Consider this explanation: The earth is less than 6000 years old, and was made with the dinosaur bones already in the earth. I mean, if God can make an Earth, surely he can make things that are new but appear old. He could easily specify the levels of carbon-14 in the matter, and in due process confound science.
Bandwidth IS directly proportional to frequency. Baud Rate (in the scientific sense) is exactly twice the frequency.
@ 900 MHz, the bandwidth is 900 MHz, the maximum switching rate (BAUD) is 1800 MHz.
tha Shannon Channel capacity, assuming 60 dB signal-to-noise, is 900e6log_2(1 + 1,000,000) = 17.9 Gb/s. obviously, this is extremely high. it is technically possible to hit this raw rate of data transfer. and it is impossible to exceed this value without data compression
No guess...an answer. The article at space.com shows the craft PARACHUTING to the ground. I'm sure terminal velocity was attained quite quickly. Ewwww...10 Gs upon landing, WITH a parachute.
"So maybe stealing bibles is like stealing sales brochures...it does more good than harm."
Unless, of course, you are stealing them to use as fuel for your next terrorist arsoning!
Yes I agree
This happened to be in a Corsair, in which the seat was not designed for underwater egress. I was looking for a link real quick.
Martin-Baker patented the Underwater Ejection System in 1965, and fitted it successfully to the Buccaneer.
Issues like what? Rotors not blowing off? Sure, there are issues like that, but look at the Harrier. They use explosive cords to detonate the canopy and the shards are so dangerous that they require pilots to have ther visors extended at all times. They even count on the canopy NOT shattering and the seat is made to break through it. All of this and I bet you would just love to fly in a harrier.
And I bet the Army Apache is so wonderful too...too bad the Marine Cobra is more battle-worthy.
I don't play video games. I tried America's Army once and it was unrealistic and complete propoganda so I quit. Talk about Mother Russia. Sheesh.
By the way, the ka-50 Havok was brought into service in 1997, well after the Communist Soviet Union fell apart. The Havok is nearly completely composite construction and fully aerobatic, including sustained inverted flight and barrel rolls. It is on the same technological level as the still-developing US Army Comanche.
I am a Canadian with no connections whatsoever with Russia.
With regards to your MK-J5D qualification...there are P.Eng's, too, who fail to grasp the importance of new innovation.
And I'm the King of England.
Honestly, I could be the head engineer at Martin-Baker and you would still mouth off about being right because you represent an entire community. There are functional emergency egress systems for helicopters, and they WORK (hence functional).
On the other hand, no, I won't save you the embarassment.
http://www.ejectionsite.com/eunderh2o.htm
This is not one of the seats designed to eject underwater, but even it performed the feat in the end.
No part of it. You made a statement about pilots not having input simply because YOU are uncomfortable with it. I'm sure there are people who are dead afraid of normal ejection seats, but it doesn't make it a bad idea or unsafe.
If they can make ejection seats for jet fighters that will work UNDERWATER, they can make an ejection system for a helicopter that works. Your mind is glazed over enough to ignore the fact that such a system exists in reality, and works effectively. It's bad enough to be a naysayer about technology that has been developed for a long time, but to naysay something that has been proven in practice is just silly.
Yes, this would work, as long as the fan cooled the cool side of the junction. If the fan directly cooled say a heat sink in parallel with the junction, the temp difference across the junction would decrease and the fan would actually slow down.
What you can do is sandwich the Peltier junction between the cpu and the sink. Since a Peltier junction is half copper, it is very efficient at flowing heat away from the source. The better the sink is, the heat flow through the Peltier increases.
Funny how I can extend the borders of my scan area about 1 inch beyond the bezel all around, and when I look closely I can see that there is phosphorus lit up as far as I can see inside. No clipping.
Edit: I know what you are saying, but have you not noticed that you can extend the scan area beyond the borders of the bezel? That's what I am saying...you remove the bezel, expand the screen even until it wraps around the corners of the face if you have that capability. Instant tiny-border, albeit with distortion from the wrapping at the edges.
You arent making any sense. If you remove the plastic, which IS the bezel last time I checked, then obviously the part behind the bezel is now revealed. You instantly can see the entire face of the tube, which really reduces the space between viewable areas of the monitors.
Slashdot Mirror
Consider this explanation: The earth is less than 6000 years old, and was made with the dinosaur bones already in the earth. I mean, if God can make an Earth, surely he can make things that are new but appear old. He could easily specify the levels of carbon-14 in the matter, and in due process confound science.
Bandwidth IS directly proportional to frequency. Baud Rate (in the scientific sense) is exactly twice the frequency. @ 900 MHz, the bandwidth is 900 MHz, the maximum switching rate (BAUD) is 1800 MHz. tha Shannon Channel capacity, assuming 60 dB signal-to-noise, is 900e6log_2(1 + 1,000,000) = 17.9 Gb/s. obviously, this is extremely high. it is technically possible to hit this raw rate of data transfer. and it is impossible to exceed this value without data compression
I don't have a P3...works fine for me By require they mean recommend.
No guess...an answer. The article at space.com shows the craft PARACHUTING to the ground. I'm sure terminal velocity was attained quite quickly. Ewwww...10 Gs upon landing, WITH a parachute.
"So maybe stealing bibles is like stealing sales brochures...it does more good than harm."
Unless, of course, you are stealing them to use as fuel for your next terrorist arsoning!
What? You Fed-Exed yourself to and from Estonia?
Yes I agree This happened to be in a Corsair, in which the seat was not designed for underwater egress. I was looking for a link real quick. Martin-Baker patented the Underwater Ejection System in 1965, and fitted it successfully to the Buccaneer.
Issues like what? Rotors not blowing off? Sure, there are issues like that, but look at the Harrier. They use explosive cords to detonate the canopy and the shards are so dangerous that they require pilots to have ther visors extended at all times. They even count on the canopy NOT shattering and the seat is made to break through it. All of this and I bet you would just love to fly in a harrier. And I bet the Army Apache is so wonderful too...too bad the Marine Cobra is more battle-worthy. I don't play video games. I tried America's Army once and it was unrealistic and complete propoganda so I quit. Talk about Mother Russia. Sheesh.
By the way, the ka-50 Havok was brought into service in 1997, well after the Communist Soviet Union fell apart. The Havok is nearly completely composite construction and fully aerobatic, including sustained inverted flight and barrel rolls. It is on the same technological level as the still-developing US Army Comanche. I am a Canadian with no connections whatsoever with Russia. With regards to your MK-J5D qualification...there are P.Eng's, too, who fail to grasp the importance of new innovation.
And I'm the King of England. Honestly, I could be the head engineer at Martin-Baker and you would still mouth off about being right because you represent an entire community. There are functional emergency egress systems for helicopters, and they WORK (hence functional).
On the other hand, no, I won't save you the embarassment. http://www.ejectionsite.com/eunderh2o.htm This is not one of the seats designed to eject underwater, but even it performed the feat in the end.
Look it up. I'll save you the public embarassment by letting you find the information in your own private time.
No part of it. You made a statement about pilots not having input simply because YOU are uncomfortable with it. I'm sure there are people who are dead afraid of normal ejection seats, but it doesn't make it a bad idea or unsafe.
If they can make ejection seats for jet fighters that will work UNDERWATER, they can make an ejection system for a helicopter that works. Your mind is glazed over enough to ignore the fact that such a system exists in reality, and works effectively. It's bad enough to be a naysayer about technology that has been developed for a long time, but to naysay something that has been proven in practice is just silly.
What part of "it works" don't you understand? If they had listened to people like you they would have given up and never perfected it.
Yes, this would work, as long as the fan cooled the cool side of the junction. If the fan directly cooled say a heat sink in parallel with the junction, the temp difference across the junction would decrease and the fan would actually slow down.
What you can do is sandwich the Peltier junction between the cpu and the sink. Since a Peltier junction is half copper, it is very efficient at flowing heat away from the source. The better the sink is, the heat flow through the Peltier increases.
Peltier junction. They work in reverse. ie: heat flow produces voltage.
I use a fairly new PiXiE monitor which is Trinitron equivalent.
Funny how I can extend the borders of my scan area about 1 inch beyond the bezel all around, and when I look closely I can see that there is phosphorus lit up as far as I can see inside. No clipping.
Edit: I know what you are saying, but have you not noticed that you can extend the scan area beyond the borders of the bezel? That's what I am saying...you remove the bezel, expand the screen even until it wraps around the corners of the face if you have that capability. Instant tiny-border, albeit with distortion from the wrapping at the edges.
You arent making any sense. If you remove the plastic, which IS the bezel last time I checked, then obviously the part behind the bezel is now revealed. You instantly can see the entire face of the tube, which really reduces the space between viewable areas of the monitors.
Did you even read the parent post? The parent to your post said to make the monitors open-frame. ie: by removing the bezel.
If you can solve the problem any better, you are welcome to.
Why not build a better car? They ARE, they are using technology to do it.