It's wrong to start buying stolen data even for tax evasion, because this kind of business can easily extend to other domains. For the "good" cause governments justify now to finance data stealing in other countries, but the day these same governments are themselves victims of such practices they will for sure find it illegal..
There are many ways to demonstrate Earth moves wrt the Sun and is accelerated. Just two methods maybe not popular among Slashdotter's pops up in my mind:
- 1) measure with a moderately good spectrograph the Doppler shift of the solar spectrum accurately. One just needs the ambient Sun light, no telescope. In the morning the Sun spectrum is slightly blueshifted wrt to the afternoon spectrum. On an annual basis one can check that the Earth goes away from the Sun from January to June, and the reverse from June to December due to the Earth elliptical orbit.
2) measure with a telescope and spectrograph the solar spectrum reflected from artificial satellites, the Moon, planets or asteroid and verifiy that the single consistant solution explaining the various Doppler shifts is that the solar system center of mass, deep inside the Sun, is at rest wrt to the other bodies, including the Earth.
- measure during a year the angular position of the stars over the sky. The dominant displacement, about 20" of arc, is due to the ratio of the Earth rotation around the Sun and the speed of light (30 km/s / 300'000 km/s = 0.0001 radian = 20"). All the stars seem to move on an ellipse on the sky with semi-long axis of about 20". The proper motion of stars or their parallaxe is much smaller.
Often one heards that research costs drive the price of drugs high, but in fact a similar ratio between marketting and research costs exists in the drug industry.
Chauvinism is everywhere, but in this case it is particularly striking. It is not IBM that releases MILEPOST Gcc, but IBM Israel *announces* the release of MILEPOST Gcc, a project funded by the European Union where 4 European partners and IBM Israel have contributed. IBM is at its best with marketting, that we already know.
Perhaps you didn't understand the same but the article doesn't say that they try to recreate the smelll within a spacecraft, but the smell of *space*. Interplanetary or interstellar space is not empty but contains gas and dust particles. This medium is extraordinary dilute (typically 1-10^5 atoms/cm^3 and 99% of this is made of odorless hydrogen and helium). Despite this low concentration, accumulated over light-years this medium adds up to and makes structures like nebulae and dark clouds seen on telescopic pictures. As I understand, the article describes the effort to recreate the smell of this dilute space stuff. In reality astronauts will never be able to smell it because the concentration is way too low. In comparison the air we breath contains about 10^20 molecules/cm^3.
Such news are made for improving PR but make no real sense for practical space activities. While a space station air certainly smells something, space gas is so dilute that no smelling may be perceived.
It is a bit like the sound or temperature of space, sometimes described for similar purposes. These cannot be perceived directly by normal people.
The International Astronomical Union should in the next General Assembly, decides, after a long week of intense discussions, that 1) meter sized asteroids should be called from now on "dwarf asteroids" 2) vaporized dwarf and normal asteroids should be declassified and put in the list of exctinct celestial bodies.
On technical matters lies and corruption do not work. These countries show they bother about technical standards being built on rational and consensual decisions, not being bought just for helping Microsoft control document formats.
These countries appear closer to integrity than Western wealthy countries, interesting.
It is not new that gamma-ray satellites have observed positron-electron annihilation 512keV line toward the Galactic centre. Because the 512keV intensity increases toward the centre, astro-particle physicists not very familiar with the wealth of astrophysical phenomena jump toward trendy explanations they know of, such as those involving dark matter (DM) with the main argument that DM is expected also to be denser toward the Galactic centre.
However recent observations of the INTEGRAL satellite have shown that the 512keV line emission is *asymmetric* with respect to the Galactic centre, but the emission does follow the known asymmetric distribution of stars in the Milky Way due to a *bar* (elongated structure made of stars, seen asymmetric due to perspective). Thus the present evidence favours to look for gamma-ray emitters related to stars, not DM. Cataclysmic binary stars, binary stars made of a normal star pouring matter on a dense companion like a white dwarf or a neutron star, can provide plenty of energetic particles producing positrons.
Because the LHC cannot destroy the planet. The test is constantly made by natural high energy protons, billions of times more energetic than the LHC protons, since over 4.5 billion years for the solar system. Billions of other stars are also bombarded by cosmic rays, have also existed billions of years without being sucked into a black-hole.
Then be sure that the LHC has been subject to numerous environmental impact studies over years by the French and Swiss governmental agencies, on topics such as, induced radio-activity, heat release, electro-magnetic fields production, underground water pollution, noise, etc. etc. and is permanently monitored.
The argument is wrong. An energetic cosmic ray (which most of the times is a proton, like in the LHC) hits generally another proton, or a neutron, within the atomic nucleus of a nitrogen or oxygen molecule in the atmosphere. Because the energy is much larger than the proton rest mass energy (from E=mc^2) thousands of new but less energetic particles are produced, repeating the process and raining down to the ground like a shower of protons, electrons, muons, photons, etc. In the end most of these particles are stopped, except a few photons that return to space.
Interestingly Enrico Fermi did use the same argument while setting on the first nuclear reactor during the Manhattan project around 1940 (that some cosmic rays are anyway much more energetic and bombarding the Earth since ages). And later fission and fusion bomb makers did use the same argument while playing with increasingly powerful toys. Ditto particle physicists for each new and more powerful accelerator. Isn't it time that journalists and other dumb news makers understand?
obviously, solar energy is the ultimate renewable energy source... ?? How do you want to renew the sun once it has exhausted its fusion power in 5 billions years? In reality there are no renewable energy sources, just differently large reservoirs.
The 3 first posts just gives the solution using Common Good Sense (CGS). Just reduce the time of State granted monopoly for copyright or patent owners. The time limit can be determined by evaluating when shorter it reduces innovation. This shortest time is clearly domain dependent, and should be shorter for fast evolving domain and vice-versa.
It is not success that push people like me to hate a company, it's factual commercial decisions and practices. For example I have been an Apple fan because of its open hardware Apple ][. The Mac was a big disapointment in this regard so I stopped to purchased Apple computers and to admire Apple. I switched to PC's loaded first with the cheap Microsoft Dos and W95 until I saw that Linux was providing better what I was expecting from a computer. Up to now Google is behaving fine in the sense that Google services are very useful and the privacy concerns are still moderate. Obviously if Google would become unbearable I would also hate it.
Most of these restrictions apply in the tiny patch called U.S.A. on the tiny planet Earth
revolving around a dwarf star in a minuscule part of a very common galaxy, billions of them
are known to exist.
Conclusion: the topic is irrelevant for the rest of the Universe, free of the
software patent non-sense.
On the contrary the Fortran user community has been using an evolving language that allows code reuse over 50 years. Only the outsiders have a frozen and outdated opinion about what is Fortran today. Heh F99 doesn't exist.
Fortress seems an attracting language for Fortran users because it allows to express algorithms in a way close to what mathematicians do since over a century. For example by using Unicode Fortress has finally a charatcter set matching the ones used by scientists.
From this page everything becomes limpid:
http://www.siel.harvard.edu/2003/about/tour/classr ooms/maxw.jsp
: "The Maxwell Dworkin building was built with funds donated by Microsoft Chairman William H. Gates III and Microsoft President Steven A. Ballmer, both members of the Class of 1977, in memory of their mothers, Mary Maxwell Gates and Beatrice Dworkin Ballmer. Maxwell Dworkin building opened in 1999 and, with its extensive office and laboratory space, will allow Harvard to double the size of its computer science faculty over the next several years."
Slashdot Mirror
As a non-French European I always wonder how French succeed to be at the same time so much openly despised and secretly admired in the USA.
It's wrong to start buying stolen data even for tax evasion, because this
kind of business can easily extend to other domains. For the "good" cause
governments justify now to finance data stealing in other countries, but
the day these same governments are themselves victims of such practices
they will for sure find it illegal..
There are many ways to demonstrate Earth moves wrt the Sun and is accelerated. Just two methods maybe not popular among Slashdotter's pops up in my mind:
- 1) measure with a moderately good spectrograph the Doppler shift of the solar spectrum accurately. One just needs the ambient Sun light, no telescope. In the morning the Sun spectrum is slightly blueshifted wrt to the afternoon spectrum. On an annual basis one can check that the Earth goes away from the Sun from January to June, and the reverse from June to December due to the Earth elliptical orbit.
2) measure with a telescope and spectrograph the solar spectrum reflected from artificial satellites, the Moon, planets or asteroid and verifiy that the single consistant solution explaining the various Doppler shifts is that the solar system center of mass, deep inside the Sun, is at rest wrt to the other bodies, including the Earth.
- measure during a year the angular position of the stars over the sky. The dominant displacement, about 20" of arc, is due to the ratio of the Earth rotation around the Sun and the speed of light (30 km/s / 300'000 km/s = 0.0001 radian = 20"). All the stars seem to move on an ellipse on the sky with semi-long axis of about 20". The proper motion of stars or their parallaxe is much smaller.
Name the cause of everything "physics" or "god" is just an
arbitrary naming, so the discussion is futile.
The efficiency of such a system is low.
See my other post on local energy storage with hydrogen
which reaches 98% efficiency.
McPhy claims to be able to store energy at 98% efficiency with hydrogen in solid containers,
which are precisely aimed for solving such problems.
http://www.mcphy.com/en/products/iso-containers.php
If I were investor I would look more closely to such technological advances.
Often one heards that research costs drive the price of drugs high, but in fact a similar ratio between marketting and research costs exists in the drug industry.
Chauvinism is everywhere, but in this case it is particularly striking. It is not IBM that releases MILEPOST Gcc, but IBM Israel *announces* the release of MILEPOST Gcc, a project funded by the European Union where 4 European partners and IBM Israel have contributed. IBM is at its best with marketting, that we already know.
Perhaps you didn't understand the same but the article doesn't say that they try to recreate the smelll within a spacecraft, but the smell of *space*.
Interplanetary or interstellar space is not empty but contains gas and dust particles. This medium is extraordinary dilute (typically 1-10^5 atoms/cm^3 and 99% of this is made of odorless hydrogen and helium). Despite this low concentration, accumulated over light-years this medium adds up to and makes structures like nebulae and dark clouds seen on telescopic pictures.
As I understand, the article describes the effort to recreate the smell of this dilute space stuff. In reality astronauts will never be able to smell it because the concentration is way too low. In comparison the air we breath contains about 10^20 molecules/cm^3.
Such news are made for improving PR but make no real sense for practical space activities. While a space station air certainly smells something, space gas is so dilute that no smelling may be perceived.
It is a bit like the sound or temperature of space, sometimes described for similar purposes. These cannot be perceived directly by normal people.
The International Astronomical Union should in the next General Assembly, decides, after a long week of intense discussions, that
1) meter sized asteroids should be called from now on "dwarf asteroids"
2) vaporized dwarf and normal asteroids should be declassified and put in the list of exctinct celestial bodies.
On technical matters lies and corruption do not work. These countries show they bother about technical standards being built on rational and consensual decisions, not being bought just for helping Microsoft control document formats.
These countries appear closer to integrity than Western wealthy countries, interesting.
It is not new that gamma-ray satellites have observed positron-electron annihilation 512keV line toward the Galactic centre. Because the 512keV intensity increases toward the centre, astro-particle physicists not very familiar with the wealth of astrophysical phenomena jump toward trendy explanations they know of, such as those involving dark matter (DM) with the main argument that DM is expected also to be denser toward the Galactic centre.
However recent observations of the INTEGRAL satellite have shown that the 512keV line emission is *asymmetric* with respect to the Galactic centre, but the emission does follow the known asymmetric distribution of stars in the Milky Way due to a *bar* (elongated structure made of stars, seen asymmetric due to perspective). Thus the present evidence favours to look for gamma-ray emitters related to stars, not DM. Cataclysmic binary stars, binary stars made of a normal star pouring matter on a dense companion like a white dwarf or a neutron star, can provide plenty of energetic particles producing positrons.
Frank Hayes hasn't noticed that the August 10 ruling was for year 2007.
Because the LHC cannot destroy the planet. The test is constantly made by natural high energy protons, billions of times more energetic than the LHC protons, since over 4.5 billion years for the solar system. Billions of other stars are also bombarded by cosmic rays, have also existed billions of years without being sucked into a black-hole. Then be sure that the LHC has been subject to numerous environmental impact studies over years by the French and Swiss governmental agencies, on topics such as, induced radio-activity, heat release, electro-magnetic fields production, underground water pollution, noise, etc. etc. and is permanently monitored.
The argument is wrong. An energetic cosmic ray (which most of the times is a proton, like in the LHC) hits generally another proton, or a neutron, within the atomic nucleus of a nitrogen or oxygen molecule in the atmosphere. Because the energy is much larger than the proton rest mass energy (from E=mc^2) thousands of new but less energetic particles are produced, repeating the process and raining down to the ground like a shower of protons, electrons, muons, photons, etc. In the end most of these particles are stopped, except a few photons that return to space.
Interestingly Enrico Fermi did use the same argument while setting on the first nuclear reactor during the Manhattan project around 1940 (that some cosmic rays are anyway much more energetic and bombarding the Earth since ages). And later fission and fusion bomb makers did use the same argument while playing with increasingly powerful toys. Ditto particle physicists for each new and more powerful accelerator. Isn't it time that journalists and other dumb news makers understand?
The 3 first posts just gives the solution using Common Good Sense (CGS). Just reduce the time of State granted monopoly for copyright or patent owners. The time limit can be determined by evaluating when shorter it reduces innovation. This shortest time is clearly domain dependent, and should be shorter for fast evolving domain and vice-versa.
It is not success that push people like me to hate a company, it's factual commercial decisions and practices. For example I have been an Apple fan because of its open hardware Apple ][. The Mac was a big disapointment in this regard so I stopped to purchased Apple computers and to admire Apple. I switched to PC's loaded first with the cheap Microsoft Dos and W95 until I saw that Linux was providing better what I was expecting from a computer. Up to now Google is behaving fine in the sense that Google services are very useful and the privacy concerns are still moderate. Obviously if Google would become unbearable I would also hate it.
Similar to this project: http://www.swissmetro.ch/
Variation: There are 1 types of people in the world, those who program in C, and those who don't.
Most of these restrictions apply in the tiny patch called U.S.A. on the tiny planet Earth revolving around a dwarf star in a minuscule part of a very common galaxy, billions of them are known to exist. Conclusion: the topic is irrelevant for the rest of the Universe, free of the software patent non-sense.
On the contrary the Fortran user community has been using an evolving language that allows code reuse over 50 years. Only the outsiders have a frozen and outdated opinion about what is Fortran today. Heh F99 doesn't exist. Fortress seems an attracting language for Fortran users because it allows to express algorithms in a way close to what mathematicians do since over a century. For example by using Unicode Fortress has finally a charatcter set matching the ones used by scientists.
From this page everything becomes limpid: http://www.siel.harvard.edu/2003/about/tour/classr ooms/maxw.jsp
: "The Maxwell Dworkin building was built with funds donated by Microsoft Chairman William H. Gates III and Microsoft President Steven A. Ballmer, both members of the Class of 1977, in memory of their mothers, Mary Maxwell Gates and Beatrice Dworkin Ballmer. Maxwell Dworkin building opened in 1999 and, with its extensive office and laboratory space, will allow Harvard to double the size of its computer science faculty over the next several years."