Evolution is beyond a doubt true. If you believe creationism is true you are obviosly set in your outdated beliefs well enough that you will not change your views. I'm not going to put down any evidence for evolution. There is a lot of it.
I just believe that some Christians adhere too rigidly to the bible. Some Christians are too worried about things like stopping gay rights and banning the teaching of evolution. I believe Christians like that are forgetting what Christ really taught. The point of Christianity is to love one another and strive to be the best person you can be. I really don't think Jesus would care if you believe in Creationism or Evolution. I'm sure He would like it a lot more if you jump-started that guy's car than if you were in a protest to ban evolution.
If there is a God, he/she/it is very powerful. Powerful enough to cause the Big Bang and engineer our universe to be the best possible for life. I am sure God, in control of quintillions of star systems, really isn't petty enough to get angry if Joe Blow doesn't believe in Him.
I am agnostic and kind of leaning toward believing in a higher power. I believe that if there is a god, then he/she/it would probably be very mecifil. I can't imagine a creator, with all his power, so petty as to send someone to hell just for not believing in him. I think that if there is a heaven, that's where everyone's headed.
I have a logical argument for there being no hell: I am not perfect. I sin all the friggen' time. But, even if someone killed one of my family members, (if I had this magical power) I would not send them into eternal damnation. No matter what anyone does to me, that eternal damnation is too draconian.
Now lets take god: He's perfect. He's all mercifil. He's a helluva guy. If I would never send anyone to hell, I can't imagine an all-loving god sending someone to hell.
I know, I've talked to fundamentalist Christians before on this issue. I know we send ourselves to hell for not believing. But, I think an all loving god would do everything in his power to stop us from going to hell.
I just built a new computer. I decided to go with the Geforce 2 Pro instead of a Geforce 3. With my XP 1900 and my G2, I could probably get around 90 FPS with Quake 3. If a got a Geforce 4, I could maybe get 120. The human eye can't notice the difference between 90 FPS and 120 FPS. What is the point of upgrading if you can't notice the difference? I only care if I get over 30 FPS.
Face it: Mozilla is an ok kind of buggy web browser.
Opera is freakin great! It is faster, more stable, and blocks popup ads. Also, for those that run Windows, unlike IE or Netscape, it does not support spyware and adware. It tests, it beats all other browsers in speed and stability. You can also get great skins with it! (^:
Opera is available for Linux/Solaris, BeOS, Symbian, Mac, QNX, and of course Windoze. Download it here
Well, according to the World Health Organization, it killed 32 (or maybe 42. can't remember). I think there were a few people immediately killed in the accident. 900 people got cancer. 10 died of cancer.
Even though that is quite a few, it in no way compares to coal power deaths.
People need to calm down about those "dirty bombs."
A kilogram of plutonium (huge amount by transuranic standards) could irradiate a small area. If you took a largish TNT bomb, you could spread the plutonium around a several-block wide area. According to Dr. Bill Watenberg, a prominint nuclear scientist with 2 PHD's, the people in this area would get about as much radiation as they would get from a chest X-ray. The real danger would be from the bomb blast and the resulting panic.
Plutonium is actualy heavier than lead, so plutonium particulates settle to the ground fast. And you don't have to worry about drinking contaminated water. You can orally take a couple of grams of plutonium with no ill effect. A 747 ramming into a reactor building probably wouldn't break through, so you don't need to really worry about terrorists ramming nuclear reactors.
Nuclear power has a suberb safety record, (chernobly killed i think 32) with no deaths in the US. Coal power kills around ~50,000 people a year. Read this report by Oak Ridge National Laboratory on coal radioactivity compared to nuclear power radioactivty. Coal plants are dumping more radioactivity (and other crap) into our atmosphere than we'd get if we just spread our nuke waste on the ground somewhere. And you can thank the non-logical retards at the Sierra Club and Greenpeace for our continued dependance on coal. Solar and wind are expensive and unreliable. Nuclear power, and ultimately fusion, is the answer to our energy problems.
Also, visit this site. Sorry, I just had to blow off some steam there.
I doesn't glow. I don't know where that myth came from. The stronium does not glow green or anything. It just looks like any kind of metal. No radioactive thing glows green. However, radium-phosphorus paint was made to make watches glow.
I don't know why people are so paraniod about nuclear power. Nuclear power has an excellent safety record. People die in coal-mine accidents all the time, but that doesn't get on slashdot. It's just when two people are moderately injured by stronium does it make the news.
You're right! You could easily take the radioactivity from ingesting several grams of plutonium. However, you could not take the heavy metal poisoning. Oddly enough, radioactivity is not the worst danger.
Even in our minority privileged 1st world, there is still evolutionary selection. Overtake on a blind corner, walk down a dark street at night, talk back to a mobster, argue with a lawyer.
In the first world, actually being rich and intelligent does not really lead to passing on more genes. In fact, being rich and intelligent is an evolutionary disadvantage. If you think about it, rich, intelligent people tend to have less kids than less intelligent trailer trash. Often, the poor will have a kid when they are a teengager, then have a few more later on. They may end up with four kids. Usualy, intelligent, well educated people will have only one or two kids.
No offense, but you must not have a very good understanding of Poymerase Chains, also called proteins. They form fairly easily by themselves, even in water.
I may point you to the example of protocells. I you take five amino acids(i dont remember which) mix them together, heat them, and then cool them, they will form protocells. These are DNA-less organisms that use ATP, have a cell membrane, metabolize, bud just like yeast, and do quite a few other things associated with cells.
In early earth, amino acids such as these would be easily formed by lightning or the more intense UV-light that they had back then. These would be formed from dissolved atmospheric gases in tidal pools such as hydrogen, ammonia, methane, CO2, and water.(the atmosphere was much different back then). Amino acids would be formed quite easily in early earth. Amino acids form so easy that they have even been found in meteorites.
Anyway, the combination of a few easily formed amino acids would produce protocells quite easily. Also, these same organic cocktails produce DNA and RNA. Maybe a few hundred million years down the road after protocells are created, a protocell forms around an RNA strand. It's just evolution from there.
I submitted an article to slashdot that had that same Space.com article that you linked to in it FOUR DAYS AGO. I'm very bitter that they rejected it, and put an identical one on a few days later.
An alien civilization would have to be more zenophobic than the Vogons to bother destroying earth. Intersteller travel is very expensive. They would have to be extremely violent to expend the amount of energy needed to reach earth and destroy us.
Intersteller distances are huge. You have to go thousands of times faster than chemical rockets to be able to practically do it. While it may not be so bad to send a 10 lb. reasearch probe at 50% of the speed of light to another star, sending a 500,000 ton Galacton Battlecruiser to 50% C and slowing it down again at Earth is a difficult proposition, for all but the most advanced type II civilizations with Dyson Spheres. If you are using Fusion, you would have to have around 99% of your vehicle mass fuel. But thats just to accelerate it. You also have to slow it down, which means, factoring in deadweight and fuel tank mass, only 1 millionth of the Galacton's shipweight is payload. The only intersteller craft that can be practically scaled up that large is a laser sail. Fusion powered craft of that size that are capable of stopping at their destination would require quintillions of tons of expensive deuterium and tritium.
To send an earth-destroying ship, you'd need a Dyson Sphere to provide around a quadrillion watts of power for a laser sail. The craft would then proceed to drop around 20,000 thermonuclear bombs on earth. Alternately, if they really wanted to "take care of" earth, they could build a dyson sphere around the sun and focus the entirety of the Sun's energy on earth.
A civilization that is interested in destroying life on earth would probably have blown itself up long before it has the capability to do so. Look at us: We are not that violent. We would certainly not wipe out E.T's. Yet even we came perilously close to ending civilization a few times during the cold war. Now a civilization so violent that it would be interested in expending the immense amount of energy to make us extinct would have most likely blown themselves up long before they had the technology for intersteller travel.
We still need to put money in our space program. You could say the same about say, cutting the military's budget for AIDS research.
I believe, for now, NASA should stop all manned flights. Before we worry about shooting people up on rockets for a half a billion dollars a pop to see if spiders spin their webs right in space, we need to get low cost space transport. It costs $5,000 dollars a pound to send crap up on the shuttle. We should just cancel the shuttle program NOW and use the ~5 billion dollars a year we save to develop a low-cost space plane that will open up space for all kinds of uses. We may even want to research how to build intersteller probes.
I think NASA needs a major overhaul. The shuttle flights and the ISS aren't really accomplishing anything usefull. Before we worry about the ISS, we just need to bring the cost of space down.
Yeah I hate that god damn player. Real Player needs to die. It is very unstable and always makes my 'puter crash. I hope Microsoft crushes them. Even though microsoft sucks, their Windows Media Player is better than that goddamn Real Player.
Now Real wants to charge a shitload of money for some Real Networks media content or some shit like that.
They have found the particles are always just slower than light speed.
I meant that they have accelerated particles to just below lightspeed. They have never met or exeeded C. Particles are not always just slower than lightspeed. That depends on thier energy level.
You can check out this [yun-qi.com] for the math behind Free Energy.
And you think I should believe that New Age site?
Anyway, reletivity has been proven though particle accelerator experiments. Every time they accelerate a particle, its mass increases. They have found the particles are always just slower than light speed.
Just listen to mainstream scientists who work endlessly on this stuff. I visited the Yun-Qi site. It looks like the ultra-hippy who thought that out was missing a few brain cells from smokin' the chiba too much.
I couldn't make out much of the new age crap they are spouting out at that site. Just like the rest of them, I assume they are grossly misinterpreting quantum theory to allow that mind-matter crap and free energy through Zero Point Energy.
ZPE is equal and isotropic over all space. First of all, there is just high-frequency background radiation. Every once in a while,this energy briefly forms a particle-antiparticle pair, which promptly annihilate each other and go back into energy.
You can't really harvest energy from ZPE. Since it is equal over all space, you would have to make a difference in intensity of ZPE between two areas. The only way we know of to do this is to put two plates very close together. Since it only allows radiation of very short wavelengths into the cavity, it creates kind of a ZPE vacuum that pushes them together ever so slightly. Of course, once the plates snap together, you have to expend just as much energy to get them apart again. You end up having a net energy loss.
Harnessing energy from ZPE is just like trying to harness energy from the heat in the air. At room temperature, the air is 500 degrees above absolute zero. That is quite a bit. But we can't harness that energy, can we? We can't because we are all at a more or less equal energy level. We can only harness the energy if we create an difference in temperature between two areas and use the temperature difference to do work. You can do this in one of two ways:
1.You can raise the temperature.
2.You can cool the temperature.
Both of these options require energy. If we chose 1, you could burn somthing and use the heat to run a turbing. If we chose two, we would expend electrical energy to run a refrigerating unit. You could make some ice. Then you could use the temperature difference between the ice and the air to run a stirling motor.
Just grabbing energy from ZPE clearly violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
There is no such thing as faster than light. In this experiment, nothing is moving faster than light (just ignore common sense, it does not apply here). From my understanding, it's just the peak of the wave that travels FTL. The photon is not going FTL.
Though this isnt really travel, as such, the only FTL phenomenon we know of is quantum teleportation. This is when you "entangle" two particles. When you entangle 2 particles, they act as one. If you changed the polarity of one, the other would instantly change to the opposite polarity, even if it is accross the galaxy. However, this still does not allow FTL star-trek teleportation or communication. Due to good old Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, you cannot measure a particle's properties exactly, because doing so would disrupt the particle.
If you and your friend Bob both had entangled photons, and you were at Alpha Centauri, you could vertically polarize your photon. Bob's photon back at Earth would instantly become horizontally polarized. But it Bob tried to measure his photon by sending it though a polarizing filter, he would only have a 1 in 4 chance of correctly measuring the photon. It's essentialy random.
The only way around this is for you to tell Bob that you polarized your photon vertically. This can only be done at light speed with a radio signal. Then Bob can send the photon through a horizontal filter.
Re:So, wait a second...Yeah Right!
on
Lindows Reviewed
·
· Score: 1
I just got linux-mandrake on my new computer 1 week ago. My god is it an improvement over windows. I don't think it is that hard to use. Anyway, on my old computer I had Windows Malfunction Edition going. It froze up all the friggen time and programs crashed on me at least twice a day. Linux has not had any problems since I went through the easy, trouble-free installation. It's weird not having constant computer crashes, like I did with windows.
You should stop listening to Ralph Nader. Look, if you think urban sprawl is bad, you should see the habitat loss that a 1 Gigawatt solar plant produces.That would take up many square miles. Other than that and the ultra-high price of about 9 cents per killowatt hour, solar power is great, unless you want electricity when it's cloudy out for some reason.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you like your job?
-Yes!
-No!
-What job?
You forgot one:
-I love working at CowboynealCorp!
A happy marraige to you both! Maybe you should have a honeymoon poll:
Where should CmdrTaco and Kathleen go on their honeymoon?
1. Hawaii
2. Jamaica
3. Aspen
4. Dreamhack 2002
5. Cowboyneal's
what if you only have dimpled chad?
Evolution is beyond a doubt true. If you believe creationism is true you are obviosly set in your outdated beliefs well enough that you will not change your views. I'm not going to put down any evidence for evolution. There is a lot of it.
I just believe that some Christians adhere too rigidly to the bible. Some Christians are too worried about things like stopping gay rights and banning the teaching of evolution. I believe Christians like that are forgetting what Christ really taught. The point of Christianity is to love one another and strive to be the best person you can be. I really don't think Jesus would care if you believe in Creationism or Evolution. I'm sure He would like it a lot more if you jump-started that guy's car than if you were in a protest to ban evolution.
If there is a God, he/she/it is very powerful. Powerful enough to cause the Big Bang and engineer our universe to be the best possible for life. I am sure God, in control of quintillions of star systems, really isn't petty enough to get angry if Joe Blow doesn't believe in Him.
I am agnostic and kind of leaning toward believing in a higher power. I believe that if there is a god, then he/she/it would probably be very mecifil. I can't imagine a creator, with all his power, so petty as to send someone to hell just for not believing in him. I think that if there is a heaven, that's where everyone's headed.
I have a logical argument for there being no hell: I am not perfect. I sin all the friggen' time. But, even if someone killed one of my family members, (if I had this magical power) I would not send them into eternal damnation. No matter what anyone does to me, that eternal damnation is too draconian.
Now lets take god: He's perfect. He's all mercifil. He's a helluva guy. If I would never send anyone to hell, I can't imagine an all-loving god sending someone to hell.
I know, I've talked to fundamentalist Christians before on this issue. I know we send ourselves to hell for not believing. But, I think an all loving god would do everything in his power to stop us from going to hell.
I just built a new computer. I decided to go with the Geforce 2 Pro instead of a Geforce 3. With my XP 1900 and my G2, I could probably get around 90 FPS with Quake 3. If a got a Geforce 4, I could maybe get 120. The human eye can't notice the difference between 90 FPS and 120 FPS. What is the point of upgrading if you can't notice the difference? I only care if I get over 30 FPS.
Face it: Mozilla is an ok kind of buggy web browser.
Opera is freakin great! It is faster, more stable, and blocks popup ads. Also, for those that run Windows, unlike IE or Netscape, it does not support spyware and adware. It tests, it beats all other browsers in speed and stability. You can also get great skins with it! (^:
Opera is available for Linux/Solaris, BeOS, Symbian, Mac, QNX, and of course Windoze. Download it here
I'm sorry!!!! I got a few facts mixed up. I got polymerase and polypeptide mixed up. I always do.
Well, according to the World Health Organization, it killed 32 (or maybe 42. can't remember). I think there were a few people immediately killed in the accident. 900 people got cancer. 10 died of cancer.
Even though that is quite a few, it in no way compares to coal power deaths.
People need to calm down about those "dirty bombs."
A kilogram of plutonium (huge amount by transuranic standards) could irradiate a small area. If you took a largish TNT bomb, you could spread the plutonium around a several-block wide area. According to Dr. Bill Watenberg, a prominint nuclear scientist with 2 PHD's, the people in this area would get about as much radiation as they would get from a chest X-ray. The real danger would be from the bomb blast and the resulting panic.
Plutonium is actualy heavier than lead, so plutonium particulates settle to the ground fast. And you don't have to worry about drinking contaminated water. You can orally take a couple of grams of plutonium with no ill effect. A 747 ramming into a reactor building probably wouldn't break through, so you don't need to really worry about terrorists ramming nuclear reactors.
Nuclear power has a suberb safety record, (chernobly killed i think 32) with no deaths in the US. Coal power kills around ~50,000 people a year. Read this report by Oak Ridge National Laboratory on coal radioactivity compared to nuclear power radioactivty. Coal plants are dumping more radioactivity (and other crap) into our atmosphere than we'd get if we just spread our nuke waste on the ground somewhere. And you can thank the non-logical retards at the Sierra Club and Greenpeace for our continued dependance on coal. Solar and wind are expensive and unreliable. Nuclear power, and ultimately fusion, is the answer to our energy problems.
Also, visit this site. Sorry, I just had to blow off some steam there.
I doesn't glow. I don't know where that myth came from. The stronium does not glow green or anything. It just looks like any kind of metal. No radioactive thing glows green. However, radium-phosphorus paint was made to make watches glow.
I don't know why people are so paraniod about nuclear power. Nuclear power has an excellent safety record. People die in coal-mine accidents all the time, but that doesn't get on slashdot. It's just when two people are moderately injured by stronium does it make the news.
You're right! You could easily take the radioactivity from ingesting several grams of plutonium. However, you could not take the heavy metal poisoning. Oddly enough, radioactivity is not the worst danger.
Even in our minority privileged 1st world, there is still evolutionary selection. Overtake on a blind corner, walk down a dark street at night, talk back to a mobster, argue with a lawyer.
In the first world, actually being rich and intelligent does not really lead to passing on more genes. In fact, being rich and intelligent is an evolutionary disadvantage. If you think about it, rich, intelligent people tend to have less kids than less intelligent trailer trash. Often, the poor will have a kid when they are a teengager, then have a few more later on. They may end up with four kids. Usualy, intelligent, well educated people will have only one or two kids.
No offense, but you must not have a very good understanding of Poymerase Chains, also called proteins. They form fairly easily by themselves, even in water.
I may point you to the example of protocells. I you take five amino acids(i dont remember which) mix them together, heat them, and then cool them, they will form protocells. These are DNA-less organisms that use ATP, have a cell membrane, metabolize, bud just like yeast, and do quite a few other things associated with cells.
In early earth, amino acids such as these would be easily formed by lightning or the more intense UV-light that they had back then. These would be formed from dissolved atmospheric gases in tidal pools such as hydrogen, ammonia, methane, CO2, and water.(the atmosphere was much different back then). Amino acids would be formed quite easily in early earth. Amino acids form so easy that they have even been found in meteorites.
Anyway, the combination of a few easily formed amino acids would produce protocells quite easily. Also, these same organic cocktails produce DNA and RNA. Maybe a few hundred million years down the road after protocells are created, a protocell forms around an RNA strand. It's just evolution from there.
I submitted an article to slashdot that had that same Space.com article that you linked to in it FOUR DAYS AGO. I'm very bitter that they rejected it, and put an identical one on a few days later.
An alien civilization would have to be more zenophobic than the Vogons to bother destroying earth. Intersteller travel is very expensive. They would have to be extremely violent to expend the amount of energy needed to reach earth and destroy us.
Intersteller distances are huge. You have to go thousands of times faster than chemical rockets to be able to practically do it. While it may not be so bad to send a 10 lb. reasearch probe at 50% of the speed of light to another star, sending a 500,000 ton Galacton Battlecruiser to 50% C and slowing it down again at Earth is a difficult proposition, for all but the most advanced type II civilizations with Dyson Spheres. If you are using Fusion, you would have to have around 99% of your vehicle mass fuel. But thats just to accelerate it. You also have to slow it down, which means, factoring in deadweight and fuel tank mass, only 1 millionth of the Galacton's shipweight is payload. The only intersteller craft that can be practically scaled up that large is a laser sail. Fusion powered craft of that size that are capable of stopping at their destination would require quintillions of tons of expensive deuterium and tritium.
To send an earth-destroying ship, you'd need a Dyson Sphere to provide around a quadrillion watts of power for a laser sail. The craft would then proceed to drop around 20,000 thermonuclear bombs on earth. Alternately, if they really wanted to "take care of" earth, they could build a dyson sphere around the sun and focus the entirety of the Sun's energy on earth.
A civilization that is interested in destroying life on earth would probably have blown itself up long before it has the capability to do so. Look at us: We are not that violent. We would certainly not wipe out E.T's. Yet even we came perilously close to ending civilization a few times during the cold war. Now a civilization so violent that it would be interested in expending the immense amount of energy to make us extinct would have most likely blown themselves up long before they had the technology for intersteller travel.
We still need to put money in our space program. You could say the same about say, cutting the military's budget for AIDS research.
I believe, for now, NASA should stop all manned flights. Before we worry about shooting people up on rockets for a half a billion dollars a pop to see if spiders spin their webs right in space, we need to get low cost space transport. It costs $5,000 dollars a pound to send crap up on the shuttle. We should just cancel the shuttle program NOW and use the ~5 billion dollars a year we save to develop a low-cost space plane that will open up space for all kinds of uses. We may even want to research how to build intersteller probes.
I think NASA needs a major overhaul. The shuttle flights and the ISS aren't really accomplishing anything usefull. Before we worry about the ISS, we just need to bring the cost of space down.
CAN YOU IMAGINE A BEOWULF CLUSTER OF THESE?
Somebody feels they always have to make a beowulf comment. Even if the article has nothing to do with computers.
Yeah I hate that god damn player. Real Player needs to die. It is very unstable and always makes my 'puter crash. I hope Microsoft crushes them. Even though microsoft sucks, their Windows Media Player is better than that goddamn Real Player.
Now Real wants to charge a shitload of money for some Real Networks media content or some shit like that.
If we went to the horsehead nebula would we find the Magratheans in suspended animation until the galactic stock prices omproved?
They have found the particles are always just slower than light speed.
I meant that they have accelerated particles to just below lightspeed. They have never met or exeeded C. Particles are not always just slower than lightspeed. That depends on thier energy level.
Also, with turbing, I meant to say turbine.
And you think I should believe that New Age site?
Anyway, reletivity has been proven though particle accelerator experiments. Every time they accelerate a particle, its mass increases. They have found the particles are always just slower than light speed.
Just listen to mainstream scientists who work endlessly on this stuff. I visited the Yun-Qi site. It looks like the ultra-hippy who thought that out was missing a few brain cells from smokin' the chiba too much.
I couldn't make out much of the new age crap they are spouting out at that site. Just like the rest of them, I assume they are grossly misinterpreting quantum theory to allow that mind-matter crap and free energy through Zero Point Energy.
ZPE is equal and isotropic over all space. First of all, there is just high-frequency background radiation. Every once in a while,this energy briefly forms a particle-antiparticle pair, which promptly annihilate each other and go back into energy.
You can't really harvest energy from ZPE. Since it is equal over all space, you would have to make a difference in intensity of ZPE between two areas. The only way we know of to do this is to put two plates very close together. Since it only allows radiation of very short wavelengths into the cavity, it creates kind of a ZPE vacuum that pushes them together ever so slightly. Of course, once the plates snap together, you have to expend just as much energy to get them apart again. You end up having a net energy loss.
Harnessing energy from ZPE is just like trying to harness energy from the heat in the air. At room temperature, the air is 500 degrees above absolute zero. That is quite a bit. But we can't harness that energy, can we? We can't because we are all at a more or less equal energy level. We can only harness the energy if we create an difference in temperature between two areas and use the temperature difference to do work. You can do this in one of two ways:
1.You can raise the temperature.
2.You can cool the temperature.
Both of these options require energy. If we chose 1, you could burn somthing and use the heat to run a turbing. If we chose two, we would expend electrical energy to run a refrigerating unit. You could make some ice. Then you could use the temperature difference between the ice and the air to run a stirling motor.
Just grabbing energy from ZPE clearly violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
There is no such thing as faster than light. In this experiment, nothing is moving faster than light (just ignore common sense, it does not apply here). From my understanding, it's just the peak of the wave that travels FTL. The photon is not going FTL.
Though this isnt really travel, as such, the only FTL phenomenon we know of is quantum teleportation. This is when you "entangle" two particles. When you entangle 2 particles, they act as one. If you changed the polarity of one, the other would instantly change to the opposite polarity, even if it is accross the galaxy. However, this still does not allow FTL star-trek teleportation or communication. Due to good old Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, you cannot measure a particle's properties exactly, because doing so would disrupt the particle.
If you and your friend Bob both had entangled photons, and you were at Alpha Centauri, you could vertically polarize your photon. Bob's photon back at Earth would instantly become horizontally polarized. But it Bob tried to measure his photon by sending it though a polarizing filter, he would only have a 1 in 4 chance of correctly measuring the photon. It's essentialy random.
The only way around this is for you to tell Bob that you polarized your photon vertically. This can only be done at light speed with a radio signal. Then Bob can send the photon through a horizontal filter.
I just got linux-mandrake on my new computer 1 week ago. My god is it an improvement over windows. I don't think it is that hard to use. Anyway, on my old computer I had Windows Malfunction Edition going. It froze up all the friggen time and programs crashed on me at least twice a day. Linux has not had any problems since I went through the easy, trouble-free installation. It's weird not having constant computer crashes, like I did with windows.
solar cell are way too expensive. I'm talking about reflective mirrors to boil water like existing plants
You should stop listening to Ralph Nader. Look, if you think urban sprawl is bad, you should see the habitat loss that a 1 Gigawatt solar plant produces.That would take up many square miles. Other than that and the ultra-high price of about 9 cents per killowatt hour, solar power is great, unless you want electricity when it's cloudy out for some reason.