I propose two-tone yellow in the front and brown in the back underwear so that no one notices all those times I thought it was just a fart. Believe me -- we noticed. And it wasn't from looking at your underwear.
Christ. Not only did that squirrel give the gnome an entire basketful of red, painful-looking chancres, but it also ate off his left hand. And he's *smiling*. That's one badass gnome.
Though it's a funny post (whether meant to be or not), Conway's "Game of Life" is tremendously important due to its influence on the study of cellular automata. Nice simple rules *can* lead to amazing complexity.
As another neuroscientist, I would urge you to keep an open mind. Perhaps they mean the frequency of events fall neatly into the sound frequency range: i routinely see 20-200 Hz E/IPSC at RT, and much higher in larger neurons at 37'C. You can get action potentials at up to 1000 Hz in auditory neurons.
As a physicist working with acoustics, I would urge you to realize that the "sound frequency range" you're referring to has essentially zero measure when compared against the range of frequencies dealt with in "acoustics", and that "sound" occurs at frequencies ranging from a cycle per several millions of years (cosmological space and time scales) up to sub-Hz (geologic processes for example), through the audible range (20 - 20000 Hz) up to medical ultrasound range (0.7 - 10 MHz) and into the THz range (high-Q harmonic oscillators used in chemical sensors) and even beyond. So the "sound frequency range" can be utterly HUGE and only a tiny, tiny portion of it has anything to do with human hearing.
That being said, these researchers ("not available for comment") are arguing that their proposed "acoustic solitons" are a newly-considered mechanism, but I don't think they are. As far as I can tell from the interesting --- but scientifically empty --- article, they're proposing ion-wave solitons as the method of nerve signal propagation. Solitons are certainly considered in acoustics, but to call this "sound" and NOT electricity is really kind of stupid. It's a (nonlinear) wave phenomenon, which is a regime into which huge numbers of phenomena fall, including many of acoustics, electrical effects, traffic patterns, plasma waves, etc. I *guess* that what they're saying is this: to get a soliton, you have to have a particular combination of conditions that just balance a couple of terms in the nonlinear material parameters describing the environment in which the waves propagate. These researchers claim that (perhaps) nerve fibers happen to possess this combination of characteristics, and anaesthetics can modify some of these terms just right to knock out soliton propagation. Interesting, but certainly no more "sound" than anything else.
I'm sorry, but you've broken one of the central tenets of slashdot, having to do with numbered lists. I actually didn't recognize your list for what it is, because it had no steps of the form "... Profit!"
This is just a warning.
... after those results, I don't want to hear any more bitching about reading yellow license plate numbers off of the reflection of a doorknob reflected in a one-pixel wide eyeball in a black and white security film shown in CSI!
The primary barrier, aside from your own intellectual resources, is the patent system. It is a barrier to creativity, and furthermore, it is a barrier to progress. So you're saying that it's basically the real world's "-10^9: Redundant" mod?
If the radiation is not high enough to kill the pilot at 3 m or so then it is not going to be detectable at 10 km.
Er... You're saying that because I can see the moon, people who've walked on the moon should have been killed? Or because I can see lights from the next town over, I shouldn't go to the next town over?
Lethality and detectability are drastically different things. Admittedly, my eyes are tremendously sensitive, whereas the lethality of visible light is *not* high. However, detectors are available which are *very* sensitive to all sorts of radiations, primary, secondary, and of higher orders. Besides which, many radiations (thermal neutrons, for example) undergo more of a diffusion process, which means that the 1/r^2 falloff isn't applicable.
Can I use it to make me that father of Anna Nicole Smith's baby? I can't believe your posting got moderated as a "Troll". Especially since it's currently right below the posting mentioning flying penises. I sense a fortuitous collaboration!
"Low frequency" usually refers to the bandwidth detectable by the individual detectors.The tight spacing allows better directional determination, since to determine direction one normally makes use of phase information in the signal, or at least relative timings. If each of the detectors averages over its sensitive face and really gives one an idea of only the average pressure on the detector at any time, then putting many of them in a line gives relative timing data as signals wash by several of them. If your individual detectors don't give meaningful pressures at low frequencies, then the whole array is pretty worthless.
They were the first to use the number '0' to create a positional number system, which is what put it head and shoulders above the Roman one.. But that's besides the point.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that, by definition, anyone even approached by you is a victim, whether their heart has stopped yet or not.
I suppose that's what the "education" tag is referring to.
"How to kill everyone". It's stood me in good stead so far.
That's no squirrel! That's the XFCE mouse!
Christ. Not only did that squirrel give the gnome an entire basketful of red, painful-looking chancres, but it also ate off his left hand. And he's *smiling*. That's one badass gnome.
Though it's a funny post (whether meant to be or not), Conway's "Game of Life" is tremendously important due to its influence on the study of cellular automata. Nice simple rules *can* lead to amazing complexity.
In Kansas we celebrate Pi Approximation Day on the first of March.
As another neuroscientist, I would urge you to keep an open mind. Perhaps they mean the frequency of events fall neatly into the sound frequency range: i routinely see 20-200 Hz E/IPSC at RT, and much higher in larger neurons at 37'C. You can get action potentials at up to 1000 Hz in auditory neurons.
As a physicist working with acoustics, I would urge you to realize that the "sound frequency range" you're referring to has essentially zero measure when compared against the range of frequencies dealt with in "acoustics", and that "sound" occurs at frequencies ranging from a cycle per several millions of years (cosmological space and time scales) up to sub-Hz (geologic processes for example), through the audible range (20 - 20000 Hz) up to medical ultrasound range (0.7 - 10 MHz) and into the THz range (high-Q harmonic oscillators used in chemical sensors) and even beyond. So the "sound frequency range" can be utterly HUGE and only a tiny, tiny portion of it has anything to do with human hearing.
That being said, these researchers ("not available for comment") are arguing that their proposed "acoustic solitons" are a newly-considered mechanism, but I don't think they are. As far as I can tell from the interesting --- but scientifically empty --- article, they're proposing ion-wave solitons as the method of nerve signal propagation. Solitons are certainly considered in acoustics, but to call this "sound" and NOT electricity is really kind of stupid. It's a (nonlinear) wave phenomenon, which is a regime into which huge numbers of phenomena fall, including many of acoustics, electrical effects, traffic patterns, plasma waves, etc. I *guess* that what they're saying is this: to get a soliton, you have to have a particular combination of conditions that just balance a couple of terms in the nonlinear material parameters describing the environment in which the waves propagate. These researchers claim that (perhaps) nerve fibers happen to possess this combination of characteristics, and anaesthetics can modify some of these terms just right to knock out soliton propagation. Interesting, but certainly no more "sound" than anything else.
The explanation's are just too complicated for us meer mortals.
I'm sorry, but you've broken one of the central tenets of slashdot, having to do with numbered lists. I actually didn't recognize your list for what it is, because it had no steps of the form "... Profit!"
This is just a warning.
... after those results, I don't want to hear any more bitching about reading yellow license plate numbers off of the reflection of a doorknob reflected in a one-pixel wide eyeball in a black and white security film shown in CSI!
...I'm afraid I have prior art claims to that plan.
FP!
Time to get some Old Glory Insurance, my friends.
*clarification: Vista does not run well on boat anchors. They really prefer an Aqua interface.*
Insightful. But it can go the other way: Many laptops these days are more like boat anchors. Well, the ones running Vista, anyway.
If the radiation is not high enough to kill the pilot at 3 m or so then it is not going to be detectable at 10 km.
Er... You're saying that because I can see the moon, people who've walked on the moon should have been killed? Or because I can see lights from the next town over, I shouldn't go to the next town over?
Lethality and detectability are drastically different things. Admittedly, my eyes are tremendously sensitive, whereas the lethality of visible light is *not* high. However, detectors are available which are *very* sensitive to all sorts of radiations, primary, secondary, and of higher orders. Besides which, many radiations (thermal neutrons, for example) undergo more of a diffusion process, which means that the 1/r^2 falloff isn't applicable.
"Low frequency" usually refers to the bandwidth detectable by the individual detectors.The tight spacing allows better directional determination, since to determine direction one normally makes use of phase information in the signal, or at least relative timings. If each of the detectors averages over its sensitive face and really gives one an idea of only the average pressure on the detector at any time, then putting many of them in a line gives relative timing data as signals wash by several of them. If your individual detectors don't give meaningful pressures at low frequencies, then the whole array is pretty worthless.
They were the first to use the number '0' to create a positional number system, which is what put it head and shoulders above the Roman one.. But that's besides the point.
Yay! I hope you meant that decimal pun.
Well, except for the "promiscuous sexual behavior" one.