Teachers must be properly trained to use this technology to its fullest. I'm afraid that won't realistically happen until the next generation of teachers emerges that has grown up all their lives around computers.
Look, I'm 32 and I'm part of the generation that "grew up" with computers. I know of many guys a few years older than me who can say the same. I'm preparing(when I finish with/. of course) to teach my first math class at the local community college. Since many school teachers start younger than me, I have to assume that the "generation of teachers"..."that has grown up all their lives around computers" is here.
Incidentally, my lesson plans include a de-emphasis on the use of technology(compared to the CC's guidelines) because I believe the students need to learn to use the computer inside their skull before using an external computer/calculator. Computers are just tools, like hammers, and knowing how to use a hammer doesn't mean you know how to build a house. Don't get me wrong, my students will still have ample time to use the technology - it's great for visualization of mathematical concepts and for working problems that may not be practical with pencil and paper. In the latter case, it actually helps to build students' confidence in their abilities when they know they can use their skills to solve difficult problems.
But, yeah, no matter what you have, it's always going to be a question of how to use it effectively.
Yeah, I got one this morning, too - although it is a pretty rare occurance for me - and the thought of "slashdot getting slashdotted" did go through my mind... and I found a bit of preverse humor in it.:-)
The tripwire type devices do indeed help prevent separation by inducing a turbulent boundary layer, but at a price. Momentum transfer across a turbulent boundary layer is much greater than across a laminar one. This translates directly to drag. So, by transforming your laminar flow to turbulent to prevent separation, you're also increasing drag by a significant amount.
Please read your history, you obviously were around back then, the media coverage was so intense, you couldn't forget.
Actually, I was born about the time Apollo was finishing up... reading history is where I get my information. Quoting the book I mentioned above, page 106(second paragraph of the "Delta Seven" chaper in case editions are different: "Both MA-6 (John's flight) and MA-7 (mine) were intended to last for three orbits. In the original planning for Mercury, that had been intended as the culmination of the whole program It was the creation of the Apollo program, then Gemini, not to mention the Russians with their day-long flight, that encouraged us think about longer flights." You'll forgive me if I take the word of a Mercury astronaut over your's.:-)
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls... but this one is a little too silly to let pass.
1. The early Atlas rockets were known for exploding on the pad when they had a Mercury capsule mounted on them. You see, the spacecraft was a far heavier payload than the Atlas was designed to carry. They were originally intended to carry a modest nuclear warhead, not an astronaut and all the things needed to keep him alive. All the weak points in the Atlas were eventually strengthened, and it went on to lauch 4 guys into orbit without much trouble(Glenn, Carpenter, Schirra, and Cooper all rode Atlases).
In any case, you did notice, didn't you, that they're using an Atlas 5? Don't you think that after four more (numbered)generations, this just might be a more reliable rocket than guys in the '60s could ever wish for?
2. And the stuff about Glenn's flight? He was only ever scheduled for three orbits. Both his flight and Carpenter's flight were planned this way. If both proved to be successful, ony then would they try for more ambitious flights. Go take a look at the book Deke!, written by "chief" astronaut Deke Slayton. He goes into a lot of details of some of the planning of many of the missions.
As far as the rest of your comment goes, while I mostly agree with you, I also realize that since I'm living in a country with a democratic(ish) government, the sentiments of the majority will dictate(more or less) national policy. If the masses don't care for piloted space flight, neither will their representatives or sentators, which will eventually lead to the pathetic funding piloted space flight receives. I also think that, even with the limited budget, if the piloted space flight guys had permanenly grounded the shuttle after the Challenger accident and funneled all the shuttle budget after that into one or more R&D projects aimed at building a newer vehicle, we'd be much better off now. 20/20 hindsight, eh? Isn't it great?
I attended a seminar last semester(Arizona State) where a professor was presenting work his group was doing on the same problem(catching a flying object). If I remember correctly, his group was more concerned with the ability to navigate to where the robot needed to be to catch the ball than the actual mechanism of the catch. However, they were using the "constant or increasing angle" technique to great effect - both for lateral positioning as well as radial.
I tried to find a link for this guy's research group, but so far have been unable to. If I do locate it, I'll post again.
Re:stupid dumb moronic question
on
GCC 4.0.0 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
As I understand it - and I'm sure someone will correct me when I'm wrong - gcc is actually a suite of language-specific "front ends" which reduces a given language to a common intermediate form that is then compiled(and linked, etc) by the "back end" into the executable code. In a way you already have different compilers... they're just all grouped together in one package.
The string 'dead' does not appear anywhere in the article.
From the article: "Red Hat's decision to end support for its free software and the Novell-SuSE link-up have put the last nail in the coffin of the free-software model, the Redmond behemoth believes"
Hmm... where I come from, one only puts the last nails in a coffin if the thing in the coffin is dead. String parsing!=comprehension.
Let's not forget that a lot of NASA's budget goes into things not related to the space program. They do research into things like aviation technology; don't forget, NASA evolved from the NACA - the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. They do research in Computer and Information Sciences, geophysics, and biology.... and all of these example come from the NASA Ames Lab; there are 10 other NASA centers! I'm in favor of piloted space as much as anyone, but we have to be careful to bear in mind NASA's other tasks when we discuss what they do and do not have the resources to do.
I've been working in science for some time now and I would say that all, more or less, follow this basic way of doing things. Nobody sit around talking about how "we're into step four now"; the method is too deaply ingrained for that.
The reason people building useful stuff don't usually folow this is that they aren't doing science. Science is about learning how and why things work.
Re:Should be -2, Moronic
on
42-Volt Autos
·
· Score: 1
I expect I'll probably be wasting my time with this and I suppose/. isn't exactly the best place for a civility discussion. However, I would suggest you might get better reactions if you stay away from the name-calling. The parent posting made some points that I(also being ignorant of the auto industry) found myself nodding along with. You provided good, clear reasoning as to why the parent posting was mistaken. For that much, I thank you. It just would have been nice to not have to filter out all the bile you included with it.
While I agree, in principle, with what you've said, the point comes down to survival. Yes, it is possible that we will pollute ourselves into oblivion, but the fact that we can predict that it is possible is important. We know which actions will potentially lead to extinction; therefore we can choose to do something different. Saying that it is inevitable sounds a little bit like an arguement I have repeatedly with a friend of mine. I'm trying to get him to quit smoking, and his usual arguement is: "I'm going to die some day anyway, so it doesn't really matter"; my response is "why rush it?" No, the earth doesn't discriminate, but if we wish not to be extinct, we need to.
I recently attended a seminar here in Arizona(another state looking at large windfarms for supplementary power) where people are looking at California's experiences so mistakes aren't repeated. While it is true there are windmills that do move fast enough to kill birds, those are the "old generation" mills. Modern windmills use larger blades moving at a much slower speed - energy extraction is more efficient this way. The result is that bird deaths around these new windmills are practically zero.
I know that their design is a long way off, but they have been spending lots of time on a their motor designs. They've even been testing them on a Rutan designed Long EZ(modified, of course). Does anyone know if XCOR is officially an X-prize team? They're not on the list...
Slashdot Mirror
Look, I'm 32 and I'm part of the generation that "grew up" with computers. I know of many guys a few years older than me who can say the same. I'm preparing(when I finish with /. of course) to teach my first math class at the local community college. Since many school teachers start younger than me, I have to assume that the "generation of teachers"..."that has grown up all their lives around computers" is here.
Incidentally, my lesson plans include a de-emphasis on the use of technology(compared to the CC's guidelines) because I believe the students need to learn to use the computer inside their skull before using an external computer/calculator. Computers are just tools, like hammers, and knowing how to use a hammer doesn't mean you know how to build a house. Don't get me wrong, my students will still have ample time to use the technology - it's great for visualization of mathematical concepts and for working problems that may not be practical with pencil and paper. In the latter case, it actually helps to build students' confidence in their abilities when they know they can use their skills to solve difficult problems.
But, yeah, no matter what you have, it's always going to be a question of how to use it effectively.
"Both"? You mean there's more than 1?
Yeah, I got one this morning, too - although it is a pretty rare occurance for me - and the thought of "slashdot getting slashdotted" did go through my mind... and I found a bit of preverse humor in it. :-)
The tripwire type devices do indeed help prevent separation by inducing a turbulent boundary layer, but at a price. Momentum transfer across a turbulent boundary layer is much greater than across a laminar one. This translates directly to drag. So, by transforming your laminar flow to turbulent to prevent separation, you're also increasing drag by a significant amount.
I've got a pait of the 20K and a pair of 25XL - a bit dated, I know... but man, I love my lightspeeds... :)
Ahh... the American Dream in action... millions of years before there were "Americans" to dream... heh
You just had to ask, didn't you?
That's where all the bad colts come from....
Horses get pregnant from drinking water?
Actually, I was born about the time Apollo was finishing up... reading history is where I get my information. Quoting the book I mentioned above, page 106(second paragraph of the "Delta Seven" chaper in case editions are different: "Both MA-6 (John's flight) and MA-7 (mine) were intended to last for three orbits. In the original planning for Mercury, that had been intended as the culmination of the whole program It was the creation of the Apollo program, then Gemini, not to mention the Russians with their day-long flight, that encouraged us think about longer flights." You'll forgive me if I take the word of a Mercury astronaut over your's. :-)
1. The early Atlas rockets were known for exploding on the pad when they had a Mercury capsule mounted on them. You see, the spacecraft was a far heavier payload than the Atlas was designed to carry. They were originally intended to carry a modest nuclear warhead, not an astronaut and all the things needed to keep him alive. All the weak points in the Atlas were eventually strengthened, and it went on to lauch 4 guys into orbit without much trouble(Glenn, Carpenter, Schirra, and Cooper all rode Atlases).
In any case, you did notice, didn't you, that they're using an Atlas 5? Don't you think that after four more (numbered)generations, this just might be a more reliable rocket than guys in the '60s could ever wish for?
2. And the stuff about Glenn's flight? He was only ever scheduled for three orbits. Both his flight and Carpenter's flight were planned this way. If both proved to be successful, ony then would they try for more ambitious flights. Go take a look at the book Deke!, written by "chief" astronaut Deke Slayton. He goes into a lot of details of some of the planning of many of the missions.
As far as the rest of your comment goes, while I mostly agree with you, I also realize that since I'm living in a country with a democratic(ish) government, the sentiments of the majority will dictate(more or less) national policy. If the masses don't care for piloted space flight, neither will their representatives or sentators, which will eventually lead to the pathetic funding piloted space flight receives. I also think that, even with the limited budget, if the piloted space flight guys had permanenly grounded the shuttle after the Challenger accident and funneled all the shuttle budget after that into one or more R&D projects aimed at building a newer vehicle, we'd be much better off now. 20/20 hindsight, eh? Isn't it great?
I tried to find a link for this guy's research group, but so far have been unable to. If I do locate it, I'll post again.
Does it involve the song "Dancing Queen"?
As I understand it - and I'm sure someone will correct me when I'm wrong - gcc is actually a suite of language-specific "front ends" which reduces a given language to a common intermediate form that is then compiled(and linked, etc) by the "back end" into the executable code. In a way you already have different compilers... they're just all grouped together in one package.
I am John Parker... see Buckaroo Banzai now?
You mean blowing shit up and barbequing weiners?
What about the Cray(formerly Tera) MTA system? These were hitting the supercomputing community at least 5 years ago...
The string 'dead' does not appear anywhere in the article.
From the article: "Red Hat's decision to end support for its free software and the Novell-SuSE link-up have put the last nail in the coffin of the free-software model, the Redmond behemoth believes"
Hmm... where I come from, one only puts the last nails in a coffin if the thing in the coffin is dead. String parsing!=comprehension.
Let's not forget that a lot of NASA's budget goes into things not related to the space program. They do research into things like aviation technology; don't forget, NASA evolved from the NACA - the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. They do research in Computer and Information Sciences, geophysics, and biology.... and all of these example come from the NASA Ames Lab; there are 10 other NASA centers! I'm in favor of piloted space as much as anyone, but we have to be careful to bear in mind NASA's other tasks when we discuss what they do and do not have the resources to do.
Unless, of course, you happen to own an airplane based in the DC area, or in any region Air Force One happens to be...
The reason people building useful stuff don't usually folow this is that they aren't doing science. Science is about learning how and why things work.
I expect I'll probably be wasting my time with this and I suppose /. isn't exactly the best place for a civility discussion. However, I would suggest you might get better reactions if you stay away from the name-calling. The parent posting made some points that I(also being ignorant of the auto industry) found myself nodding along with. You provided good, clear reasoning as to why the parent posting was mistaken. For that much, I thank you. It just would have been nice to not have to filter out all the bile you included with it.
While I agree, in principle, with what you've said, the point comes down to survival. Yes, it is possible that we will pollute ourselves into oblivion, but the fact that we can predict that it is possible is important. We know which actions will potentially lead to extinction; therefore we can choose to do something different. Saying that it is inevitable sounds a little bit like an arguement I have repeatedly with a friend of mine. I'm trying to get him to quit smoking, and his usual arguement is: "I'm going to die some day anyway, so it doesn't really matter"; my response is "why rush it?" No, the earth doesn't discriminate, but if we wish not to be extinct, we need to.
I recently attended a seminar here in Arizona(another state looking at large windfarms for supplementary power) where people are looking at California's experiences so mistakes aren't repeated. While it is true there are windmills that do move fast enough to kill birds, those are the "old generation" mills. Modern windmills use larger blades moving at a much slower speed - energy extraction is more efficient this way. The result is that bird deaths around these new windmills are practically zero.
> Go Ducks! Good job on this one. Beavers, too! :-)
I know that their design is a long way off, but they have been spending lots of time on a their motor designs. They've even been testing them on a Rutan designed Long EZ(modified, of course). Does anyone know if XCOR is officially an X-prize team? They're not on the list...