Right. I should have picked a better word. I guess it was because the last time I heard cold fusion being debunked they were talking about margins of error.
Nuclear fuel from a high altitude spacecraft explosion (side note, what would explode anyways?) would be spread out over an area of a square metre or two at most, as it will be in a container that can survive re-entry and crash landing, much as the "black boxes" that survive airplane crashes.
Embedded systems use a device called a watchdog timer. Basically, it counts down from, say 2 minutes, then reboots the computer. The programs running on the computer need to continually reset the timer back to the 2 minute mark. If the computer locks up, the timer is never reset. It will count all the way down and reboot the computer.
Although the mass is higher, the mass per unit power is probably a lot lower. In other words, to provide the same power using solar panels or batteries would likely be a lot more massive.
There may be a certain level of radiation, but the thing about spacecraft is that they can take up a lot of space. Every time you double the distance from the reactor, you cut the radiation by a factor of four. So, you can put the equipment, or the reactor, on the end of a long boom.
Nuclear subs prove that humans can live beside reactors for long periods of time without undo difficulty. (See above comment about lowering the radiation hazzard.)
Failed launches do not spread nuclear waste anywhere. Nuclear fuel is specially contained to survive launch accidents, as has been shown in the past. Also, NASA's launch facilities and direction guarantees that any debris will fall into the Atlantic.
Automating a nuclear reactor is probably less complex than operating the craft itself. The reactor has only one task to do: produce power. Automating the spacecraft involves orienting sensors, buffering data, performing course corrections, monitoring the AE-35 unit [grin], etc.
Fusion does have a long way to go, and I'm pulling for the He3 fusion mentioned on Slashdot before. Cold fusion is likely a statistical error. At least most nuclear physicists seem to think so.
I know it works in Canada. I use it in Canada. However the data comes from stateside. From the Gnome Applet's help file: The Weather report applet downloads weather information from the U.S National Weather
Service (NWS) servers, including the Interactive Weather Information Network (IWIN)
This likely expains why radar maps and forecasts are unavailable for my city.
I love my Gnome Weather applet. It's nice to be able to tell, at a glance, whether I need a jacket, or shorts, or an umbrella. (My only windows look out onto a small alley, no help there.)
Is there a Canadian equivalent to this service, and how do I configure the Gnome Weather applet to use it?
The paperwork *is* there to prevent things from going wrong. Specifications make sure that the parts can cope with the stresses of flight. Checklists make sure that the parts that are supposed to be there are there. Imagine how silly NASA would look if the shuttle launced without any food aboard. A spaceflight is basically months upon months of planning followed by a few days in orbit. Without paperwork, how would management know if it was safe to launch?
Further, in the event of an accident, the paperwork is not there to provide a scapegoat, but to aid in finding out what went wrong. Maybe the pre-launch sequence of events needs to be adjusted . Maybe some additional tests and checks need to be made. Unless you have paperwork, you'll never be able to tell what went wrong.
The biggest advantage I see from having a standardized linux is that of support. Many companies will not support linux because there is so many variations of how things are done. If there was one standard that was guaranteed to be available, no matter what the distribution, it would go a long way towards second party linux support.
That didn't stop us from going to the Moon. It also does't stop us from handling deadly viruses and bacteria in labs all around the world.
I don't think that there is any other reason to go. "Resources" some say. Resources are cheaper here.
"Offworld backup of Humanity", say others. Any disaster that would wipe out humanity would wipe out so much of the ecosystem that these people wouldn't be able to return anyways.
There are two good reasons to go to Mars. The best one is "Because we can". However, adventuring doesn't typically generate a lot of financial support from governments these days. The other reason would be to bring back something that we don't have here, something of scientific interest that we couldn't trust the detection and retrieval of to robotic systems: Martian life.
Also from the article: In fact, it has been repeatedly affirmed that no doctrine of Scripture has been affected by these textual differences.
I'm sure you're aware that current day biblical scholars cannot radically alter the scriptures. These thousands of changes are corrections to spelling and grammar, ensuring that "Nebuchadnezzar" is spelled that way every time, and that the "whom"s that should be "whom"s are "whom"s and not "who"s, not to add stuff like "And on the eighth day, God did arise from His La-Z-Boy and breathed upon the surface of the fourth rock, bringing forth creatures to delight and confound Adam. And there was evening and morning, the eighth day."
I've never seen the show so I don't know a thing about it, but whenever I see the phrase "The OC" I think of OAC (Ontario Academic Credit) which is, or was, the fifth year of high school. So, this show was, in my mind, a show about a bunch of high school kids.
What is the show about, anyways (now that it's been mentioned on Slashdot a couple of times)?
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
George Bernard Shaw
Slashdot Mirror
You mean that wind isn't caused by trees and grass waving back and forth?
Well, hey! Any excuse to party, you know.
Real programmers have sixteen fingers.
Real programmers have 0x10 fingers.
I opened up two copies of the spreadfirefox counter page, and the counts differed. That is odd.
Right. I should have picked a better word. I guess it was because the last time I heard cold fusion being debunked they were talking about margins of error.
Nuclear fuel from a high altitude spacecraft explosion (side note, what would explode anyways?) would be spread out over an area of a square metre or two at most, as it will be in a container that can survive re-entry and crash landing, much as the "black boxes" that survive airplane crashes.
Embedded systems use a device called a watchdog timer. Basically, it counts down from, say 2 minutes, then reboots the computer. The programs running on the computer need to continually reset the timer back to the 2 minute mark. If the computer locks up, the timer is never reset. It will count all the way down and reboot the computer.
- Although the mass is higher, the mass per unit power is probably a lot lower. In other words, to provide the same power using solar panels or batteries would likely be a lot more massive.
- There may be a certain level of radiation, but the thing about spacecraft is that they can take up a lot of space. Every time you double the distance from the reactor, you cut the radiation by a factor of four. So, you can put the equipment, or the reactor, on the end of a long boom.
- Nuclear subs prove that humans can live beside reactors for long periods of time without undo difficulty. (See above comment about lowering the radiation hazzard.)
- Failed launches do not spread nuclear waste anywhere. Nuclear fuel is specially contained to survive launch accidents, as has been shown in the past. Also, NASA's launch facilities and direction guarantees that any debris will fall into the Atlantic.
- Automating a nuclear reactor is probably less complex than operating the craft itself. The reactor has only one task to do: produce power. Automating the spacecraft involves orienting sensors, buffering data, performing course corrections, monitoring the AE-35 unit [grin], etc.
Fusion does have a long way to go, and I'm pulling for the He3 fusion mentioned on Slashdot before. Cold fusion is likely a statistical error. At least most nuclear physicists seem to think so.I've read the label. It is DUCT tape. Sure there may be a brand called Duck tape, but the type of tape is duct tape.
Yeah, but she comes from the wong side of the planet.
I know it works in Canada. I use it in Canada. However the data comes from stateside. From the Gnome Applet's help file: The Weather report applet downloads weather information from the U.S National Weather Service (NWS) servers, including the Interactive Weather Information Network (IWIN)
This likely expains why radar maps and forecasts are unavailable for my city.
Google is readying it's newest beta release: Google-Weather.
So... What's the surcharge if you have a weather rock?
I love my Gnome Weather applet. It's nice to be able to tell, at a glance, whether I need a jacket, or shorts, or an umbrella. (My only windows look out onto a small alley, no help there.)
Is there a Canadian equivalent to this service, and how do I configure the Gnome Weather applet to use it?
At the aquarium... we have... penguins. It's really cool.
I would hope so. Penguins are a polar species. "Really cool" is what their natural environment is all about.
Bloody decapitations were common.
Now THAT sounds like a good comic book.
The paperwork *is* there to prevent things from going wrong. Specifications make sure that the parts can cope with the stresses of flight. Checklists make sure that the parts that are supposed to be there are there. Imagine how silly NASA would look if the shuttle launced without any food aboard. A spaceflight is basically months upon months of planning followed by a few days in orbit. Without paperwork, how would management know if it was safe to launch?
Further, in the event of an accident, the paperwork is not there to provide a scapegoat, but to aid in finding out what went wrong. Maybe the pre-launch sequence of events needs to be adjusted . Maybe some additional tests and checks need to be made. Unless you have paperwork, you'll never be able to tell what went wrong.
I thought that International waters started at 12 miles, or at 200 miles, not at 3 miles.
The biggest advantage I see from having a standardized linux is that of support. Many companies will not support linux because there is so many variations of how things are done. If there was one standard that was guaranteed to be available, no matter what the distribution, it would go a long way towards second party linux support.
That didn't stop us from going to the Moon. It also does't stop us from handling deadly viruses and bacteria in labs all around the world.
I don't think that there is any other reason to go. "Resources" some say. Resources are cheaper here.
"Offworld backup of Humanity", say others. Any disaster that would wipe out humanity would wipe out so much of the ecosystem that these people wouldn't be able to return anyways.
There are two good reasons to go to Mars. The best one is "Because we can". However, adventuring doesn't typically generate a lot of financial support from governments these days. The other reason would be to bring back something that we don't have here, something of scientific interest that we couldn't trust the detection and retrieval of to robotic systems: Martian life.
Also from the article: In fact, it has been repeatedly affirmed that no doctrine of Scripture has been affected by these textual differences.
I'm sure you're aware that current day biblical scholars cannot radically alter the scriptures. These thousands of changes are corrections to spelling and grammar, ensuring that "Nebuchadnezzar" is spelled that way every time, and that the "whom"s that should be "whom"s are "whom"s and not "who"s, not to add stuff like "And on the eighth day, God did arise from His La-Z-Boy and breathed upon the surface of the fourth rock, bringing forth creatures to delight and confound Adam. And there was evening and morning, the eighth day."
I'd be glad if they found such evidence. It would provide the best possible excuse for a manned mission.
Okay, so what does O.C. stand for anyways?
I've never seen the show so I don't know a thing about it, but whenever I see the phrase "The OC" I think of OAC (Ontario Academic Credit) which is, or was, the fifth year of high school. So, this show was, in my mind, a show about a bunch of high school kids.
What is the show about, anyways (now that it's been mentioned on Slashdot a couple of times)?