Lizardtech already has an algorithm that successfully compresses images up to 300% of their initial size. It's been around for years and years and is very good. It is nearly impossible to see and loss of resolution. It is already used for satellite image compression and is proven. We actually use it to transmit images of newspaper pages in high quality, high resolution over the web for purposes of advertisers 'oking' their adverts in the layout.
30% compression absolutely sucks and is like someone heralding that they have built the first plane today. It's moronic actually to think that someone wasted their time doing something that has already been done and then compounding it by doing a poor job at it. I am not trying to be obtuse, just realistic.
>If not supporting Micro$oft and increasing their stranglehold on development and innovation makes us communists, what does it make those who support Micro$soft's dictatorship?
Capitalists. You talk as though communism was a dirty word. Open Source Software is essentially based on the same type of foundation that communism and socialism are based on. Sharing the rewards of the work with everyone regards of their status and regardless of whether they contributed. Is that such a bad thing? I hope not. Maybe there is actually more merit to communism than there is in capitalism. That is something each individual has to figure out for themselves. The easy line for dividing the two groups though is financial status. The wealthy will almost always support capitalism tooth and nail, it's how they got there and what keeps them there. The poor and underclassed will almost always support socialism or to use the 'dirty' word, communism. It is their hope of having a better life for themselves and their children as often wealth is out of their reach.
A lot of people want to agrue the 'out of reach' wealth part, but those arguesments are entirely based on 'opportunity'. Sure there is opportunity in the US and other countries, for those that have the money to buy the opportunity. As a poor uneducated child of a poor family, you cannot recieve the advanced education that you must have to get your foot in the door of a company who will pay you well. Times have changed in the US, we have set up a system where on the wealthy can raise children who can be wealthy. The poor haven't any hope. Don't give the the financial aid bit, have you tried it lately? All of the cutbacks have caused a situation where all of the aid will only get you 60% of the way there. Without any means to pay that other 40% you are stuck without recourse. The upper class consistantly points their finger at the 'AID' button making it seem as though their is a way out, when there really isn't.
Do I sound like an underprivelaged, uneducated poor sap? I am well educated, privaleged and earn a good income. I just don't want to be a hipocrate like so many of the other A'holes out there who walk on the backs of the poor to get their cake. It's not fair and we keep building on top of that unfair structure. Open Source is a glimmer of light that shines through the crack in that wall that seperates the wealthy from the poor. The 'capitalists' like Gates, are afraid that they will get a crowbar via open source and be able to compromise the foundation of their empire.
Yea I have to agree with you. I think that there is a lot of potential for Open Source software, includung Linux, to blossom in a number of areas. One of th biggest hurdles is the group of people out there who are going to use the open source software as a set of tools to steal hack crack and such. The manufacturers are going to shake a heavy finger at that and try very hard to paint the entire community with that brush. It is up to us, who use this stuff for legal purposes, to clean our own houses. I don't want these guys cleaning it for me.
We have used this same strategy to pick up converstations around the glode here at Echelon for years. Oops, I wasn't supposed to say that. Forget you ever heard that.
Nobody can tell me that someone at Google has not ever used soemthing other than google for searching. If they haven't ever tried the competition, then I would say they will not last very long if they won't look at what they are doing. They must look at the others to see how they compare. Therefore 100% cannot possibly be correct.
I hate to digress off the issue at hand, but you bring up something that should be part of our collective common sense. We should have learned a lesson with Prohibition. We are proving that we learned absolutely NOTHING. You CANNOT tell someone they cannot have something because someone else thinks it is wrong. It will only serve to make that group of people want it even more, use more devisious methods to get it and commit more crimes in other areas to get to that end. We see that history already repeating itself with the 'prohibition' of 'illiciet' drugs, such a marajuana. Stealing is one thing, but in the case of drugs, stealing happens because people want the end product that is illegal and is illegal to fund legally. The whole business of creating, farming and selling drugs had ought to be regulated in the same fashion as alcohol is today. It would decrease the overall usage. Provide help for those who have real problems with it. Enable groups to appoarch the issues surrounding it's use with an air of sanity instead of the 'brain on drugs' mentality. The vast majority of the people who have tried illegal drugs are still alive and functioning well in society today. You tell a kid that they will ruin their ability to think properly, learn, and function in society then they try it and see it is all lies only wonders what other lies they are being told too. That is what leads to great usage. That is what leads to escalation in types of drugs being used. They lied about these things, then they must be lieing about the rest.
Stealing is NOT the same type of offense and I don't see where you can draw a parallel to drugs. I do not see this as an issue about prohibition to 'stealing'. If you don't like the word stealing applied theft of copyrighted songs, then perhaps you should petition the artists themselves to stop copyrighting them to begin with. It isn't a matter of the end result being wrong, it's a matter of the process being broken and people continueing to participate in a broken process. If it's that bad, then perhaps they will justy stop using it. Nothing forces an artist to to work through RIAA to produce music. You can point to money as an issue, but it is you who are supplying the money to RIAA in the first place. Stop buying music from artists associated with RIAA then and the organization will quickly collapse and the artists will stop using them. The solution is simply, it's a matter of getting the majority of the people to start doing it.
A quick follow up. Here is a lexicon of words that have different meanings between the British and Americans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_words_having_ different_meanings_in_British_and_American_English
When you have to explain something funny, it it obviously wasted on the person to whom you have to explain it to. We were playing on some words that have different meanings between english in Engalnd and English in America. Pissed happens to be one of those. Being 'pissed' in England means to be drunk, being 'pissed' in America means to be upset. Two very different meanings depending on what continent you happen to utter the word. THAT is what we were playing with. Not that the word means both things, but that it's utterance in different places means different things. Get it now?
I agree, then on top of that, I get modded down as off-topic. If you say anything that is 'observant' or factual in regards to a news post here, you stand the chance of being flagged as a troll, offtopic, flamebait or redundant. Seems awfully silly to get modded down for simply stating that the news is really old, not new as the article post strongly suggests, 'just completed', yea last week.
yea, I would be pretty pissed if my laptop got nicked.;) oh! but pissed means 'drunk' over there too. Maybe I wouldn't be able to afford to be 'pissed' then.
My supposition is based on M theory, (better known as string theory). M Theory has been heralded as the 'unifying' theory of all of the different 'string theories' that have been published. There are those who strongly disagree that M theory is any better than any other supposition and is a wild stab in the dark. I think that it is an elegant explaination of all of the different theories that are currently out there and even explains why those different theories may all be right in their own regard. It is not something that I can explain in a reply and I am not sure where there may be a decent write up of it on the web. M Theory, as stated, is a unifying strategy for the other String Theories that are out there. Here is a simple overview of them, http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/qg_ss.ht ml and http://www.benbest.com/science/standard.html . The largest point within the theory that I am standing on is the gravitron. No, not the ride at the midway, the particle (if we can really use the word particle here).
The hardest thing for people to understand today seems to be that we do not yet have ANY understanding of the cause of gravity. We know it's effects via Newton's observations and subsequent theories, but nothing exists on the causal side of the equation. the gravitron is a proposed theory for that causal side, but still just a theory. I, for one, think that it is by far the best explaination that we have to date and stand by it, so far. Where does our understanding of gravity go from there if we were to suppose that it were truth? No one really knows, again. Probably CERN's new collider will give us some insight here if it can really detect those heavy 'particles' that are thought to drop out of the current collection areas.
The basis of my frustration is this; the prediction of the 'wobble' and speed change is based on the old set of theories without regard to string and/or particle physics and the possible existence of the gravitron. If that one point is ever found to be true, then this prediction most probably would prove to be false. Why? That might take a document on the scale of several hundred pages to explain. Stated as short as possible understanding that it will inject suppositional errors? Well, that would have to be that a change in the position of a portion of the earth's mass, while equally displacing other portions of mass, will not effect the overall distribution of gravitrons being cause to pass through our dimension(s). It would litterally take an outside addition or subtraction of mass or energy to produce the effect that they are proclaiming has happened.
I am frustrated trying to put this into layman's terms, as you can possibly tell. I would be interested in your brother's take on this too.
Here is an experiment you can do to understnad what I am driving at. It is much more representative of of reality than the simply stool trick. Take a bed sheet suspend it by it's four edges and put a heavy sphere in the middle. Now find two sphere's of the same weight but substantially different diameters. We only want the different diameters largely differnt so you can see the effect of a compressed mass as opposed to one that is not compressed. Roll the larger shpere around the dimple or depression that is made by the larger sphere in the middle of the sheet. Take the smaller mass and roll it in exactly the same way as the larger mass of the same weight. observe what happens to the rotation of the smaller mass as it travels forward.
My arguement is based on more forward science that 1940's grade school physics here. It based on the theory that the earth spins as an result of an outside force, not it's own, and revovles around the suns as a result of the gravitational effects of the sun's mass, not the earth's. This is standard accepted astro physics. The earth is not the center of the cause and effect equation. The sun is to is. The smaller mass with the same has a different result based on that than if you only accept the earth in the equation and forget why the earth spins in the first place.
I feel like a lone sane person in an insane assylum trying to explain this. I know that it is right, but I am not sure how to explain it on a simple enough level so that it is understood. I am flabbergasted and astounded that some 'scientist' today would have the lack of understanding to make such a statement and not take into account the larger cause and effect picture that you must to determine the outcome. It's quite frustrating and annoying. I keep trying though. Maybe some day someone will look back and say, "Yea he was right! Poor soul got laughed out of the public forum, but he was right."
If you are measuring degrees turned per second that is right. I was countering the charge that the speed, feet per second at the surface would be faster. That would be false. The speed that the surface of the sphere is actually moving at less feet per second that before. There are a lot move formulas that need to be considered when trying to determine if the surface of the earth actually sped up or slowed down. The big one is determining if the core sped up or slowed down, as it actually turns at a different rate than the surface. The second is to find the new apparent center of the mass and figure out a change in gravity has resulted in the change in the denisty and position of the center of the mass as it relates to the center of the axis it is spinning on. There can then, and only then, be some calculations done to figure out how the revolutions are effected as the fulcrum of the new mass center versus the axis center has changed. You then can reverse the equations and determine if the speed at the surface of that sphere has sped up or slowed down as a result of the compression.
It simply is not as easy as taking a simple experiment as spinning on a stool and drawing in your legs. The two are similar, but not completely relational. The arguement seems in conflict with the common sense answer, but the physics of the whole set of equations, taking into account how a possibly denser mass would effect the gravity of the sun we revolve around, (or more simply, but more incorrect, how the suns gravity effects us with a change in mass), is much much more complex. It's almost the same arguement as a flat earth and a round earth. You have to look at the bigger picture. The rotation of the earth is actually a result of the sun's gravity, not the other way around. I know it seems wrong to a lot of people, but it really isn't. The deep set of equations proves, (or really thoery), that out.
Remember relativity? Where are you measuring from? What is your perspective or how are you relative to the measurement? If you stick your feet out, the speed at which your feet are moving is actually faster than if they were retracted. Your eyes, on the other hand, are at the center or axis and move slower. Your feet actually move at a greater distance per unit of time than when they are tucked in, despite your perception. The measurement at the axis of spin, IS going to be slower. Try it and measure it yourself.
I will remind you that we live on the outer crust of the earth, not in the mantel or core. So our perspective on the speed, at the crust's surface, is going to be different than that at the core.
Try to remember your University physics! Oh, sorry I forgot you failed that course!
Remember relativity? Where are you measuring from? What is your perspective or how are you relative to the measurement? If you stick your feet out, the speed at which your feet are moving is actually faster than if they were retracted. Your eyes, on the other hand, are at the center or axis and move slower. Your feet actually move at a greater distance per unit of time than when they are tucked in, despite your perception. The measurement at the axis of spin, IS going to be slower. Try it and measure it yourself.
I will remind you that we live on the outer crust of the earth, not in the mantel or core. So our perspective on the speed, at the crust's surface, is going to be different than that at the core.
Try to remember your University physics!
It really doesn't matter. The dude is speaking out his butt, because he really doesn't know if the earth compressed, expanded or simply burped. There is currently no way for measuring the result definitavely, so the point is mute and wasted to begin with.
Further compression of the earth's mass would actually slow the earth down, not speed it up. Someone has there physics in a wad. Think of it this way. If you are being swung in a cricle and you then extend your legs. The result is that you swing faster, because your mass is distributed further from the center of the rotation. Not the other way around. Freaking dorks don't know what they are talking about. Secondly, the earth did not change it's mass, so travel around the sun is NOT going to be effected in the slightest. It would take an outside force to effect that, not an inside one.
Fix Unix who? I hate it when people only use first names. Besides I thought I heard that Unix whoever was dead! How can you fix someone who is dead? Bury them again? Would someone please ask Mr. Linux, Unix's son I believe, what his dad's first name was? We need to fill out the gravestone properly you see.;)
I took the old Ataria 2600 I had when I was a kid out of the box. It still worked. My mother, (yes she is a senior) wants it so bad now. She loves it. She belived it would rot your brain when I was young. Lol, how our perceptions change as the world around us changes.
You miss so many good things with that attitude. I'll bet you you never heard of 'Click and Clack' brothers on NPR. Do you know what NPR is? My eleven year old son LOVES the car guys. They are funny and it IS JUST radio. There is a world to be seen or heard in many different mediums. You can't simply dismiss them because they don't interest you. That's EXACTLY what breeds contempt, bias and bigotry.
Makes me think about something that I saw over the weekend on TV. They were saying how bad kids were becoming because they played video games instead of 'old fashion' things like lego blocks and erector sets. I wanted to punch the broad who was doing the news article. One, Lego block are not the old. Two lego blocks were evil to parents in the time they were made too. The kept the kids from 'going outside' to play. They didn't teach you how to spell or do math. They were abstract and did not fit into the logic needed to 'condition' a mind in a way that would be successful in this world. We laugh at those things now. Back then it was serious. Now they are just as serious about all of the 'new' stuff. History repeating itself is all that is. Get over it people.
I hate to see people say things like this. It is so anti-social. Unless everybody does everything in the fashion they did when you were young, and everything was good, they are bad. Gosh I remember there being a whole uproar about cartoons on Saturday. Even the government got involved because they thought cartoons were the big evil for kids minds there could possibly ever be. They created school house rock or something like that to interject in the comercial sections. They felt that made it better and your brain wouldn't rot. Now look. This stuff we grew up with, that was so bad, is now old fashioned and good. It will happen the same way for this generation as it did for ours. Rememebr the car was evil too, when it was created. Laws were passed to keep them off the roads because they were so vile. everything new is evil to someone. Don't listen to them. It is those people that are evil. Not the things they point fingers at.
You apparently don't have kids that age. I have an eleven year old at home and he talks EXACTLY like that. Well, my son is a bit more smart mouthed than that, but I would say that it is very accurate for the age group.
Slashdot Mirror
Lizardtech already has an algorithm that successfully compresses images up to 300% of their initial size. It's been around for years and years and is very good. It is nearly impossible to see and loss of resolution. It is already used for satellite image compression and is proven. We actually use it to transmit images of newspaper pages in high quality, high resolution over the web for purposes of advertisers 'oking' their adverts in the layout.
30% compression absolutely sucks and is like someone heralding that they have built the first plane today. It's moronic actually to think that someone wasted their time doing something that has already been done and then compounding it by doing a poor job at it. I am not trying to be obtuse, just realistic.
>If not supporting Micro$oft and increasing their stranglehold on development and innovation makes us communists, what does it make those who support Micro$soft's dictatorship? Capitalists. You talk as though communism was a dirty word. Open Source Software is essentially based on the same type of foundation that communism and socialism are based on. Sharing the rewards of the work with everyone regards of their status and regardless of whether they contributed. Is that such a bad thing? I hope not. Maybe there is actually more merit to communism than there is in capitalism. That is something each individual has to figure out for themselves. The easy line for dividing the two groups though is financial status. The wealthy will almost always support capitalism tooth and nail, it's how they got there and what keeps them there. The poor and underclassed will almost always support socialism or to use the 'dirty' word, communism. It is their hope of having a better life for themselves and their children as often wealth is out of their reach.
A lot of people want to agrue the 'out of reach' wealth part, but those arguesments are entirely based on 'opportunity'. Sure there is opportunity in the US and other countries, for those that have the money to buy the opportunity. As a poor uneducated child of a poor family, you cannot recieve the advanced education that you must have to get your foot in the door of a company who will pay you well. Times have changed in the US, we have set up a system where on the wealthy can raise children who can be wealthy. The poor haven't any hope. Don't give the the financial aid bit, have you tried it lately? All of the cutbacks have caused a situation where all of the aid will only get you 60% of the way there. Without any means to pay that other 40% you are stuck without recourse. The upper class consistantly points their finger at the 'AID' button making it seem as though their is a way out, when there really isn't.
Do I sound like an underprivelaged, uneducated poor sap? I am well educated, privaleged and earn a good income. I just don't want to be a hipocrate like so many of the other A'holes out there who walk on the backs of the poor to get their cake. It's not fair and we keep building on top of that unfair structure. Open Source is a glimmer of light that shines through the crack in that wall that seperates the wealthy from the poor. The 'capitalists' like Gates, are afraid that they will get a crowbar via open source and be able to compromise the foundation of their empire.
Yea I have to agree with you. I think that there is a lot of potential for Open Source software, includung Linux, to blossom in a number of areas. One of th biggest hurdles is the group of people out there who are going to use the open source software as a set of tools to steal hack crack and such. The manufacturers are going to shake a heavy finger at that and try very hard to paint the entire community with that brush. It is up to us, who use this stuff for legal purposes, to clean our own houses. I don't want these guys cleaning it for me.
We have used this same strategy to pick up converstations around the glode here at Echelon for years. Oops, I wasn't supposed to say that. Forget you ever heard that.
Nobody can tell me that someone at Google has not ever used soemthing other than google for searching. If they haven't ever tried the competition, then I would say they will not last very long if they won't look at what they are doing. They must look at the others to see how they compare. Therefore 100% cannot possibly be correct.
I hate to digress off the issue at hand, but you bring up something that should be part of our collective common sense. We should have learned a lesson with Prohibition. We are proving that we learned absolutely NOTHING. You CANNOT tell someone they cannot have something because someone else thinks it is wrong. It will only serve to make that group of people want it even more, use more devisious methods to get it and commit more crimes in other areas to get to that end. We see that history already repeating itself with the 'prohibition' of 'illiciet' drugs, such a marajuana. Stealing is one thing, but in the case of drugs, stealing happens because people want the end product that is illegal and is illegal to fund legally. The whole business of creating, farming and selling drugs had ought to be regulated in the same fashion as alcohol is today. It would decrease the overall usage. Provide help for those who have real problems with it. Enable groups to appoarch the issues surrounding it's use with an air of sanity instead of the 'brain on drugs' mentality. The vast majority of the people who have tried illegal drugs are still alive and functioning well in society today. You tell a kid that they will ruin their ability to think properly, learn, and function in society then they try it and see it is all lies only wonders what other lies they are being told too. That is what leads to great usage. That is what leads to escalation in types of drugs being used. They lied about these things, then they must be lieing about the rest.
Stealing is NOT the same type of offense and I don't see where you can draw a parallel to drugs. I do not see this as an issue about prohibition to 'stealing'. If you don't like the word stealing applied theft of copyrighted songs, then perhaps you should petition the artists themselves to stop copyrighting them to begin with. It isn't a matter of the end result being wrong, it's a matter of the process being broken and people continueing to participate in a broken process. If it's that bad, then perhaps they will justy stop using it. Nothing forces an artist to to work through RIAA to produce music. You can point to money as an issue, but it is you who are supplying the money to RIAA in the first place. Stop buying music from artists associated with RIAA then and the organization will quickly collapse and the artists will stop using them. The solution is simply, it's a matter of getting the majority of the people to start doing it.
A quick follow up. Here is a lexicon of words that have different meanings between the British and Americans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_words_having_ different_meanings_in_British_and_American_English
When you have to explain something funny, it it obviously wasted on the person to whom you have to explain it to. We were playing on some words that have different meanings between english in Engalnd and English in America. Pissed happens to be one of those. Being 'pissed' in England means to be drunk, being 'pissed' in America means to be upset. Two very different meanings depending on what continent you happen to utter the word. THAT is what we were playing with. Not that the word means both things, but that it's utterance in different places means different things. Get it now?
pissed in 'english' simply means drunk. no modifiers needed.
I agree, then on top of that, I get modded down as off-topic. If you say anything that is 'observant' or factual in regards to a news post here, you stand the chance of being flagged as a troll, offtopic, flamebait or redundant. Seems awfully silly to get modded down for simply stating that the news is really old, not new as the article post strongly suggests, 'just completed', yea last week.
This was news last week, not today. Week old news posted as headlines is sad. Very very sad.
yea, I would be pretty pissed if my laptop got nicked. ;) oh! but pissed means 'drunk' over there too. Maybe I wouldn't be able to afford to be 'pissed' then.
My supposition is based on M theory, (better known as string theory). M Theory has been heralded as the 'unifying' theory of all of the different 'string theories' that have been published. There are those who strongly disagree that M theory is any better than any other supposition and is a wild stab in the dark. I think that it is an elegant explaination of all of the different theories that are currently out there and even explains why those different theories may all be right in their own regard. It is not something that I can explain in a reply and I am not sure where there may be a decent write up of it on the web. M Theory, as stated, is a unifying strategy for the other String Theories that are out there. Here is a simple overview of them, http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/qg_ss.ht ml and http://www.benbest.com/science/standard.html . The largest point within the theory that I am standing on is the gravitron. No, not the ride at the midway, the particle (if we can really use the word particle here).
The hardest thing for people to understand today seems to be that we do not yet have ANY understanding of the cause of gravity. We know it's effects via Newton's observations and subsequent theories, but nothing exists on the causal side of the equation. the gravitron is a proposed theory for that causal side, but still just a theory. I, for one, think that it is by far the best explaination that we have to date and stand by it, so far. Where does our understanding of gravity go from there if we were to suppose that it were truth? No one really knows, again. Probably CERN's new collider will give us some insight here if it can really detect those heavy 'particles' that are thought to drop out of the current collection areas.
The basis of my frustration is this; the prediction of the 'wobble' and speed change is based on the old set of theories without regard to string and/or particle physics and the possible existence of the gravitron. If that one point is ever found to be true, then this prediction most probably would prove to be false. Why? That might take a document on the scale of several hundred pages to explain. Stated as short as possible understanding that it will inject suppositional errors? Well, that would have to be that a change in the position of a portion of the earth's mass, while equally displacing other portions of mass, will not effect the overall distribution of gravitrons being cause to pass through our dimension(s). It would litterally take an outside addition or subtraction of mass or energy to produce the effect that they are proclaiming has happened.
I am frustrated trying to put this into layman's terms, as you can possibly tell. I would be interested in your brother's take on this too.
Here is an experiment you can do to understnad what I am driving at. It is much more representative of of reality than the simply stool trick. Take a bed sheet suspend it by it's four edges and put a heavy sphere in the middle. Now find two sphere's of the same weight but substantially different diameters. We only want the different diameters largely differnt so you can see the effect of a compressed mass as opposed to one that is not compressed. Roll the larger shpere around the dimple or depression that is made by the larger sphere in the middle of the sheet. Take the smaller mass and roll it in exactly the same way as the larger mass of the same weight. observe what happens to the rotation of the smaller mass as it travels forward.
My arguement is based on more forward science that 1940's grade school physics here. It based on the theory that the earth spins as an result of an outside force, not it's own, and revovles around the suns as a result of the gravitational effects of the sun's mass, not the earth's. This is standard accepted astro physics. The earth is not the center of the cause and effect equation. The sun is to is. The smaller mass with the same has a different result based on that than if you only accept the earth in the equation and forget why the earth spins in the first place.
I feel like a lone sane person in an insane assylum trying to explain this. I know that it is right, but I am not sure how to explain it on a simple enough level so that it is understood. I am flabbergasted and astounded that some 'scientist' today would have the lack of understanding to make such a statement and not take into account the larger cause and effect picture that you must to determine the outcome. It's quite frustrating and annoying. I keep trying though. Maybe some day someone will look back and say, "Yea he was right! Poor soul got laughed out of the public forum, but he was right."
If you are measuring degrees turned per second that is right. I was countering the charge that the speed, feet per second at the surface would be faster. That would be false. The speed that the surface of the sphere is actually moving at less feet per second that before. There are a lot move formulas that need to be considered when trying to determine if the surface of the earth actually sped up or slowed down. The big one is determining if the core sped up or slowed down, as it actually turns at a different rate than the surface. The second is to find the new apparent center of the mass and figure out a change in gravity has resulted in the change in the denisty and position of the center of the mass as it relates to the center of the axis it is spinning on. There can then, and only then, be some calculations done to figure out how the revolutions are effected as the fulcrum of the new mass center versus the axis center has changed. You then can reverse the equations and determine if the speed at the surface of that sphere has sped up or slowed down as a result of the compression.
It simply is not as easy as taking a simple experiment as spinning on a stool and drawing in your legs. The two are similar, but not completely relational. The arguement seems in conflict with the common sense answer, but the physics of the whole set of equations, taking into account how a possibly denser mass would effect the gravity of the sun we revolve around, (or more simply, but more incorrect, how the suns gravity effects us with a change in mass), is much much more complex. It's almost the same arguement as a flat earth and a round earth. You have to look at the bigger picture. The rotation of the earth is actually a result of the sun's gravity, not the other way around. I know it seems wrong to a lot of people, but it really isn't. The deep set of equations proves, (or really thoery), that out.
Remember relativity? Where are you measuring from? What is your perspective or how are you relative to the measurement? If you stick your feet out, the speed at which your feet are moving is actually faster than if they were retracted. Your eyes, on the other hand, are at the center or axis and move slower. Your feet actually move at a greater distance per unit of time than when they are tucked in, despite your perception. The measurement at the axis of spin, IS going to be slower. Try it and measure it yourself.
I will remind you that we live on the outer crust of the earth, not in the mantel or core. So our perspective on the speed, at the crust's surface, is going to be different than that at the core.
Try to remember your University physics! Oh, sorry I forgot you failed that course!
Remember relativity? Where are you measuring from? What is your perspective or how are you relative to the measurement? If you stick your feet out, the speed at which your feet are moving is actually faster than if they were retracted. Your eyes, on the other hand, are at the center or axis and move slower. Your feet actually move at a greater distance per unit of time than when they are tucked in, despite your perception. The measurement at the axis of spin, IS going to be slower. Try it and measure it yourself.
I will remind you that we live on the outer crust of the earth, not in the mantel or core. So our perspective on the speed, at the crust's surface, is going to be different than that at the core.
Try to remember your University physics! It really doesn't matter. The dude is speaking out his butt, because he really doesn't know if the earth compressed, expanded or simply burped. There is currently no way for measuring the result definitavely, so the point is mute and wasted to begin with.
Further compression of the earth's mass would actually slow the earth down, not speed it up. Someone has there physics in a wad. Think of it this way. If you are being swung in a cricle and you then extend your legs. The result is that you swing faster, because your mass is distributed further from the center of the rotation. Not the other way around. Freaking dorks don't know what they are talking about. Secondly, the earth did not change it's mass, so travel around the sun is NOT going to be effected in the slightest. It would take an outside force to effect that, not an inside one.
I pay enough in taxes already. You can send them the check for the services to monitor other countries problems such as this. Nothing is free.
Fix Unix who? I hate it when people only use first names. Besides I thought I heard that Unix whoever was dead! How can you fix someone who is dead? Bury them again? Would someone please ask Mr. Linux, Unix's son I believe, what his dad's first name was? We need to fill out the gravestone properly you see. ;)
I took the old Ataria 2600 I had when I was a kid out of the box. It still worked. My mother, (yes she is a senior) wants it so bad now. She loves it. She belived it would rot your brain when I was young. Lol, how our perceptions change as the world around us changes.
You miss so many good things with that attitude. I'll bet you you never heard of 'Click and Clack' brothers on NPR. Do you know what NPR is? My eleven year old son LOVES the car guys. They are funny and it IS JUST radio. There is a world to be seen or heard in many different mediums. You can't simply dismiss them because they don't interest you. That's EXACTLY what breeds contempt, bias and bigotry.
Makes me think about something that I saw over the weekend on TV. They were saying how bad kids were becoming because they played video games instead of 'old fashion' things like lego blocks and erector sets. I wanted to punch the broad who was doing the news article. One, Lego block are not the old. Two lego blocks were evil to parents in the time they were made too. The kept the kids from 'going outside' to play. They didn't teach you how to spell or do math. They were abstract and did not fit into the logic needed to 'condition' a mind in a way that would be successful in this world. We laugh at those things now. Back then it was serious. Now they are just as serious about all of the 'new' stuff. History repeating itself is all that is. Get over it people.
>without the negative societal consequences.
I hate to see people say things like this. It is so anti-social. Unless everybody does everything in the fashion they did when you were young, and everything was good, they are bad. Gosh I remember there being a whole uproar about cartoons on Saturday. Even the government got involved because they thought cartoons were the big evil for kids minds there could possibly ever be. They created school house rock or something like that to interject in the comercial sections. They felt that made it better and your brain wouldn't rot. Now look. This stuff we grew up with, that was so bad, is now old fashioned and good. It will happen the same way for this generation as it did for ours. Rememebr the car was evil too, when it was created. Laws were passed to keep them off the roads because they were so vile. everything new is evil to someone. Don't listen to them. It is those people that are evil. Not the things they point fingers at.
You apparently don't have kids that age. I have an eleven year old at home and he talks EXACTLY like that. Well, my son is a bit more smart mouthed than that, but I would say that it is very accurate for the age group.