Ah, dammit. Did'nt read the article properly... It seems they will be observing up to 12 000 systems at once:
The spacecraft's 27-centimeter (10.6-inch) telescope monitors up to 12,000 sunlike stars at once. Getting a big sample is crucial because only one in a hundred of those stars that do have planets will be oriented so that the passage of the planet in front of the star is visible from Earth.
Those scientists think of everything. Still, they say that one in a hundred will be orientated properly, but according to my calculations above it will still be about only one in about 675. Even if one accounts for more planets per star their orbits will probably be oriented in approximately the same plane. Again, this is probably still wrong, but I'd be grateful if someone could explain why.
If we observe a random star sustem which seems like it could have earthlike planets, it seems to me that observing a transition is unlikely.
Suppose that earth was the only planet revolving around the sun; the chance of observing a transition from some large distance is approximately:
(diameter of sun / diameter of earth) 109
(2 au / diameter of earth) 73686 earth diameters.
The chance of the orbit being oriented correctly seems to be 0.00147986287.
I suppose you could increase the chances by choosing larger stars, but it is still a very long shot. From reading TA it seems that they are indeed hunting for "eclipses" from a planet passing directly in from of it's star, causing dips in a star's luminosity.
Try using spreeder. It increases the speed you can read at by a lot.
You must be joking but... I think this is valid only if your reading speed is very slow to begin with. People who have normal reading abilities will take in several words at a time. Your eyes are not really that sharp but your brain will help you fill in the rest, or something like that. Seeing only one word at a time seem damn inefficient to me.
The best way to learn to read faster is by reading a lot. I do, and I can easily read 800 wpm for comprehension (have tested myself multiple times), although around 650 wpm is more in my comfort zone. With that thing I have very poor, if any, comprehension at 650 wpm.
no longer is spaceflight limited to governmental agencies. usher in the era privately funded space access, and may that lead to mass produced spacecraft for private use!
The good thing about this is, that, while they're standing on the giant shoulders of government research in space technology, they have a completely different focus. They're not part of political ploys and whims, but rather have an incentive to make accesss to space as cheap as possible, while not endangering the security of the payload.
Sending humans to space is not feasible for them right now, but it'll probably be within reach for them in the foreseeable future. This is a Good Thing. It is one of the areas where a free market will have a direct effect on innovation.
I applaud their belated success, and the fact that they and their investors have faith in the possibility of future commercial spaceflight. In the end it will benefit mankind as a whole.
a smaller webserver [d116.com] has been created 9 years ago.
Except for the fact that the smaller server requires a Linux computer with a RS232 interface to act as its host. While cool, it's not able to serve pages in any useful fashion without being attached to what could act as an immensely more powerful webserver:)
The only way that something outside the observable universe could affect something inside the observable universe and be seen by something else inside the observable universe is if the laws of physics that we know and love are basically a steaming pile of horse apples.
FTA:
Most likely to create such a coherent flow they would have to be some very strange structures, maybe some warped space time. But this is just pure speculation.
It's difficult to wrap my mind around this, but I'll have a go:
O......................A.|..B
We are the observer at O, the pipe is our light cone limit. Object B fires an immense laser beam at object A some time far in the past and then start racing away from us. Object A explodes so violently that we can detect it after 13 billion years or so. We can still not observe object B directly, but we can observe an effect of its actions. If object B instead is unbelievably massive it could accelerate object A, and we could observe the effect.
Why is this wrong?
Because we see what happened 13 billion years ago. Object B could be further away by now, but the only things we know is what happened in the past. Object B must then necessarily be within our light cone, as any laser beam fired at A could reach us as well.
As we gaze across billions of lightyears, we also gaze through aeons backwards in time.
The biggest obstacle lies in the cables. To extend the elevator to a stationary satellite from the Earth's surface would require twice that length of cable to reach a counterweight, ensuring that the cable maintains its tension.
Wouldn't the counterweight only have to be as far away as necessary to generate enough centripetal force to counter the weight of the cable below the geostationary point plus whatever payload the cable can handle?
It seems to me that with a large enough counterweight (captive asteroid or something?) it could be a lot closer. Since no one has commented on it, why am I wrong?
No, we don't. We do, however, need a cognitive system sophisticated enough to be able to read visual and other inputs, and to act accordingly. As in, differentiate between a bunny in the road (take evasive action if not dangerous to anyone, otherwise crush the bunny) and a kid (take evasive action even if it might result in a crash, endangering the passengers and/or other trafficants).
That's an extremely complex problem, for which we are far away from an adequate solution as of now. Of course, a really good cognitive system could drive carefully enough to be able to avoid bunny and kid alike without having to cause danger to anyone.
Mind-control powers? That doesn't sound good. We actually deal with tardigrades at work and you're raising some serious concerns. I plan to... hold on, someone's at the door. IT WAS NO ONE. TARDIGRADES ARE NOT DANGEROUS. TARDIGRADES ARE OUR FRIENDS.
If I send you a link to a jpg stored on their server, and you click it, you're accessing their content. No big difference between that and viewing a website with an image hotlinked from them (I have no idea if they've blocked hotlinking or not, and I don't really care).
"The EULA is not only more ridicilous than we imagine, it's more ridiculous than we can imagine". (Haldane, I'm sorry)
BTW, by reading this post you agreed to send me £100 monthly for ever and ever.
The facebook one is blatantly taking a right that it doesn't have a legitimate reason to take.
From their EULA:
"By accessing or using our web site at www.facebook.com or the mobile version thereof (together the "Site") or by posting a Share Button on your site, you (the "User") signify that you have read, understand and agree to be bound by these Terms of Use ("Terms of Use" or "Agreement"), whether or not you are a registered member of Facebook."
The thing is that they already do. I haven't played any game recently (that also has a console version) that doesn't have gamepad support in the PC version.
I really don't like that. I have pretty good aim from far too many hours of CS, and I really enjoy getting those headshots in. In a game converted from console to asdw + mouse they often don't bother to change the mechanics. You still just point in the general direction and fire, Rambo style. No chance to take advantage of good aim, which is really frustrating if you've got the aim.
Give me an exact crosshair and a reasonably exact weapon, and I'll get those guys in the style I like:)
The revolver in HL2 was maybe a bit too much when it comes to accuracy, but enjoyable if you know what you're doing.
So you can still email and surf most stuff, just no youtubing or radio streaming.
Or, you get what you pay for. Where I live I pay for a connection with a set bandwidth. If they capped it outside of terms of service they would be struck down by the government because of illegal marketing. They don't cap it, or I would know. How does supply and demand work out for the free and the brave?
I did a lot of practice on the basic Em, Am, D, C, and G chords, and I can do them fairly regularly
Those are necessary, but I'd advice you strongly to learn the different Barre chords as well. When you know them well you can play practically any chord by transposing the base chord.
I've been playing on and off for 18 years. My nemesis in the beginning was the A-shape Barre, my fingers are simply too short and stubby. I could bend them far enough, but another trick is to transpose an E-shape Barre five bands upwards for speed and precision. This is technically the same chord, and it will sound similar enough to save you in most circumstances.
Good luck, and don't give up! My guitars have given me countless hours of enjoyment and comfort, even though I mostly play alone. I still play almost every day.
When you get to the level where you can pick up almost any song in a few minutes, which won't take all that long if you dedicate a small amount of time every day, you'll be very grateful for having learnt it.
If you can get your hands on a cheap amp and an electric guitar after having learnt the basics, that'll open up a whole new world for you. Most power chords are relatively simple, and you'll feel like you're on top of the world while playing along with your favourite rock artist. It beats Guitar Hero by a long shot:)
I have Munch [wikimedia.org] on my wall. Very relaxing and inspiring when you are behind schedule.
As did this guy. Sorry, couldn't find an English version. The picture is real, taken in the home of one of the robbers who got away with the paintings. He sent an MMS to a buddy with the same picture, and the byline "I'm selling an old sofa. Do you know of anybody who might be interested?"
I'm no great coder, nor matemathician, but wouldn't a GPU be perfect for simulations such as this one?
I imagine there is a lot of vector calculations going on, which GPUs are very good at. Maybe the communication between memory and GPU would be too slow.
Someone with more knowledge, please share your insights!
I assume that I found the correct contest, it fits the description.
They did however get the Vista box, by exploiting a flaw in Flash (from the same article). Both successful cracks was only achieved after the rules had been relaxed to allow exploits by "tricking" the judges into clicking on links to malicious web pages created by the contestants.
On the first day only direct attacks over the network was allowed, and all OSes survived that.
Oh yes, they will. I have enjoyed, and have been inspired by, his many excellent stories. I will tell my children about them, and I believe they will read them and feel the same about them.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course. Shame on me for not picking up that one. Thanks!
Ah, dammit. Did'nt read the article properly...
It seems they will be observing up to 12 000 systems at once:
Those scientists think of everything. Still, they say that one in a hundred will be orientated properly, but according to my calculations above it will still be about only one in about 675.
Even if one accounts for more planets per star their orbits will probably be oriented in approximately the same plane.
Again, this is probably still wrong, but I'd be grateful if someone could explain why.
If we observe a random star sustem which seems like it could have earthlike planets, it seems to me that observing a transition is unlikely.
Suppose that earth was the only planet revolving around the sun; the chance of observing a transition from some large distance is approximately:
(diameter of sun / diameter of earth) 109
(2 au / diameter of earth) 73686 earth diameters.
The chance of the orbit being oriented correctly seems to be 0.00147986287.
I suppose you could increase the chances by choosing larger stars, but it is still a very long shot. From reading TA it seems that they are indeed hunting for "eclipses" from a planet passing directly in from of it's star, causing dips in a star's luminosity.
Which of my assumptions are wrong? :)
You must be joking but...
I think this is valid only if your reading speed is very slow to begin with. People who have normal reading abilities will take in several words at a time. Your eyes are not really that sharp but your brain will help you fill in the rest, or something like that. Seeing only one word at a time seem damn inefficient to me.
The best way to learn to read faster is by reading a lot. I do, and I can easily read 800 wpm for comprehension (have tested myself multiple times), although around 650 wpm is more in my comfort zone. With that thing I have very poor, if any, comprehension at 650 wpm.
The good thing about this is, that, while they're standing on the giant shoulders of government research in space technology, they have a completely different focus. They're not part of political ploys and whims, but rather have an incentive to make accesss to space as cheap as possible, while not endangering the security of the payload.
Sending humans to space is not feasible for them right now, but it'll probably be within reach for them in the foreseeable future. This is a Good Thing. It is one of the areas where a free market will have a direct effect on innovation.
I applaud their belated success, and the fact that they and their investors have faith in the possibility of future commercial spaceflight. In the end it will benefit mankind as a whole.
Except for the fact that the smaller server requires a Linux computer with a RS232 interface to act as its host. :)
While cool, it's not able to serve pages in any useful fashion without being attached to what could act as an immensely more powerful webserver
FTA:
It's difficult to wrap my mind around this, but I'll have a go:
O......................A.|..B
We are the observer at O, the pipe is our light cone limit.
Object B fires an immense laser beam at object A some time far in the past and then start racing away from us. Object A explodes so violently that we can detect it after 13 billion years or so. We can still not observe object B directly, but we can observe an effect of its actions.
If object B instead is unbelievably massive it could accelerate object A, and we could observe the effect.
Why is this wrong?
Because we see what happened 13 billion years ago. Object B could be further away by now, but the only things we know is what happened in the past. Object B must then necessarily be within our light cone, as any laser beam fired at A could reach us as well.
As we gaze across billions of lightyears, we also gaze through aeons backwards in time.
I guess this would be a fictitious centrifugal force, sorry about that :)
FTA:
Wouldn't the counterweight only have to be as far away as necessary to generate enough centripetal force to counter the weight of the cable below the geostationary point plus whatever payload the cable can handle?
It seems to me that with a large enough counterweight (captive asteroid or something?) it could be a lot closer. Since no one has commented on it, why am I wrong?
No, we don't. We do, however, need a cognitive system sophisticated enough to be able to read visual and other inputs, and to act accordingly. As in, differentiate between a bunny in the road (take evasive action if not dangerous to anyone, otherwise crush the bunny) and a kid (take evasive action even if it might result in a crash, endangering the passengers and/or other trafficants).
That's an extremely complex problem, for which we are far away from an adequate solution as of now. Of course, a really good cognitive system could drive carefully enough to be able to avoid bunny and kid alike without having to cause danger to anyone.
Star Control II, I presume :)
Good times!
Guess what, that was my point :)
If I send you a link to a jpg stored on their server, and you click it, you're accessing their content. No big difference between that and viewing a website with an image hotlinked from them (I have no idea if they've blocked hotlinking or not, and I don't really care).
"The EULA is not only more ridicilous than we imagine, it's more ridiculous than we can imagine". (Haldane, I'm sorry)
BTW, by reading this post you agreed to send me £100 monthly for ever and ever.
From their EULA:
"By accessing or using our web site at www.facebook.com or the mobile version thereof (together the "Site") or by posting a Share Button on your site, you (the "User") signify that you have read, understand and agree to be bound by these Terms of Use ("Terms of Use" or "Agreement"), whether or not you are a registered member of Facebook."
My emphasis.
Like, a speed-typing contest?
Re my sig, I probably meant accurate, not exact...
I really don't like that. I have pretty good aim from far too many hours of CS, and I really enjoy getting those headshots in. In a game converted from console to asdw + mouse they often don't bother to change the mechanics. You still just point in the general direction and fire, Rambo style. No chance to take advantage of good aim, which is really frustrating if you've got the aim.
Give me an exact crosshair and a reasonably exact weapon, and I'll get those guys in the style I like :)
The revolver in HL2 was maybe a bit too much when it comes to accuracy, but enjoyable if you know what you're doing.
Or, you get what you pay for. Where I live I pay for a connection with a set bandwidth. If they capped it outside of terms of service they would be struck down by the government because of illegal marketing.
They don't cap it, or I would know.
How does supply and demand work out for the free and the brave?
Those are necessary, but I'd advice you strongly to learn the different Barre chords as well. When you know them well you can play practically any chord by transposing the base chord.
I've been playing on and off for 18 years. My nemesis in the beginning was the A-shape Barre, my fingers are simply too short and stubby. I could bend them far enough, but another trick is to transpose an E-shape Barre five bands upwards for speed and precision. This is technically the same chord, and it will sound similar enough to save you in most circumstances.
Good luck, and don't give up! My guitars have given me countless hours of enjoyment and comfort, even though I mostly play alone. I still play almost every day.
When you get to the level where you can pick up almost any song in a few minutes, which won't take all that long if you dedicate a small amount of time every day, you'll be very grateful for having learnt it.
If you can get your hands on a cheap amp and an electric guitar after having learnt the basics, that'll open up a whole new world for you. Most power chords are relatively simple, and you'll feel like you're on top of the world while playing along with your favourite rock artist. It beats Guitar Hero by a long shot :)
As did this guy.
Sorry, couldn't find an English version. The picture is real, taken in the home of one of the robbers who got away with the paintings.
He sent an MMS to a buddy with the same picture, and the byline "I'm selling an old sofa. Do you know of anybody who might be interested?"
It was later used against them in the trial.
I'm no great coder, nor matemathician, but wouldn't a GPU be perfect for simulations such as this one?
I imagine there is a lot of vector calculations going on, which GPUs are very good at. Maybe the communication between memory and GPU would be too slow.
Someone with more knowledge, please share your insights!
Not if you are in a spoon factory
This is pure gold.
I assume that I found the correct contest, it fits the description.
They did however get the Vista box, by exploiting a flaw in Flash (from the same article). Both successful cracks was only achieved after the rules had been relaxed to allow exploits by "tricking" the judges into clicking on links to malicious web pages created by the contestants.
On the first day only direct attacks over the network was allowed, and all OSes survived that.
Oh yes, they will.
I have enjoyed, and have been inspired by, his many excellent stories.
I will tell my children about them, and I believe they will read them and feel the same about them.