So does this book overlap at all with Roger Penrose's "The Emperor's New Mind"?
If I remember correctly, that book was trying to state that something on the order of quantum gravity (i.e. some phenomena we don't understand yet) was responsible for conciousness.
That book was/is controversial, and this one probably will be also...
From what I've heard, one of the things that has prevented Lisp and similar languages from going mainstream in business and other applications is that it is difficult to write a true optimizing compiler for it. When I say optimizing compiler, I mean a compiler that can produce code as fast as the best C or FORTRAN compilers, using similar optimizations.
This is because:
- Lisp is a higher-order language (functions as formal parameters and return values)
- Many optimizations require the use of a control-flow graph to be effective (e.g. dead-code elimination, common subexpression elimination).
- It is difficult to create a useful control-flow graph for a higher-order language because variables may contain functions that affect the direction of control flow, and the values of these variables can only be determined at run time.
There are ways around these limitations, but it is still an area of active research and I don't know of any compilers out there yet that manage to get around the limitations.
Once you can get a control flow graph, then you can use many more optimizations, and you can write a compiler that will produce very fast code.
Hate to tell ya, but English is becoming the one world language:
1) English is the second most spoken language, with Mandarin Chinese first and Spanish third.
2) English speaking is far, far more widespread than that of Mandarin, which is prevalent in China only.
3) English is the language spoken between air planes and air traffic controllers throughout the world.
4) Most technical papers are now put out in English, and most of the crap on the internet is in English.
5) If two people from different countries without a common language meet, they are most likely to start trying to communicate in English.
Don't get me wrong; I think everybody should be multilingual and have respect for multiple languages. I personally have some fluency in Spanish and Japanese in addition to English. Where it gets really interesting is in places like India, where English was acquired from the British, but is being slowly altered to be their own.
However, knowing how the Japanese tend to import words directly into their own language using katakana, I think a more realistic translation would be something like:
I see a number of questions concerning the practicality of these things, and I figure I'd jump in with my 2 cents:
Solar Sails are: - Extremely efficent: no reaction products need to be carried up, and no fuel is needed. - Light: Very important in deployment concerns, where weight=money. Sail material is often Mylar or Kevlar, which is much lighter and more stable than rocket fuel. - Nonexhaustive: The sun is always there. I suspect the solar wind tapers off as you get further out, but if you are going out of the system anyway, you're probably going to need some other form of propulsion.
Solar Sails are not: - Easy to deploy: You need a great amount of sail area to obtain a decent acceleration, and all that sail has to be brought into orbit and unfolded somehow. This NASA solutions tries to solve this big problem. - Quickly Accelerating: You won't pull huge numbers of g's with a solar sail, but the important thing to remember is that they provide (relatively) constant slow acceleration over a long period of time, as opposed to a quick acceleration over a short period of time. In the end, they achieve the same result in about the same time frame. - Active: Control of thrust must be achieved through manipulation of the sails, and not manipulation of the thrusting medium, as opposed to a liquid rocket, where thrust can be controlled by adjusting flow and mixture. Once again, maybe by varying the strength of the magnetic bottle, NASA can achieve more active control.
Seems reasonable to me, especially with the NASA improvements.
I wonder if you could somehow reverse the polarity on the magnetic bottle and use the wind to pull the craft in towards the sun.
It just stuns me to see people resort to simple-minded name calling over this issue. This RTG issue has been beaten to death, and this unnecessary hysteria has to stop. Give me counterexamples, not insults. You cretins can all go back to your creationism classes now.
Slashdot Mirror
The guide I tend to use, although it may be obsolete by now since I've been out of watching anime for a while is:
- Taken as a general rule, vanilla anime tends to be of higher quality than typical American animation.
EXCEPT:
- Disney-level animation can be equal to or better than the best Japanese animation, and:
- Disney usually does organics (people, animals) better, but:
- Anime does technology (lasers, mecha, nukes) better.
Of course that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
So does this book overlap at all with Roger Penrose's "The Emperor's New Mind"?
If I remember correctly, that book was trying to state that something on the order of quantum gravity (i.e. some phenomena we don't understand yet) was responsible for conciousness.
That book was/is controversial, and this one probably will be also...
From what I've heard, one of the things that has prevented Lisp and similar languages from going mainstream in business and other applications is that it is difficult to write a true optimizing compiler for it. When I say optimizing compiler, I mean a compiler that can produce code as fast as the best C or FORTRAN compilers, using similar optimizations.
This is because:
- Lisp is a higher-order language (functions as formal parameters and return values)
- Many optimizations require the use of a control-flow graph to be effective (e.g. dead-code elimination, common subexpression elimination).
- It is difficult to create a useful control-flow graph for a higher-order language because variables may contain functions that affect the direction of control flow, and the values of these variables can only be determined at run time.
There are ways around these limitations, but it is still an area of active research and I don't know of any compilers out there yet that manage to get around the limitations.
Once you can get a control flow graph, then you can use many more optimizations, and you can write a compiler that will produce very fast code.
Anyway that's just my take on the situation.
Or how about an even better idea:
A non-obfuscated Intercal contest!
Try to write as clear a program as possible.
Now that would be a challenge...
Hate to tell ya, but English is becoming the one world language:
1) English is the second most spoken language, with Mandarin Chinese first and Spanish third.
2) English speaking is far, far more widespread than that of Mandarin, which is prevalent in China only.
3) English is the language spoken between air planes and air traffic controllers throughout the world.
4) Most technical papers are now put out in English, and most of the crap on the internet is in English.
5) If two people from different countries without a common language meet, they are most likely to start trying to communicate in English.
Don't get me wrong; I think everybody should be multilingual and have respect for multiple languages. I personally have some fluency in Spanish and Japanese in addition to English. Where it gets really interesting is in places like India, where English was acquired from the British, but is being slowly altered to be their own.
--------
Unless of course the textbook you're referring to is one of those "Making Out in Japanese" books...
"Kireina karada dane! Motto fukaku!"
(Translation is an exercise left to the reader...)
--------
However, knowing how the Japanese tend to import words directly into their own language using katakana, I think a more realistic translation would be something like:
"Surasho_dotto.org"
-----------
Good...
See the previous topic concerning the Cassini project for reasons why RTGs are frowned upon. I wouldn't recommend getting into that here.
I see a number of questions concerning the practicality of these things, and I figure I'd jump in with my 2 cents:
Solar Sails are:
- Extremely efficent: no reaction products need to be carried up, and no fuel is needed.
- Light: Very important in deployment concerns, where weight=money. Sail material is often Mylar or Kevlar, which is much lighter and more stable than rocket fuel.
- Nonexhaustive: The sun is always there. I suspect the solar wind tapers off as you get further out, but if you are going out of the system anyway, you're probably going to need some other form of propulsion.
Solar Sails are not:
- Easy to deploy: You need a great amount of sail area to obtain a decent acceleration, and all that sail has to be brought into orbit and unfolded somehow. This NASA solutions tries to solve this big problem.
- Quickly Accelerating: You won't pull huge numbers of g's with a solar sail, but the important thing to remember is that they provide (relatively) constant slow acceleration over a long period of time, as opposed to a quick acceleration over a short period of time. In the end, they achieve the same result in about the same time frame.
- Active: Control of thrust must be achieved through manipulation of the sails, and not manipulation of the thrusting medium, as opposed to a liquid rocket, where thrust can be controlled by adjusting flow and mixture. Once again, maybe by varying the strength of the magnetic bottle, NASA can achieve more active control.
Seems reasonable to me, especially with the NASA improvements.
I wonder if you could somehow reverse the polarity on the magnetic bottle and use the wind to pull the craft in towards the sun.
flame{
It just stuns me to see people resort to simple-minded name calling over this issue. This RTG issue has been beaten to death, and this unnecessary hysteria has to stop. Give me counterexamples, not insults. You cretins can all go back to your creationism classes now.
}\\flame