Isn't this similar to membrains supported by String theory? According to String theory the whole universe is a membrain. When our universe (membrain) collides with another membrane a new membrain may be created.
According to GR, gravity is the curvature of Space-Time. As the anti-matter moves through space it has to follow this curvature. If it does not, that means GR is wrong (which may be the case, but I doubt this experiment will disprove GR).
...many people will die soon as the energy crisis hits. Energy usage and world population have a very close correlation. Do not forget that the energy we use (fossil fuels) was produced millions of years ago. It is essentially free, we just have to use it. Any other method which requires us to produce energy will be more expensive (unless something marvellous happens, but I do not think so).
Less energy means smaller population. The future does not bode well for us.
Is there really someone who believes this news? The current biggest oil field is Ghawar in Saudi Arabia with 75 - 80 billions barrel of oil. And you really believe that there is a much bigger field than Ghawar and it is conveniently located within the border of the US? Oh, come on...
(1 billion barrels recoverable oil is OK. However, this is not much as the world uses 30 billion annually.)
Then you have never heard of Jevons paradox which states as technological improvements increase the efficiency with which a resource is used, total consumption of that resource may increase, rather than decrease.
So, technology itself cannot save us from an energy crisis. And energy crisis means food crisis, too.
As for solar power, we cannot harvest it efficiently let alone store it. Fossil fuels were produced and stored for us by Nature that's why it is so cheap. If energy has to be produced (let it be solar, wind or water) and stored by us it will be no longer cheap. IMHO, storage is the bigger problem.
Have you heard of EROEI (Energy Return On Energy Invested)? There was a time when it was 100:1 in case of oil. That means you could produce 100 barrels of oil with the energy of 1 barrel of oil. Nowadays, it is somewhere between 5 and 10, but this is far better than biomass which is between 1 and 2.
Energy consumption and world population have a close correlation. If energy consumption drops so will world population. And believe me, people won't die peacefully.
And to clarify things those hundreds of millions of people will die in a short period of time (a few years) and of course not during a 100-year-period.
Most probably the population of Earth will be greatly reduced due to the shortage of energy. That means hundreds of millions people will die unless something miraculous happens. Do not forget that our civilization depends on cheap energy and energy will be much more expensive in the future.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." ('Atlas Shrugged' 1957)
Actually, if the LHC does not find the Higgs boson that will be quite a win for String Theory. The Higgs boson is responsible for giving mass to the particles according to the Standard Model. String Theory explains the particles' mass in a different way.
I am not a physicist, but I am under the impression that finding the Higgs boson would be a major setback for String Theory. So, in this way String Theory is 'testable'.
The largest bank, OTP, in Hungary provides mobile banking for a few years. The internet banking is also quite secure. If you want to enter into your account you will receive an SMS on your mobile phone with a password. This password is valid for 5 minutes. So, it's not enough for an attacker to obtain your ID and password (eg. via phising) he has to get your mobile phone, too.
I also suspect this is the same in most countries in the world. Currently, you cannot use vegetable oil in your car legally. But I'm sure our wise legistrators will come up a way to pay taxes on those, too.
...Miklos Szeredi was offered a job by SUSE Labs, Prague, which he accepted. His job will be kernel developement for SUSE (all GPL, of course). IIRC, he can work on FUSE in 10% of his work time.
What about if the inventor has to show proof about his effort which made his invention possible? I mean if his invention is just a simple idea (like the metal wrapping of batteries in the article) with no real effort behind it then it is an obvious idea.
The patent system compensates the inventor for his time and money to make the invention. If there are no such things behind an invention then what the patent system compensates for?
You can even say that today, democracy is nothing more than a dictatorship where you can change the dictator in every four year. During that time you can't do anything against those who are in power. Unless they give up their power willingly you have to stage a revolution if you want a change. Simple protests are futile.
So, what do you call a system where you can't force those who are in power to leave without bloodshed? A dictatorship.
I mean this looks like a PR release to me. One of the tasks of the police is to protect the citizens and prevent them to become uneasy. While releasing this information to the public shows that the police is doing its job, it also injects some fear into the population. And we all know that fear leads to power.
To quote from 'The Power of Nightmares':...Together, they created today's nightmare vision of a secret organized evil that threatens the world, a fantasy that politicians then found restored their power and authority in a disillusioned age. And those with the darkest fears became the most powerful...
I recommend reading "Twilight in the desert" by Matthew R. Simmons. The book covers the Saudi oil production and shed light on the difficulties the Saudies face extracting the oil from the reservoirs. Simmons thinks the Saudies hit the peak of their oil production in the 80's.
The copyright system developed along with the printing press. In the age of the printing press, it was unfeasible for an ordinary reader to copy a book. Copying a book required a printing press, and ordinary readers did not have one. What's more, copying in this way was absurdly expensive unless many copies were made--which means, in effect, that only a publisher could copy a book economically.
So when the public traded to publishers the freedom to copy books, they were selling something which they *could not use*. Trading something you cannot use for something useful and helpful is always good deal. Therefore, copyright was uncontroversial in the age of the printing press, precisely because it did not restrict anything the reading public might commonly do.
But the age of the printing press is gradually ending. The xerox machine and the audio and video tape began the change; digital information technology brings it to fruition. These advances make it possible for ordinary people, not just publishers with specialized equipment, to copy. And they do!
What RMS implies, and I wholly agree with it, is that if copying had been easy at the beginning then there wouldn't been copyright laws at all. In this sense copyright laws are completely artificial. These laws try to simulate real property laws in a world where there is no real property.
Here's an example how absurd copyright laws are. Suppose I go to a concert and listen to the songs. Suppose I have good memory and I can write down the songs using a pen and a paper after the concert at home.
The pen and the paper is mine. I used my mind to write down the songs. How is it the songs are not mine?
Mozart exactly did this. If Mozart did this now he would be in jail.
I perfectly agree with you. However, are you ready to accept that in the future your living standard will be lower than now?
Currently, in the developed world people live much better than the developing world. This is because we use up much more resources than the rest of the world. As work moves to the developing world they are getting to use more and more resources.
As resources are not unlimited that means the developed world will have to use less and less. This means a lower living standard. After a time a balance will be reached, but that means everybody will be poor. Do you really want that?
People have to understand that the high living standard in the developed world only possible at the expense of the rest of the world. If you want to enjoy your high living standard in the future you have to prevent the developing world to become developed.
This is only cheap because there are very few cars running on electricity today. However, you have to look at the big picture.
Fact sheet:
1. The wolrd uses 82 million barrel of oil every day.
2. There are 42 gallons of oil in a barrel, about 30 out of 42 is used for fuel.
3. There are about 33kWh energy in a gallon of fuel.
4. There are about 700 million cars worldwide.
5. An electric engine can be (AFAIK) 3 times more efficient than an internal combustion engine.
So, we do the math.
30 gallons * 82 million barrels * 33kWh * 700 million cars / 3 (efficiency) = 1.8942 × 10^19 kWh
That's a lot of power. You have to build a lot of nuclear reactor, solar panel, wind mill, etc. to supply that power. Basically, we are using free energy now which won't be available in the future. The electric car for the masses is only a dream.
No, this is illegal because the state basically owns you. You are an asset to the state, you pay taxes. If you commit suicide you won't pay any more taxes. This is the reason why it's illegal to commit suicide.
Slashdot Mirror
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/13/2234236
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/15/0541230
Wow, I wrote membrains many times. :)
At least I wrote membrane twice correctly.
Isn't this similar to membrains supported by String theory? According to String theory the whole universe is a membrain. When our universe (membrain) collides with another membrane a new membrain may be created.
According to GR, gravity is the curvature of Space-Time. As the anti-matter moves through space it has to follow this curvature. If it does not, that means GR is wrong (which may be the case, but I doubt this experiment will disprove GR).
...many people will die soon as the energy crisis hits. Energy usage and world population have a very close correlation. Do not forget that the energy we use (fossil fuels) was produced millions of years ago. It is essentially free, we just have to use it. Any other method which requires us to produce energy will be more expensive (unless something marvellous happens, but I do not think so).
Less energy means smaller population. The future does not bode well for us.
Is there really someone who believes this news? The current biggest oil field is Ghawar in Saudi Arabia with 75 - 80 billions barrel of oil. And you really believe that there is a much bigger field than Ghawar and it is conveniently located within the border of the US? Oh, come on...
(1 billion barrels recoverable oil is OK. However, this is not much as the world uses 30 billion annually.)
Then you have never heard of Jevons paradox which states as technological improvements increase the efficiency with which a resource is used, total consumption of that resource may increase, rather than decrease.
So, technology itself cannot save us from an energy crisis. And energy crisis means food crisis, too.
As for solar power, we cannot harvest it efficiently let alone store it. Fossil fuels were produced and stored for us by Nature that's why it is so cheap. If energy has to be produced (let it be solar, wind or water) and stored by us it will be no longer cheap. IMHO, storage is the bigger problem.
Have you heard of EROEI (Energy Return On Energy Invested)? There was a time when it was 100:1 in case of oil. That means you could produce 100 barrels of oil with the energy of 1 barrel of oil. Nowadays, it is somewhere between 5 and 10, but this is far better than biomass which is between 1 and 2.
Energy consumption and world population have a close correlation. If energy consumption drops so will world population. And believe me, people won't die peacefully.
For more info read Olduvai theory.
And to clarify things those hundreds of millions of people will die in a short period of time (a few years)
and of course not during a 100-year-period.
Most probably the population of Earth will be greatly reduced due to the shortage of energy. That means hundreds of millions people will die unless something miraculous happens. Do not forget that our civilization depends on cheap energy and energy will be much more expensive in the future.
Why vote?
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." ('Atlas Shrugged' 1957)
Actually, if the LHC does not find the Higgs boson that will be quite a win for String Theory. The Higgs boson is responsible for giving mass to the particles according to the Standard Model. String Theory explains the particles' mass in a different way.
I am not a physicist, but I am under the impression that finding the Higgs boson would be a major setback for String Theory. So, in this way String Theory is 'testable'.
The largest bank, OTP, in Hungary provides mobile banking for a few years. The internet banking is also quite secure. If you want to enter into your account you will receive an SMS on your mobile phone with a password. This password is valid for 5 minutes. So, it's not enough for an attacker to obtain your ID and password (eg. via phising) he has to get your mobile phone, too.
I also suspect this is the same in most countries in the world. Currently, you cannot use vegetable oil in your car legally. But I'm sure our wise legistrators will come up a way to pay taxes on those, too.
...Miklos Szeredi was offered a job by SUSE Labs, Prague, which he accepted. His job will be kernel developement for SUSE (all GPL, of course). IIRC, he can work on FUSE in 10% of his work time.
What about if the inventor has to show proof about his effort which made his invention possible? I mean if his invention is just a simple idea (like the metal wrapping of batteries in the article) with no real effort behind it then it is an obvious idea.
The patent system compensates the inventor for his time and money to make the invention. If there are no such things behind an invention then what the patent system compensates for?
You can even say that today, democracy is nothing more than a dictatorship where you can change the dictator in every four year. During that time you can't do anything against those who are in power. Unless they give up their power willingly you have to stage a revolution if you want a change. Simple protests are futile.
So, what do you call a system where you can't force those who are in power to leave without bloodshed? A dictatorship.
I mean this looks like a PR release to me. One of the tasks of the police is to protect the citizens and prevent them to become uneasy. While releasing this information to the public shows that the police is doing its job, it also injects some fear into the population. And we all know that fear leads to power.
...Together, they created today's nightmare vision of a secret organized evil that threatens the world, a fantasy that politicians then found restored their power and authority in a disillusioned age. And those with the darkest fears became the most powerful...
To quote from 'The Power of Nightmares':
I recommend reading "Twilight in the desert" by Matthew R. Simmons.
The book covers the Saudi oil production and shed light on the difficulties the Saudies face extracting the oil from the reservoirs. Simmons thinks the Saudies hit the peak of their oil production in the 80's.
The whole world will be oil free by 2020, because oil will be too expensive to use as a fuel. Do not forget, the peak is near.
According to Jevson paradox the saved energy will be used up elsewhere. It can even result in more energy usage.
From Reevaluating Copyright: The Public Must Prevail:
The copyright system developed along with the printing press. In the age of the printing press, it was unfeasible for an ordinary reader to copy a book. Copying a book required a printing press, and ordinary readers did not have one. What's more, copying in this way was absurdly expensive unless many copies were made--which means, in effect, that only a publisher could copy a book economically.
So when the public traded to publishers the freedom to copy books, they were selling something which they *could not use*. Trading something you cannot use for something useful and helpful is always good deal. Therefore, copyright was uncontroversial in the age of the printing press, precisely because it did not restrict anything the reading public might commonly do.
But the age of the printing press is gradually ending. The xerox machine and the audio and video tape began the change; digital information technology brings it to fruition. These advances make it possible for ordinary people, not just publishers with specialized equipment, to copy. And they do!
What RMS implies, and I wholly agree with it, is that if copying had been easy at the beginning then there wouldn't been copyright laws at all. In this sense copyright laws are completely artificial. These laws try to simulate real property laws in a world where there is no real property.
Here's an example how absurd copyright laws are. Suppose I go to a concert and listen to the songs. Suppose I have good memory and I can write down the songs using a pen and a paper after the concert at home.
The pen and the paper is mine. I used my mind to write down the songs. How is it the songs are not mine?
Mozart exactly did this. If Mozart did this now he would be in jail.
I perfectly agree with you. However, are you ready to accept that in the future your living standard will be lower than now?
Currently, in the developed world people live much better than the developing world. This is because we use up much more resources than the rest of the world. As work moves to the developing world they are getting to use more and more resources.
As resources are not unlimited that means the developed world will have to use less and less. This means a lower living standard. After a time a balance will be reached, but that means everybody will be poor. Do you really want that?
People have to understand that the high living standard in the developed world only possible at the expense of the rest of the world. If you want to enjoy your high living standard in the future you have to prevent the developing world to become developed.
This is only cheap because there are very few cars running on electricity today. However, you have to look at the big picture.
Fact sheet:
1. The wolrd uses 82 million barrel of oil every day.
2. There are 42 gallons of oil in a barrel, about 30 out of 42 is used for fuel.
3. There are about 33kWh energy in a gallon of fuel.
4. There are about 700 million cars worldwide.
5. An electric engine can be (AFAIK) 3 times more efficient than an internal combustion engine.
So, we do the math.
30 gallons * 82 million barrels * 33kWh * 700 million cars / 3 (efficiency) = 1.8942 × 10^19 kWh
That's a lot of power. You have to build a lot of nuclear reactor, solar panel, wind mill, etc. to supply that power. Basically, we are using free energy now which won't be available in the future. The electric car for the masses is only a dream.
No, this is illegal because the state basically owns you. You are an asset to the state, you pay taxes. If you commit suicide you won't pay any more taxes. This is the reason why it's illegal to commit suicide.