from the car's perspective, the light is moving away from it at C, but it's moving forward at.5C, so the light is only getting closer to the observer at.5C
I always had problem figuring out this... I mean, it's logical and all, like if I would be throwing a ball instead of photon, but isn't the speed of light a constant? If it is, how come it would go at.5C from the observer point of view?
I understand the maths, it is kind of... simple (1 - 1/2 = 1/2:-P) but it is the concept that light, if its speed is a constant, should always travel at the same speed that baffles me in this. Would care to explain it to me?
Directly from the article : Most computational origamists are driven by sheer curiosity and the aesthetic pleasure of these structures, but their work is also finding application in fields like astronomy and protein folding, and even automobile safety.
I'm tempted to flame you like hell but well, it's just that I've read TFA. My bad, sorry!:-P
I'll try to explain it in laymans terms for you...
He means that he did not find a number which is part of an infinite quantity of infinite supply and for which there is also an infinite number of. Get it? Good.
Now, for my part I do not give much credibility to a guy who can't even find a number for which there is an infinite quantity. F*ck, just pick one and there you are! But again, I must concede that to find a number (for which similar number exists in an infinite supply) must be harder to do if you look for ONE specific number and you need to look for it thru an indenumerably infinite supply of those. I imagine the complexity of it must be an indenumerably infinite order of magnitude harder to do then to find the bug I am actually tracking which also exist in an indenumerably infinite supply of in the application I am currently working on.
Now I think I've done my fair share of productivity in this world today and I'll just go back to sleep, thank you.
clients rarely know what they want... satisfying a client... is a very difficult thing. Then, when they bitch and moan... ...will impact *your* bottom line, not theirs.
So if I understand corretly, and correct me if I'm wrong, dealing with a client is alot like dealing with my wife?
I live in Quebec and we frequently get -25 Celcius during the winter... Do we complain about not getting any heat from the gulf stream? No! you incensitive whatever!!!
Just an observation, but I would think that 100 years between the point where we had been observing birds to make the first wing and the point where we observe whales to enhance them is pretty good. Because as you said, nature got millions of years to perfect those "design" so for us to do it in a couple hundred years is pretty good I think!:)
Well, it is easy to brag here on slashdot, but I am pretty sure that if you were a security researcher who had just discovered the next remote hole in MS (not M$) software, you would just stfu and take the money to pay your bill, feed your childrens, buy a gift to your wife and finally just try to live a decent life like everyone else would. "I'd punish them hard, then donate the proceeds to the FSF to keep Linux Free.". Yeah right...
I'm tired of people sounding like 14 years old teenagers around here...
I always wondered if, in those case when the setup is stationary (as it is the case here), if it would not be more efficient to just use (lets say) a big block of steel to store potential energy...
They could just use a small electric motor to lift up the steel block up a rail of some kind so they would accumulate potential energy (mechanical batteries?). Then, when they would need to use the stored energy, they could let this steel block go down slowly (with reduction gears etc etc) which would in turn drive a generator...
I really don't know, but I would think that much less energy would be lost due to friction and heat in such a setup then in an electrolysis setup... What is wrong in this idea?
The problem is not with insurances being offered, but with the peoples and organizations abusing this fact when bringing up lawsuit. Insurance primes goes up when insurance companies loses to much money. Do not forget that an insurance is a product, just like any ohter product out there.
Insurance is all about protecting you of certain potential risks. It could never happen in a life time, but if the risk exist and if the concretization of this risk is bothering you, it may be worth getting an insurance for it.
For example, there is a risk that my appartment catch fire one day and that I lose everything material I have. It never happened before (to me at least) but I bought an insurance to protect me from this scenario; "just in case"
A copyright violation in an open source product may not have happened yet, but it certainly COULD happen. So, this is a risk that an insurance company could offer to cover. They will sit down (like they seem to be doing in this case), do some calculation on the amount of risk involved and determine how much they want to charge for it. Then, it is up to you to get this coverage or not, this is your part of the equation.
It has nothing to do with "honor code" or whatever and everything to do with probabilities of an event happening, and if you want to assume that risk or not. For my part, I think it is great if a company wants to propose an insurance plan for this kind of risk. It is just one more product available to me as a customer.
Hey... Don't tell anyone, but I heard manufacturers were even putting magnets INSIDE their harddrive!
They say they have to because an electric motor needs to have those, but pffff, I'm sure it is only a consiracy so that HDs break faster, to make us buy more HDs you see...
Yes, I find all this insane...A guy goes 3 times the speed limit and KILL someone, yet he get 18 months in jail. Another one records a movie in a theater and could get 12 months. Wow, great priorities as a society!
Both had done something illegal, I just find it disgusting to see the court "punishement" sometimes...
I understand perfectly, having grown up with parents who where themself "sheeps"... Now, they do not follow this religion anymore, but they follow something else which is not any better.
I like your post, and I agree that there is not many (Well, I do not know of any) religions able to, or willing to, really pursue the goal of "finding the truth" which is why I do not follow any either. But I do not consider myself an atheist because I do not adhere to any specific branch or religion, no more then I adhere to the view that there is no god (or whatever its name) at all.
Maybe I'd just been a bit easy on the trigger with my original reply, but I hate it when both side accuse the other of being closed-mind or "sheeps" when they seem to be as closed mind or as much a sheep as their "opponent".
Slashdot Mirror
from the car's perspective, the light is moving away from it at C, but it's moving forward at .5C, so the light is only getting closer to the observer at .5C
.5C from the observer point of view?
... simple (1 - 1/2 = 1/2 :-P) but it is the concept that light, if its speed is a constant, should always travel at the same speed that baffles me in this. Would care to explain it to me?
I always had problem figuring out this... I mean, it's logical and all, like if I would be throwing a ball instead of photon, but isn't the speed of light a constant? If it is, how come it would go at
I understand the maths, it is kind of
SCO's tripod only has one leg left. There's a technical term for that.
:)
A monopod?
Directly from the article : Most computational origamists are driven by sheer curiosity and the aesthetic pleasure of these structures, but their work is also finding application in fields like astronomy and protein folding, and even automobile safety.
:-P
I'm tempted to flame you like hell but well, it's just that I've read TFA. My bad, sorry!
I'll try to explain it in laymans terms for you...
He means that he did not find a number which is part of an infinite quantity of infinite supply and for which there is also an infinite number of. Get it? Good.
Now, for my part I do not give much credibility to a guy who can't even find a number for which there is an infinite quantity. F*ck, just pick one and there you are! But again, I must concede that to find a number (for which similar number exists in an infinite supply) must be harder to do if you look for ONE specific number and you need to look for it thru an indenumerably infinite supply of those. I imagine the complexity of it must be an indenumerably infinite order of magnitude harder to do then to find the bug I am actually tracking which also exist in an indenumerably infinite supply of in the application I am currently working on.
Now I think I've done my fair share of productivity in this world today and I'll just go back to sleep, thank you.
And an AC stating the obvious gets ignored
Suicide is against the law where I live.
:)
This really gives a new meaning to : "Prosecuting you down to hell"
clients rarely know what they want... ... is a very difficult thing.
...will impact *your* bottom line, not theirs.
satisfying a client
Then, when they bitch and moan...
So if I understand corretly, and correct me if I'm wrong, dealing with a client is alot like dealing with my wife?
How's that as my first try at trolling? :-P
72 TFlops/sec
is that an accelation or what???
I just wish I could put a cow on the back of my truck
Hey, nothing's stoping you!
I live in Quebec and we frequently get -25 Celcius during the winter... Do we complain about not getting any heat from the gulf stream? No! you incensitive whatever!!!
It's only a joke, laugh...
Just an observation, but I would think that 100 years between the point where we had been observing birds to make the first wing and the point where we observe whales to enhance them is pretty good. Because as you said, nature got millions of years to perfect those "design" so for us to do it in a couple hundred years is pretty good I think! :)
Well, it is easy to brag here on slashdot, but I am pretty sure that if you were a security researcher who had just discovered the next remote hole in MS (not M$) software, you would just stfu and take the money to pay your bill, feed your childrens, buy a gift to your wife and finally just try to live a decent life like everyone else would. "I'd punish them hard, then donate the proceeds to the FSF to keep Linux Free.". Yeah right...
I'm tired of people sounding like 14 years old teenagers around here...
16 litres at 6000 rpm == 1000 hps 6000 rpm / 3 nbrLitres * 3 16 litres * 3 == 48 litres But I really don't know if it should be calculated this way...
F*ck my karma, but this should have been modded up to 5. Reading some of the post here makes me want to puke. Wow, what a community...
I feel really sorry for the guy who modded this "informative" :S
I always wondered if, in those case when the setup is stationary (as it is the case here), if it would not be more efficient to just use (lets say) a big block of steel to store potential energy...
They could just use a small electric motor to lift up the steel block up a rail of some kind so they would accumulate potential energy (mechanical batteries?). Then, when they would need to use the stored energy, they could let this steel block go down slowly (with reduction gears etc etc) which would in turn drive a generator...
I really don't know, but I would think that much less energy would be lost due to friction and heat in such a setup then in an electrolysis setup... What is wrong in this idea?
Someone knowledgable could explain me?
If you need power steering when you are getting laid, I sure don't want to see what the girl looks like...
Because this SCO farce demonstrated that in fact, this risk really exists. Up to you to decide if you want to buy the insurance or not now...
The problem is not with insurances being offered, but with the peoples and organizations abusing this fact when bringing up lawsuit. Insurance primes goes up when insurance companies loses to much money. Do not forget that an insurance is a product, just like any ohter product out there.
Insurance is all about protecting you of certain potential risks. It could never happen in a life time, but if the risk exist and if the concretization of this risk is bothering you, it may be worth getting an insurance for it.
For example, there is a risk that my appartment catch fire one day and that I lose everything material I have. It never happened before (to me at least) but I bought an insurance to protect me from this scenario; "just in case"
A copyright violation in an open source product may not have happened yet, but it certainly COULD happen. So, this is a risk that an insurance company could offer to cover. They will sit down (like they seem to be doing in this case), do some calculation on the amount of risk involved and determine how much they want to charge for it. Then, it is up to you to get this coverage or not, this is your part of the equation.
It has nothing to do with "honor code" or whatever and everything to do with probabilities of an event happening, and if you want to assume that risk or not. For my part, I think it is great if a company wants to propose an insurance plan for this kind of risk. It is just one more product available to me as a customer.
Hey... Don't tell anyone, but I heard manufacturers were even putting magnets INSIDE their harddrive!
They say they have to because an electric motor needs to have those, but pffff, I'm sure it is only a consiracy so that HDs break faster, to make us buy more HDs you see...
Yes, I find all this insane...A guy goes 3 times the speed limit and KILL someone, yet he get 18 months in jail. Another one records a movie in a theater and could get 12 months. Wow, great priorities as a society!
Both had done something illegal, I just find it disgusting to see the court "punishement" sometimes...
Remove the space just before the word Load at the end...
I understand perfectly, having grown up with parents who where themself "sheeps"... Now, they do not follow this religion anymore, but they follow something else which is not any better.
I like your post, and I agree that there is not many (Well, I do not know of any) religions able to, or willing to, really pursue the goal of "finding the truth" which is why I do not follow any either. But I do not consider myself an atheist because I do not adhere to any specific branch or religion, no more then I adhere to the view that there is no god (or whatever its name) at all.
Maybe I'd just been a bit easy on the trigger with my original reply, but I hate it when both side accuse the other of being closed-mind or "sheeps" when they seem to be as closed mind or as much a sheep as their "opponent".
Thanks for rational reply!