi plans, and stealing for war profiteers.
We still could have invaded, and set the country up as something peaceful, but not with the idiots that Bush brought in to work on the job; nothing but loyalists and corporate shills. What worked so well fixing Europe after WW II? Empowering people and public works programs and building infrastructure -- not importing mercenaries, and contractors, and unchecked outsourcing.
Did you know that in Vietnam, they voted too? Voting doesn't create a Democracy. You have to have an educated populace. And we are slowly deteriorating from a Democracy into a fascist, corporate-run state. Of course, the half of the population that thinks that way, you can safely ignore because they are Liberals. See how hard it is to keep a country Democratic?
The predictions of a bad Hurrican season in 2006 did come true, just not in our Hemisphere. Weather science still isn't as exact as it could be -- lots of variables.
The US cronies weren't "Democratizing" Iraq so much as creating a Corporatist playground.
Iraq failed for the same reason that BushCo almost created an insurgency in Luisianna; they disenfranchised everyone.
Over 60% unemployment and much of that former troops with weapons. It's like they planned the unrest.
No guards on weapons stockpiles, no protection of infrastructure besides oil wells.
Then the "Democracy" was pushing towards religious factions. They should have outlawed religious-based candidacies, it's like they wanted to exacerbate the differences (Red State/Blue State).
The first Iraq invasion wasn't all that clean cut either. Yeah I know; "Saddam Bad." Unlike the leaders of most of the Bush ally nations? What could Fox news do if they started reporting what the Saudis do in their country (where, ahem, 16 of the 19 hijackers came from)?
No, I'm talking about activities that occur because some organized life form is consuming resources. Yes you would be assuming something in your search -- so Aliens that were earth-like would be more likely to find us than non carbon-based organisms.
On earth we've found sulfer-based, anarobic, and other types of life. We are surmising Silicon and there are even theories of Hydrogen-peroxide based life on Mars. With more examples of life forms, we might find some more general assumptions we can make.
I'm not talking about looking for Water-rich Nitrogen planets like earth. There will probably be narrow bands of absorbed radiation that are common to certain planets with life on them. After we find a few planets with life -- we too will probably be able to find life more accurately with a telescope -- at least narrow the search to much more likely planets.
Apparently, you just accidentally told the truth in a joke.
Do you look forward to eating Indian Mangoes?
What has Pakistan and the US been doing so much lately? Distributing nuclear technology.
Why? Because they are some crazy war-profiteers. Carlysle Group, is the largest weapons dealer outside of a country in the world - and the chairman is Pappy Bush. They sell to both sides and all their banking is in Dubai. Carlysle owns Halliburton, which owns KBR, which owns about 12 other initialed companies that all profit in our war. One hand makes the mess, the other hand cleans it up -- profit! That such a comflict of interest doesn't make people scream "traitor!" is an amazing example of how brain-dead we have become.
Why is it acceptable, that politicians have feduciary compensation from war activities?
And while I've seen people say; "they need to tap our phones to get bad guys," apparently these same people aren't all upset that the Government posted on their website most of the important details of making nuclear weapons. I think they took it down after some complaining.
A bunch of powerful nations, pass around some money and rights to the spoils, and then they "Agree" that killing people is OK now? What is the difference between White Phospherous, Napalm or Serin Gas? Cost and Efficiency.
Our Cluster Bombs, Depleted Uranium and Smart Bombs kill lots of people -- apparently the piles of dead all had a trial and jury to prove that they were terrorists, rather than just bystanders. These are legitimate weapons, because they cost the military industry a lot of money and were made in industrialized nations. If you create a counter-weapon, with what you have available, and use goods that cost less, that is asymmetric warefare and bad. Targeting civilians is a terrorist activity -- but accidentally destroying Lebanese hospitals because you say you were trying to get bad guys; That's civilized.
And Abu Ghraib was a few bad apples. Same with Gitmo. And all those people who were put in oil drums in Afghanistan. And pay no attention to Negroponte -- death squads following the same techniques and dressed like police in Iraq, just like they did in Chile, have nothing to do with him. Don't pay attention to James Baker's career "oops, why'd I tell Saddam he could invade Kuwait?"
And the Constitution is more than 60 years old -- I suppose that has nothing important in it as well. Why is it that you think people were so much more primitive 60 years ago? How are we different now? Why do people keep repeating that "history repeats?"
60 years or 600 years -- war is a scam to create desperation and profits. We did economically to the USSR what we tried to do to China in Vietnam -- which was more successful?
Al Qaeda is a manufactured enemy, because a direct conflict with China would cause lots of Media and WalMart to turn against BushCo. Go check out his ties to Saudis and the Shah of Iran. Same old scam, different "nouns." They just need some convenient enemy, because in chaos they can steel. And Bush supporting companies have made billions.
Exactly what is the only country in the world, that has ever used nuclear weapon?
Against japan the nation that attacked pearl harbor, and killed over 7 million "civilians" in china alone.
-- Ex-MisTech;
It is sort of sad, but that "dishonor" of Japan attacking Pearl Harbor has been completely eclipsed. First, the US was interfering in Japan shipping Oil into their country -- so there was some provocation.
But how can you look at Pearl Harbor, and not get upset about George Bush's "Shock and Awe?" For 6 months, before "official" invasion, we were bombing them with sortie after sortie. Bush was trying to provoke Saddam, and even tried to get him to hit a UN painted airplane. We cut of aide, made the people starve, and then invaded a sovereign nation anyway -- that was, in hindsight, complying with all the conditions that justified (according to Bush) the invasion. 650,000 dead Iraqis later, we get an admonition, that; "oops, I guess there were no WMDs, or Al Qaeda."
Now Special Forces has attacked an Iranian embassy in Iraq -- whatever excuses you have heard to justify it, take them with a grain of salt from a group that continuously lies. We have two aircraft carriers off their shores, and we are trying to interdict their oil shipments. In effect, Bush is trying to force a violent conflict with Iran.
So, while you might find historicall references where "someone is worse" -- none of current history justifies any indignation. Under BushCo, we are merely operation under "might makes right." So Iran better not develop Nuclear power or we bomb them -- end of moral argument. Please note, that the Nuclear inspection teams have been on record that Iran's reactors only create a 3% Consentration of Uranium which is useful for reactors. Weapons "grade" requires 98%. Again, BushCo is lying when they talk about Nuclear weapons.
BushCo employs the same tactic. Criticizing their corruption means that you don't support troops or America -- when really, you have a problem with a speicific, corrupt group of War profiteers.
The problems with Israel are the problems we have with NeoCons. The problems Israel has with Palestinians, is perhaps a lot like the problems we will have with Mexico. Business is addicted to cheap labor, so having disenfranchised "illegal" labor with no rights, means that Mexican wages will continue to fall. In order that the poor people don't start yelling at the government, the CorpGov tries to instigate rivalries.
If Palestinians had real opportunities, colleges, and health care -- do you thik they'd want to risk getting shot to throw rocks at passing soldiers?
No. These problems are human nature -- but the nature of Businesses enjoying profits by taking from desperate people. And business under the NeoCons is good. All these problems are created, so that they can "FIX" them with expensive and violent force. There is no goal beyond power and profit -- it makes the Middle East struggles a bit easier to understand.
The Apple one seems to alias better (of course, at least twice the pixels to play with), and have a better interface -- but yeah, it seems like Nokia did it first. I wouldn't say exactly the same however. Apple doesn't have that zoomed square effect and they also jump to the column width with a double click.
Re:Third party software, Phone locked tight
on
iPhone Roundup
·
· Score: 1
I never believed Job's comment about Viruses bringing down the network.
I think you are on to the real reason when you say that "Apple has less influence than Palm."
Basically, along with the two-year lockin with Cingular, this is about locking customers into Cingular services. If they unlocked the full functionality of this phone, someone could put Skype on this and just make free calls while near a wireless network -- I don't think Cingular would be bending over backwards to help Apple get a leg up over Nokia without selling their services.
That iPhone has all the functionality of a Mac Mini - it is a computer, with a touch screen (multi-touch) interface. There are no limitations other than the ones they gave it. It can all be upgraded and unlocked --- and Cingular will discover this about a month after it ships, but both they and Apple will look the other way as long as it doesn't get out of hand.
This is at least 5 years more advanced than anything out there. Jobs just realized that he has to partner to market this thing -- he's done the ultimate cool thing before, and it was too big and too expensive and no third parties were jumping on to help sell add ons. It was called the Newton, and Palm hasn't even caught up to that old machine in terms of how well designed it was.
Re:Not impressed
on
iPhone Roundup
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I concur.
Anything that Javascript can do.
But there is also Quartz running on that machine... basically it must have a 3D accelerator chip because it is actually running Mac OS X -- just a compressed version of it stored in under 500 megs of Flash. It must have Core Graphics and Core Video -- so the latest OS.
So basically, anything that Apple wants to allow, that runs on OS X, and doesn't exceed the performance.
Look at the animation of the CDs again; that is a 3D transform of multiple objects composited over video in real time. Quartz composer can take a video feed, react to sound, and build it all on the graphics card. At 160 DPI, I'm guessing there is almost a 720pixel wide screen there -- maybe 640. So, I'm guessing that this machine is equivalent to a 5 year old desktop in power.
The main stumbling-block would be software interpreting it. The Widgets are easy enough to build and willl get easier. They use PNG graphics files and Javascript. They can actually use C++ programs and JAVA -- but I'm not sure what Apple is allowing for the iPhone.
OpenGL is also in their -- inside of Core Graphics. Again -- it all depends on if they have developer tools that make it easy enough for programmers to build decent games, and how much apple allows.
Definitely mindsweeper, or a ported version of DOOM if Apple allows it.
Re:Not impressed
on
iPhone Roundup
·
· Score: 2, Informative
And the lack of third-party applications disqualifies it from the moniker smartphone.
Because we all know, that only Smart Phones require a slew of installs to do anything useful.
It's a smart phone, because a person can just USE all the advanced features. I love the gestures, rather than backing up on a selected web page, choosing option, choosing zoom, and then scrolling here -- oops, over there.
90% of that Treo functionality goes to waste. I have a semi-advanced phone, and I've yet to play even an MP3 on it. I took perhaps 5 pictures -- how do I get them to my computer? Well I bought some app off eBay because Motorolla was selling it for a premium. One of these years I will install it, but it is Windows Only, and while my 5 year old Mac runs fine, I have to repair my XP machine again.
How many people out of 100 ever add another application to their phone? With this phone, you will add those functions with iTunes, and you will update your contacts, your photos, music and movies the same way. And like 200 million people already use this application. 2 Billion songs served.... now where was I going with all this... I don't know, but I need to hang up my web surfing app in treo, and take a picture. This response has taken only 30 minutes to type out by the way. Whooosh this phone is smart!
We've wasted billions trying to stop people with box cutters. We could have helped create opportunities for poor, disenfranchised people for a lot less, and done more to reduce the number of people who want to harm us.
Having said that, I still think it is a great idea. But that is because of how many shoulder-fired rockets the NeoCon military companies have sold. 99% of these are from US or Carlysle companies.
Then of course, they will sell a premium Laser reflective missile and then urge congress to upgrade the anti-missile laser.
Assume that war is a racket, and force them to prove otherwise.
The argument that "windows is a target" because it is so popular, is ridiculous. Why wouldn't a Virus free OS become more popular?
Microsoft had benefits that MADE it popular. A lot of this was business deployment and legacy. Also the way they crushed rivals and ActiveX and a few other technologies that enabled these things also made it a great place to create viruses.
For a few years, most of the viruses were just vbscript hacks inside of Outlook. Script kiddies could write them. That was just a flawed design driven by marketing.
Apple's OS does have some weak spots that could be attacked by hackers, but it is better by design. You have to trick the user in most scenarios to hurt their own system.
While MS has just ADDED these types of measures. It's not like they seperated kernel space from user space BEFORE all the viruses were created. Now with this security bolted on top, they still have legacy and all that ActiveX stuff sitting around, that they will have to patch for years.
If Apple gets more popular -- they will also have to support legacy software and functionality, but they also didn't open the ActiveX, VBScript can of worms. At some point, businesses will find more value in discarding legacy software because maintaining it is a burden. The increasing interoperability of the Web, and things like XML, are allowing for "functional equivalents" to replace "parts" of systems. So it ease easier to manage a careful transition to another platform.
I agree with that... there is probably a lot for business deployment.
But I actually prefer Windows 2000 because it's possible to actually fix it. I've been using XP for a while and go back to Windows 2000 as well -- without feeling like I've lost anything or gained anything but a relocation of icons.
With the Mac "Tiger" 10.4 release, it just keeps growing on me and I don't like to use 10.3 or earlier. I suspect I'll feel the same way about Leopard (there are a lot of developer features I'm looking forward to).
Vista seems a lot nicer, and that "core graphics" analog, over time, will be a big deal as it has for the Mac. So over time, when you see some of the Developments for Vista that aren't possible with XP, people will see the need. But the DRM is a big turnoff. But it will be a slow cycle, because the bulk of Windows users aren't out for the bleeding edge. They just want things that don't break and annoy them. Vista doesn't seem to guarantee that.
But really, putting graphics routines on the graphics card allows for a lot more than just GOOEY eye candy.
Yes, In Mac as well you can install globally or for the current user.
The only question is; how easy is it to repair or create a new user with the settings you need? Can you back up the current user easily or take a "snap shot?" If it destroys my user, and that took me weeks to create -- what's the difference?
It is a step in the right direction but the devil is in the details.
Also, I imagine that a lot of people are going to be confused at home; "Hey, I just installed that application -- and now you logged in, where did it go?"
Slashdot Mirror
Stability of the Sun's thermal output
.3% output.
...
The only way to reliably test the so-called "solar constant," whose value at the mean Sun-Earth distance is a little over 1 1/3 kilowatts per square meter of surface, is from outer space. Atmosphere and other factors are going to vary any measurement too much.
Here is a web site that talks about changes in this Solar Constant, measured since 1979. The greatest has been about
http://www.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/winter96/article 3-fig2.html
Why is the Sun stable?
1) if the Sun's output weren't stable, temperatures would fluctuate so fast life on Earth wouldn't be in its present form.
2) We are here -- hence things must have been stable.
3) Follow the following physics I dug up about Hydrostatic Equilibrium:
http://www.astronomynotes.com/starsun/s3.htm
Solar Luminosity---huge energy output!
The first basic question about the Sun is how bright is it? It puts out A LOT of energy every second. How much? The answer from our measurements is 4 × 1026 watts. Such a large number is beyond most of our comprehension, so let's put the Sun's total energy output (ie., its luminosity) in more familiar units. It is equal to 8 × 1016 of the largest power plants (nuclear or hydroelectric) on the Earth. Our largest power plants now can produce around 5,000 Megawatts of power. Another way to look at this is that the sun puts out every second the same amount of energy as 2.5 × 109 of those large power plants would put out every year---that's over two billion!
Hydrostatic Equilibrium Controls the Reaction Rates
Hydrostatic equilibrium is the balance between the thermal pressures from the heat source pushing outwards and gravity trying to make the star collapse to the very center. I will discuss hydrostatic equilibrium in more depth (no pun intended) in a later section. The nuclear fusion rate is very sensitive to temperature. It increases as roughly temperature4 for the proton-proton chain and even more sharply (temperature15) for the Carbon-Nitrogen-Oxygen chain. So a slight increase in the temperature causes the fusion rate to increase by a large amount and a slight decrease in the temperature causes a large decrease in the fusion rate.
Now suppose the nuclear fusion rate speeds up for some reason. Then the following sequence of events would happen: 1) the thermal pressure would increase causing the star to expand; 2) the star would expand to a new point where gravity would balance the thermal pressure; 3) but the expansion would lower the temperature in the core---the nuclear fusion rate would slow down; 4) the thermal pressure would then drop and the star would shrink; 5) the temperature would rise again and the nuclear fusion rate would increase. Stability would be re-established between the nuclear reation rates and the gravity compression.
Personally, I think there are fluctuations --from minute to minute. Kind of like the waves on the ocean can make the water level change dramatically at small samples. But the Level of the ocean as an average is very, very stable. So I think that the thermal output of the Sun is very, very stable -- sunspot activity on 11 year cycles or not. There are a lot of dynamic forces that very constantly and very quickly in the 4-stage fusion process of the sun, but they all average out. Any drastic change over time would be huge. Since it has been here 4 Billion years -- the Net process has to be stable. Right? In our Stratosphere, Ozone atmosphere convert much of the Ulraviolet light into Infrared light -- heat. Out magnetosphere is created by our earth's metal core. This creates a giant electrical generator that keeps producing lightning (interaction between magnetic field and charged particles from sun) so a more energetic Sun would produce more lighting and more Ozone co
This is an example of "framing an argument."
...as a solution is that if combustion is still a cheaper method of energy production, stopping it will still require the use of a World Police State to enforce the global ban on combustion, since the majority of people will still choose the cheapest option.
... it has only been through the conserted efforts of the "old technology" companies like Big Oil and the huge automotive industries wasteful infrastructure that has created this problem. You can barely see pavement most of the day for all the cars on the road -- don't you think it would be pretty damn easy to have a train replace a lot of traffic.
Going back go pack animals vs. executing people who use combustion engines.
Hyper meet bole.
I'm suprised that the only Green solution you propose isn't eating babies. Then you could talk about how this would please Pro-Choice, PETA, and Green-peace.
If oil is running out -- and it's when, not if, it stands to reason that the country that is on an alternative energy path sooner rather than later is going to be in the catbird seat with new technology and being a world leader.
If we even have another ice age -- wouldn't it also be nice to reduce pollution anyway, so all our kids don't have to get asthma treatments?
And if the sun is heating things up, and not human activity (which I find hard to believe, when you look at little human changes like 30 million miles of asphalt, hectares of swampland in the Loiusiana coast converted to dry land -- those sorts of little changes too numerous to mention). Doesn't it make sense to look at ways to reduce carbon anyway? So that we heat up less fast.
And instead of trying to bet the farm, based on happy-talk by people with no scientific background guessing about all the Global Warming benefits -- isn't it better to plan for "worst case scenarios" -- you know, in case they happen?
Yes, and we would have to shoot people who use incandescent bulbs, because, you know, saving $35 a year on LED light bubls that use less electricity and never burn out is just going to be so hard to enforce. Or moving people to electric cars that need almost no repairs, have faster excelleration, less moving parts, and will be cheaper to refuel, would be so hard to do.
Listen, a few government subsidies here, a few pollution taxes there
Why do we not have more trains going everywhere this mass of humanity needs to go? They are cheaper to provide per person. There are a lot of advances such as light rail to make it more practical. It would save huge amounts of energy. And people forced to drive cars and stare at the tail lights of other cars for an hour a day could do something else with their time. It's a no-brainer.
In fact, most of the simple solutions that could save us huge amounts are pretty easy; for example, an $10,000 SUV tax. Pay per the pound for your vehicle on taxes or something like that. The result? Higher fleet efficiency. Just 7% more efficiency would mean no need to import oil from the Middle East. Fleet standards have been going DOWN the past 6 years.
But let's keep letting oil company paid for talk-show hosts frame the argument. If Kyoto protocals were so draconian, why are more than 200 mayors implementing them without the help of the federal government AND saving money for their cities? Why does saving energy and resource result in LOWER COSTS? Why do people listen to fat-cats who are always wrong?
I'm suprised nobody brought to court by the RIAA hasn't argued that they already paid for the Music/Video because all their blank media has a Levy (tax) based on the industry losing money to copying.
So you paid for it.
If the RIAA doesn't like the deal, then they can either end the Levy or increase it -- it seems to be their ballgame. But you cannot accept money for a service, and then say it wasn't enough -- can you? How can they presume a tax based on theft? Isn't that a subsidy for usage?
And I agree with teknomage1 -- about 99.5% of my DVDs and CDs has had my data backed up, or passed around or distributed -- not the RIAA's lost music. Most of the music I have is from my Wife's CD collection on a hard drive to run her iPod. CDs and DVDs of music just gather dust.
It seems the Bush and Blair governments have much in common these days. They create problems that THEY already have the solution to.
The US is working on a National ID system, because apparently, Illegals can get work. But that is by design, to help businesses lower wages.
How hard would it be, to create a system where you Social Security System was KNOWN, but you used a pass code to handshake with the government that YOU and only you are a person allowed to use it? If anyone gets the private pass code, you use your master code and create another one.
But Bush already has family investments in a solution provider. Like they have investments in Kaufman, who does much of the educational testing -- seems to be the only group that actually benefits from NO Child Left Behind.
And a lot of these "bad guys" have the blessings of the Governments -- they won't be hindered by the changes.
No the problem and the solution is all built along the idea that YOU are what our governments are worried about.-
There is no provision agains the "Company" doing the spying. The call doesn't need to be routed back to the US -- probably the audio is processed at sites around the world, and on flagged calls are sent back for review.
If the actual call is rerouted to the US, it doesn't have to go to the government -- just a disavowed third-party.
That's what we were seeing with AT&T and other Telcos. Poindexter is working in the private sector for the private business equivalent of TIMA. You also have companies like ChoicePoint, which collects voting data to help rig votes (as used in Mexico, and provided for by the latest patriot act). I'll add all the "Oops" we lost our database incidents to this conspiracy, now numbering in the millions. I'd say if one party got all the stolen data that has just been reported, it would comprise about 5%-10% of the us population -- heavily weighted towards college kids and military.
Add this to the GPS tracking chip built into all phones (but not necessarily for the customer) since 2005.
By privatizing spying and the military, the Powers that Be don't have to worry about congress or the American public.
This sort of "business shopping" also results in states almost giving away resources like coal.
... it appears self-regulation didn't work."
And even if it doesn't result in a benefit of more jobs... all that a business needs to do is make 1 person happy.
State Representatives should not be allowed to sign NDA agreements. This is so much like Dick Cheney's private meeting with energy lobbyists. Private deals with Public Representatives? No. Therein lies fascism.
I like Google as a company, but now they are starting to act like every other company when they get big or become a monopoly. THEY are not what is important; the general welfare of the people is what is important. People will have jobs and get paid for doing them regardless of what the name on the door is -- but only IF, Governments don't kow-tow and compete for a race to the bottom to get the business.
You can get a clearer picture if you imagined this was a tire manufacturer. NC gives them a waver on pollution standards, but keeps it from the public. They get a tax break and set up shop in a low income neighborhood so nobody complains about the smoke stacks. The state representatives don't have the right to low-ball the value of their citizens. That might not have happened in this case -- but you don't know with NDAs involved. They could have offered a deal where the DA would not allow any lawsuits for two years or perhaps a favorable legal environment. Tell me that Disney doesn't enjoy that in Orlando, Florida.
One or two companies can do this and we don't notice. But we are about to notice with the avalanche of Companies enjoying more rights than people. Just wait for the surprise headline; "People more contaminated than realized
You don't see this as absurd?
How could I "copy" a dance move, unless I had the same body?
Who has a copyright on head shakes, snapping fingers, or on "showing the hand?" Or do you get a copyright on a certain number of coordinated moves and the simple ones are free domain. It's amazing that so many things became part of our culture, and nobody thought to copyright them. Who would now be licensing the Rhumba today? Copyright was designed to help the consumer, to avoid confusion in the marketplace. Can anyone "sell me" the Funky Chicken dance?
Quick, somebody at CopyLeft find a version of the "Funky Chicken" and preserve it for us to use.
All your arguments sound like the same crap they said about Vietnam; "handcuffing our troops."
You know, I just don't want to be somewhere that we have to be that brutal.
Iraq is about Oil, and Saudi plans, and stealing for war profiteers.
We still could have invaded, and set the country up as something peaceful, but not with the idiots that Bush brought in to work on the job; nothing but loyalists and corporate shills. What worked so well fixing Europe after WW II? Empowering people and public works programs and building infrastructure -- not importing mercenaries, and contractors, and unchecked outsourcing.
Did you know that in Vietnam, they voted too? Voting doesn't create a Democracy. You have to have an educated populace. And we are slowly deteriorating from a Democracy into a fascist, corporate-run state. Of course, the half of the population that thinks that way, you can safely ignore because they are Liberals. See how hard it is to keep a country Democratic?
I think in the Pacific, it might have been.
The predictions of a bad Hurrican season in 2006 did come true, just not in our Hemisphere. Weather science still isn't as exact as it could be -- lots of variables.
The US cronies weren't "Democratizing" Iraq so much as creating a Corporatist playground.
Iraq failed for the same reason that BushCo almost created an insurgency in Luisianna; they disenfranchised everyone.
Over 60% unemployment and much of that former troops with weapons. It's like they planned the unrest.
No guards on weapons stockpiles, no protection of infrastructure besides oil wells.
Then the "Democracy" was pushing towards religious factions. They should have outlawed religious-based candidacies, it's like they wanted to exacerbate the differences (Red State/Blue State).
The first Iraq invasion wasn't all that clean cut either. Yeah I know; "Saddam Bad." Unlike the leaders of most of the Bush ally nations? What could Fox news do if they started reporting what the Saudis do in their country (where, ahem, 16 of the 19 hijackers came from)?
No, I'm talking about activities that occur because some organized life form is consuming resources.
Yes you would be assuming something in your search -- so Aliens that were earth-like would be more likely to find us than non carbon-based organisms.
On earth we've found sulfer-based, anarobic, and other types of life. We are surmising Silicon and there are even theories of Hydrogen-peroxide based life on Mars. With more examples of life forms, we might find some more general assumptions we can make.
I'm not talking about looking for Water-rich Nitrogen planets like earth. There will probably be narrow bands of absorbed radiation that are common to certain planets with life on them. After we find a few planets with life -- we too will probably be able to find life more accurately with a telescope -- at least narrow the search to much more likely planets.
Apparently, you just accidentally told the truth in a joke.
Do you look forward to eating Indian Mangoes?
What has Pakistan and the US been doing so much lately? Distributing nuclear technology.
Why? Because they are some crazy war-profiteers. Carlysle Group, is the largest weapons dealer outside of a country in the world - and the chairman is Pappy Bush. They sell to both sides and all their banking is in Dubai. Carlysle owns Halliburton, which owns KBR, which owns about 12 other initialed companies that all profit in our war. One hand makes the mess, the other hand cleans it up -- profit! That such a comflict of interest doesn't make people scream "traitor!" is an amazing example of how brain-dead we have become.
Why is it acceptable, that politicians have feduciary compensation from war activities?
And while I've seen people say; "they need to tap our phones to get bad guys," apparently these same people aren't all upset that the Government posted on their website most of the important details of making nuclear weapons. I think they took it down after some complaining.
What does "legitimate use of WMD's even mean?"
A bunch of powerful nations, pass around some money and rights to the spoils, and then they "Agree" that killing people is OK now? What is the difference between White Phospherous, Napalm or Serin Gas? Cost and Efficiency.
Our Cluster Bombs, Depleted Uranium and Smart Bombs kill lots of people -- apparently the piles of dead all had a trial and jury to prove that they were terrorists, rather than just bystanders. These are legitimate weapons, because they cost the military industry a lot of money and were made in industrialized nations. If you create a counter-weapon, with what you have available, and use goods that cost less, that is asymmetric warefare and bad. Targeting civilians is a terrorist activity -- but accidentally destroying Lebanese hospitals because you say you were trying to get bad guys; That's civilized.
And Abu Ghraib was a few bad apples. Same with Gitmo. And all those people who were put in oil drums in Afghanistan. And pay no attention to Negroponte -- death squads following the same techniques and dressed like police in Iraq, just like they did in Chile, have nothing to do with him. Don't pay attention to James Baker's career "oops, why'd I tell Saddam he could invade Kuwait?"
And the Constitution is more than 60 years old -- I suppose that has nothing important in it as well. Why is it that you think people were so much more primitive 60 years ago? How are we different now? Why do people keep repeating that "history repeats?"
60 years or 600 years -- war is a scam to create desperation and profits. We did economically to the USSR what we tried to do to China in Vietnam -- which was more successful?
Al Qaeda is a manufactured enemy, because a direct conflict with China would cause lots of Media and WalMart to turn against BushCo. Go check out his ties to Saudis and the Shah of Iran. Same old scam, different "nouns." They just need some convenient enemy, because in chaos they can steel. And Bush supporting companies have made billions.
Exactly what is the only country in the world, that has ever used nuclear weapon?
Against japan the nation that attacked pearl harbor, and killed over 7 million "civilians" in china alone.
-- Ex-MisTech;
It is sort of sad, but that "dishonor" of Japan attacking Pearl Harbor has been completely eclipsed. First, the US was interfering in Japan shipping Oil into their country -- so there was some provocation.
But how can you look at Pearl Harbor, and not get upset about George Bush's "Shock and Awe?" For 6 months, before "official" invasion, we were bombing them with sortie after sortie. Bush was trying to provoke Saddam, and even tried to get him to hit a UN painted airplane. We cut of aide, made the people starve, and then invaded a sovereign nation anyway -- that was, in hindsight, complying with all the conditions that justified (according to Bush) the invasion. 650,000 dead Iraqis later, we get an admonition, that; "oops, I guess there were no WMDs, or Al Qaeda."
Now Special Forces has attacked an Iranian embassy in Iraq -- whatever excuses you have heard to justify it, take them with a grain of salt from a group that continuously lies. We have two aircraft carriers off their shores, and we are trying to interdict their oil shipments. In effect, Bush is trying to force a violent conflict with Iran.
So, while you might find historicall references where "someone is worse" -- none of current history justifies any indignation. Under BushCo, we are merely operation under "might makes right." So Iran better not develop Nuclear power or we bomb them -- end of moral argument. Please note, that the Nuclear inspection teams have been on record that Iran's reactors only create a 3% Consentration of Uranium which is useful for reactors. Weapons "grade" requires 98%. Again, BushCo is lying when they talk about Nuclear weapons.
BushCo employs the same tactic. Criticizing their corruption means that you don't support troops or America -- when really, you have a problem with a speicific, corrupt group of War profiteers.
The problems with Israel are the problems we have with NeoCons.
The problems Israel has with Palestinians, is perhaps a lot like the problems we will have with Mexico. Business is addicted to cheap labor, so having disenfranchised "illegal" labor with no rights, means that Mexican wages will continue to fall. In order that the poor people don't start yelling at the government, the CorpGov tries to instigate rivalries.
If Palestinians had real opportunities, colleges, and health care -- do you thik they'd want to risk getting shot to throw rocks at passing soldiers?
No. These problems are human nature -- but the nature of Businesses enjoying profits by taking from desperate people. And business under the NeoCons is good. All these problems are created, so that they can "FIX" them with expensive and violent force. There is no goal beyond power and profit -- it makes the Middle East struggles a bit easier to understand.
He is in marketing.
What do you expect?
The Apple one seems to alias better (of course, at least twice the pixels to play with), and have a better interface -- but yeah, it seems like Nokia did it first. I wouldn't say exactly the same however. Apple doesn't have that zoomed square effect and they also jump to the column width with a double click.
I never believed Job's comment about Viruses bringing down the network.
I think you are on to the real reason when you say that "Apple has less influence than Palm."
Basically, along with the two-year lockin with Cingular, this is about locking customers into Cingular services. If they unlocked the full functionality of this phone, someone could put Skype on this and just make free calls while near a wireless network -- I don't think Cingular would be bending over backwards to help Apple get a leg up over Nokia without selling their services.
That iPhone has all the functionality of a Mac Mini - it is a computer, with a touch screen (multi-touch) interface. There are no limitations other than the ones they gave it. It can all be upgraded and unlocked --- and Cingular will discover this about a month after it ships, but both they and Apple will look the other way as long as it doesn't get out of hand.
This is at least 5 years more advanced than anything out there. Jobs just realized that he has to partner to market this thing -- he's done the ultimate cool thing before, and it was too big and too expensive and no third parties were jumping on to help sell add ons. It was called the Newton, and Palm hasn't even caught up to that old machine in terms of how well designed it was.
I concur.
... basically it must have a 3D accelerator chip because it is actually running Mac OS X -- just a compressed version of it stored in under 500 megs of Flash. It must have Core Graphics and Core Video -- so the latest OS.
Anything that Javascript can do.
But there is also Quartz running on that machine
So basically, anything that Apple wants to allow, that runs on OS X, and doesn't exceed the performance.
Look at the animation of the CDs again; that is a 3D transform of multiple objects composited over video in real time. Quartz composer can take a video feed, react to sound, and build it all on the graphics card. At 160 DPI, I'm guessing there is almost a 720pixel wide screen there -- maybe 640. So, I'm guessing that this machine is equivalent to a 5 year old desktop in power.
The main stumbling-block would be software interpreting it. The Widgets are easy enough to build and willl get easier. They use PNG graphics files and Javascript. They can actually use C++ programs and JAVA -- but I'm not sure what Apple is allowing for the iPhone.
OpenGL is also in their -- inside of Core Graphics. Again -- it all depends on if they have developer tools that make it easy enough for programmers to build decent games, and how much apple allows.
Definitely mindsweeper, or a ported version of DOOM if Apple allows it.
And the lack of third-party applications disqualifies it from the moniker smartphone.
... now where was I going with all this... I don't know, but I need to hang up my web surfing app in treo, and take a picture. This response has taken only 30 minutes to type out by the way. Whooosh this phone is smart!
Because we all know, that only Smart Phones require a slew of installs to do anything useful.
It's a smart phone, because a person can just USE all the advanced features. I love the gestures, rather than backing up on a selected web page, choosing option, choosing zoom, and then scrolling here -- oops, over there.
90% of that Treo functionality goes to waste. I have a semi-advanced phone, and I've yet to play even an MP3 on it. I took perhaps 5 pictures -- how do I get them to my computer? Well I bought some app off eBay because Motorolla was selling it for a premium. One of these years I will install it, but it is Windows Only, and while my 5 year old Mac runs fine, I have to repair my XP machine again.
How many people out of 100 ever add another application to their phone? With this phone, you will add those functions with iTunes, and you will update your contacts, your photos, music and movies the same way. And like 200 million people already use this application. 2 Billion songs served.
This will be adopted BECAUSE it is expensive.
We've wasted billions trying to stop people with box cutters.
We could have helped create opportunities for poor, disenfranchised people for a lot less, and done more to reduce the number of people who want to harm us.
Having said that, I still think it is a great idea. But that is because of how many shoulder-fired rockets the NeoCon military companies have sold. 99% of these are from US or Carlysle companies.
Then of course, they will sell a premium Laser reflective missile and then urge congress to upgrade the anti-missile laser.
Assume that war is a racket, and force them to prove otherwise.
Great point.
The argument that "windows is a target" because it is so popular, is ridiculous. Why wouldn't a Virus free OS become more popular?
Microsoft had benefits that MADE it popular. A lot of this was business deployment and legacy. Also the way they crushed rivals and ActiveX and a few other technologies that enabled these things also made it a great place to create viruses.
For a few years, most of the viruses were just vbscript hacks inside of Outlook. Script kiddies could write them. That was just a flawed design driven by marketing.
Apple's OS does have some weak spots that could be attacked by hackers, but it is better by design. You have to trick the user in most scenarios to hurt their own system.
While MS has just ADDED these types of measures. It's not like they seperated kernel space from user space BEFORE all the viruses were created. Now with this security bolted on top, they still have legacy and all that ActiveX stuff sitting around, that they will have to patch for years.
If Apple gets more popular -- they will also have to support legacy software and functionality, but they also didn't open the ActiveX, VBScript can of worms. At some point, businesses will find more value in discarding legacy software because maintaining it is a burden. The increasing interoperability of the Web, and things like XML, are allowing for "functional equivalents" to replace "parts" of systems. So it ease easier to manage a careful transition to another platform.
You sound so smug about not being smug. ;-)
You will be able to take a snapshot of SlashDot, and then turn that region into a widget that subscribes to this web page in Leopard.
You just don't realize you want Leopard yet.
And then there is ZPS. Oh, but you want to know what that is, right? Steve Jobs will bring you in... bit by bit.
I agree with that... there is probably a lot for business deployment.
But I actually prefer Windows 2000 because it's possible to actually fix it. I've been using XP for a while and go back to Windows 2000 as well -- without feeling like I've lost anything or gained anything but a relocation of icons.
With the Mac "Tiger" 10.4 release, it just keeps growing on me and I don't like to use 10.3 or earlier. I suspect I'll feel the same way about Leopard (there are a lot of developer features I'm looking forward to).
Vista seems a lot nicer, and that "core graphics" analog, over time, will be a big deal as it has for the Mac. So over time, when you see some of the Developments for Vista that aren't possible with XP, people will see the need. But the DRM is a big turnoff. But it will be a slow cycle, because the bulk of Windows users aren't out for the bleeding edge. They just want things that don't break and annoy them. Vista doesn't seem to guarantee that.
But really, putting graphics routines on the graphics card allows for a lot more than just GOOEY eye candy.
Yes, In Mac as well you can install globally or for the current user.
The only question is; how easy is it to repair or create a new user with the settings you need? Can you back up the current user easily or take a "snap shot?" If it destroys my user, and that took me weeks to create -- what's the difference?
It is a step in the right direction but the devil is in the details.
Also, I imagine that a lot of people are going to be confused at home; "Hey, I just installed that application -- and now you logged in, where did it go?"