I hear this argument a lot but I think it is kind of naive... Game developers are focusing their efforts on Windows games. By reimplementing a stable Win32 API for Linux, this makes getting these games on Linux much simpler and cost-effective for the game developers.
It's because of apps like this no-one wants to adopt Linux as a gaming platform.
Wrong. It is because the Linux user-base does not represent a target demographic that the game companies can reap reasonable profit from. Cedega does not present developers with a means of complacentcy towards Linux, but an easier entry point when they are convinced it would be a viable market.
The road will be long and hard but we must stop buying stuff like this and also stop buying Windows games, only when the companies realise there is a genuine market for Linux games will there be any progress.
stop buying stuff like this will only prove to the gaming companies that Linux is not a viable market with which to sell its goods.
I can hold out, can you?
That's silly. Do you think you are actually helping anything by actively boycotting these products? You are taking your capital (as is your choice) and not providing it to the companies that may, very well, create the games on the platform you are so fighting for. If it turns out that Cedega, Wine, etc become a viable API for companies to develop on, due to its compatibility with win32, why not accept that as such? You want them to just up and switch to OpenGL/OpenAL when they are using DirectX? Why not just create DirectX for Linux and make their lives easier? This sort of community good-will will tell these companies that Linux's user-base genuinely wants their titles to run on that platform and they will in turn, ensure that their products run just as well on our Win32 API as it does on Windows Win32 API.
Remember, when dealing with corporations, it is up to you to prove to the investor that they will make a return. Until we can prove to the gaming industry that Linux presents a great investment, they will not make any efforts on our behalf (unless it is in the form of a kind gesture a la ID, Epic).
Using CentOS or RHEL for that matter with a Fedora repository is one of the only definite ways to smash up your system....
This is what i do: keep yum and up2date pointed at standard centos mirrors. Install apt-get, point it to freshrpms, dag, newrpms, etc...
I use yum for my system updates, apt-get (with "sanitized" repository settings, no base/core/updates) for my extra packages like mplayer, flash, et al.
For those of you that are unaware, since the poster doesn't explain at all what Infiniband is, I will explain it for you.
Infiniband is a high-speed, low-latency interconnect used heavily with beowulf clusters (currently). Infiniband, like Myrinet, addressed many of the problems that are inherent with using interconnects like ethernet.
The biggest problem with any TCP/IP based transport, in the world of supercomputing, is latency. The amount of error checking that is involved creates latencies that bring fine-grained (lots of memory reads/writes/swaps) calculations to their knees. As many clusters use MPI (Message Passing Interface) for sharing memory between nodes, a low-latency interconnect was needed to replace ethernet and TCP/IP. People have worked on reducing latencies over ethernet by designing raw transport stacks, relying on the switch and the quality/brevity of the ethernet connections (using short, shielded cables proved useful), to ensure accurate data transport, but none of these methods have proven viable.
Infiniband has also been used as an interconnect for network storage devices as there are obvious advantages to this; eliminating much of that latency makes reads and writes to a device much simpler thus reducing overhead and improving overall throughput.
More information on Infiniband can be found here at the Infiniband sourceforge page. This should give a sufficiently technical overview of what it does without any of the marketing talk.
Re:Even modern linux distros need to be sanitized
on
Is Your OS Tough Enough?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
um, it seems like gentoo has shielded you from the world of actually compiling software yourself... if a program can use alsa, but you don't have it, chances are, there is a --disable-alsa switch in the./configure script. It's not all that difficult to throw commands... Sure, emerge something sounds nice and all, but what do you really learn? A lot of gentoo folk claim that they 'learn' a lot about linux during the install... I think that this is more along the lines of "they learn about gentoo" more than anything else.
With fedora, it should take less than two minutes to disable the services that you don't need either through the System Services gui, or through the chkconfig command. Why the above poster even bothers removing packages (unless he has drive space constraints) is beyond me. And I have found that You will spend alot more time fixing a redhat system. is pure B.S. Care to elaborate on that a little bit, back it up with some real-world situations? up2date... with a good mirror, I have all the latest and greatest security patches in 1/50th the time it takes you to recompile all of your packages. Wanna upgrade my distro? Point yum to the new repository... 1/2 hour, done. Over the course of a year, it is obvious that gentoo requires a lot more work than a package based distro.
Some algorithms do not parallelize very nicely... especially, in general, the abstract phrase video editing. On a shared memory system (big sun SMPs or in this case, dual cores), it would be pretty easy to parallelize such things as filters and the transforms needed for encoding, but as for editing, I don't see that happening. I'm a beowulf guy so I have grown accustomed to course-grained, embarassingly parallel, to moderately parallel applications. These chips will fit in quite nicely with our MPICH/OpenMP environments but these dual core chips will likely do nothing for consumers rather than allow them to run more things at once. I can't say I seriously see software companies writing parallel versions of video renderers, encoders, or any other cpu intesive stuff simply for consumers to use.
I don't know whats worse: a dupe or a story thats almost 3 years old... I certainly hope the editors aren't paid to do what they do. You subscription holders should really rethink your purchase.
Correction. CentOS uses sources that are given to RedHat from a community that RedHat is heavily involved in. If you think that RedHat has contributed 1% of the code in the entire distro, you are mad and an insult to the developers that work on it. Still, the point of my post was not who the source came from, but RedHat's policies, that are quite fair, regarding the rebuilding and redistribution of binaries based on their source releases.
There is no reason for you or the CentOS guys to be one bit pissed about this. The letter from RedHat's legal team was very polite and the demands made were very simple: they just wanted perfect clarity on the nature of CentOS and RedHat Enterprise Linux. They did not want CentOS taking Enterprise clients away from their products. I think this is completely fair as the CentOS team USES the RedHat sources that were given to the community by RedHat to build their distro. BTW, I run CentOS on all my servers at work, so I have no axe to grind with the CentOS guys.
A solution to this is to install the AdBlock extension for Mozilla/Firefox. Once you've done this, grab
this list of search strings. Once you've done this, import the text file and you should be home free. Try to keep that file updated as it should be a good starting-off point, but will become outdated as time goes by.
This has been going on for a long time now... since August. He got some new advertisers that use requested clicks to display ads. It seems now, he's using something else that causes it to pop up when you first visit, which seemed to start a month ago.
Re:No Such Agency of America
on
SHA-1 Broken
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Pretty fucking hard. The NSA doesn't lend out CPU time on classified supercomputers to anyone but a select few government organizations. As much as I think the congress and various others are in cahoots with the RI/MPAA, the NSA would probably not stand for such a thing.
Parent is a troll. These trolls have been around for a while and yet moderators still fall for them. The How long until x slashdot user makes some statement... posts have been getting rather annoying and it always seems to be the same folks doing it too. If you don't want to see M$ sux0rz posts, then you need to view at +2/+3 because often times, those guys don't get modded up.
Screw using it as a replacement for CD/DVD/Blue-Ray, I want to use it to replace current hard drive technology! I'm sure that there must be away to adapt this technology so that it could be used in this manner. I wonder if there is a limit to the number of writes that can be performed on the medium?
Written by Diane Warren and sung by Russell Watson. I see no Rod Stewarts in there. Russell Watson sounds nothing like Rod Stewart anyway.
Here's proof.
At my shop, we have been using CentOS 3 for quite some time now, and are extremely satisfied with it. Now, if you work for a big company that gets off on spending lots of money to make sure they got something tangible, then go for Red Hat Enterprise linux. People like to run their mouths about how disorganized RedHat is etc. Its untrue, at least presently speaking. Yum is an admin's dream come true when it comes to updates. Now, as CentOS 3 is just a recompile of the RedHat Enterprise sources, CentOS has been completely compatible with all that good stuff(TM) that is certified to run on RHEL 3, like oracle, not to mention completely free (as in beer/speech). I would wait until February, when RedHat Enterprise 4 comes out as it will include the 2.6 kernel series and much more up to date software. CentOS will likely build those sources and create CentOS 4 near or around that same time.
Notice the pattern of the numbers in the statement above. Its not random. There is no way you'd account for the data on your cd's unless the data on the cd's somehow magically conformed to that pattern.
Throwing insults wasn't exactly what I had in mind when I said I would appreciate more insight into why In essence, everything I said is wrong, more of a set me straight kind of thing.
I am truly sorry if you feel that I have in some way marginalized the work of real physicists, though, that was, obvious to anyone, not my intention nor were any real physicists harmed in the making of this statement.
Your #7 is a little unfair. A lot of people take those sorts of courses and learn that material but never are given or develop a good enough visualization of these more complex topics in physics.
#8 Having NO theory is more accurate than having an incorrect theory. although this is true, having an incorrect theory at least shows that someone is truly thinking about something. Eventually, said person will either conform to and learn the current upheld theories or be, as you said, a crackpot.
Calling it "Frame Grabbing" was an innocent technical mistake not based on naivety, but simply a mistake. If you read other comments, I'm fairly sure i referenced it correctly.
The onus is not on me to prove it right, but to prove that other theories are incorrect and that mine would be a "better fit". You cannot prove anything in science, you can only make predictive observations. Though I thought I was describing, generally, some behaviors of GR, I was wrong. I can admit that and I can also admit that I have some more reading to do.
I'm hard pressed to think of even special cases where gravity has any quantitative agreement with the dynamics of a fluid.
I did some reading and I'm forced to agree with you. I am wrong that ST has properties similar to a fluid. With regards to a quantitative agreement, yes. With regards to very limited general behavioral similarities, maybe in some small sense if any (i'm thinking of how gravity, ahem, "travels", limited by c, traversing ST in an almost wave-like pattern,etc). In any event, you're good;)
It's true that in general relativity, frame dragging is not the cause of time dilation
I've seen nothing that says the two are not at all related.
It also makes no sense in GR to speak of "a number of frames being dragged", let alone whether that number increases or decreases under different circumstances.
My mistake. I did not mean that literally. I tried to use the term "frame" and "dragging" in a context that is easy to grasp.
And the mechanics of frame dragging is not that similar to the mechanics of motion through a medium such as a gas. (If anything, it's more analogous to magnetodynamics.)
You are right on this, but, in some observations, space-time exhibits qualities similar to a fluid and granted, in a lot of others, a similarity to magnetodynamics, like you said.
If you're talking about your own pet theory that isn't GR, well, who knows? You need to write down some field equations to say anything concrete about it.
Its not really a pet theory, its a generalization of what I have learned about GR, a way to make it make literal sense. As for the field equations, I'm hoping that my "description" lines up with most of the established theories before cracking down on my own work. I think the biggest problem was my wording. Perhaps I knew what it meant but others scratched their heads like "WTF?". I was trying to think in terms of those fancy graphics that they put in video clips on shows like Nova, etc.
In essense, everything you said was wrong, but hey relativity is like that sometimes.
First, thanks for the link. Quite informative. However, I may not be as wrong as you claim. It may simply just be a matter of semantics. In fact, much of what was stated in that article seems to reinforce a lot of what I said.
From the article Lense and Thirring predicted that the rotation of an object would alter space and time, dragging a nearby object out of position compared to the predictions of Newtonian physics.
These rotating objects must be fairly massive for any equipment to pick this up. Why would only a rotating object produce the frame dragging phenomenon? It makes little sense that only a rotating object would alter space-time and not an object moving in a more linear fashion. What Lense and Thirring describe is almost a sort of Space-Time draft, similar to what happens to bodies travelling through a gas in close proximity.
None of the matter that we have on hand to experiment with Frame-Dragging is travelling fast enough to produce an effect of the magnitude described in the above post. Perhaps those hot balls of gas travelling at 99% c will yield us some information.
I welcome any counters to anything I've said and why what I've said may or may not be completely wrong, meaning, I would appreciate more insight into why In essence, everything I said is wrong. Perhaps the way I described it (as close to a Saganish explanation as I could give) may be a bit confusing?
I do think that I may have been wrong with regards to the scope of the term Frame-Dragging, not being on such a small scale as I described; as seems to be alluded to by the Wiki entry.
There is a lot of talk and a lot of debate going on here with regards to the effects of near-light speed travel. A theory that seems to fit General Relativity and recent expeditions to measure a phenomenon called "Frame Grabbing" should provide some insight:
1- Any object that travels through space-time has an effect on space time. Think, for a second, of space-time as a gas. When you accelerate an object through this gas, much of the surrounding gas is pulled along with the craft due to drag. Any object/material traveling through space-time will pull along with it "Frames" of space-time. This, in theory, is the cause of Time Dilation, as predicted by General Relativity.
2- As you approach c, you are dragging more "Frames" with you. Hence the reason Time Dilation is more evident and further exagerated the closer you get to c.
3- To achieve speeds faster than that of c, the material must be "invisible" to space-time itself. Any drag on space-time, produced by a craft or any sort of matter will render any attempt to break the limit c impossible. Current linear motion produces an almost cavitational effect, where frames are, in essence, skipped while older frames are continually dragged by the mass causing clock skew and a need for even more energy to achieve acceleration. This is not dissimilar to the effect of breaking the sound barrier, only we are describing a completely different medium, space-time, not gas.
4- By skipping over current frames and dragging older ones with you, the time lapse occuring on or within that particular body will appear slower to the observer than said observer's time lapse. It is because of this that it is theoretically impossible to travel backwards in time and only possible to travel forward at different rates.
If anyone has any objections to this, let me know. IANAP (I am not a physicist) so I could be dead wrong. It is just that, this makes the most sense to me and seems to fit the facts best.
[seemingly sarcastic remark] See, now we can use our guns for their constitutionally intended purpose: to overthrow our increasingly despotic regime. [/seemingly sarcastic remark] Bills like this prove that the government no longer belongs to the people and needs to be replaced.
In the line-up of standard cable channels, real educational channels have been usurped by revenue-generating, reality tv. With the exception of the History channel, which to this day, still airs great material, every other channel has gone down this path.
TLC: WTF happened to that channel? Discovery: Unless you have the extendend package, the only thing that airs anymore are these assinine motorcycle shows which have absolutely no relevance. In no way do these shows give any real insight into mechanics or building a motorcycle. Its all about the "reality" aspect.
TechTV is just another victim in the war for demographics. Like food companies, tv companies must find ways to make their shows appealing to the most people. The fact that our beloved channels have become little more than outlets for social drivel, product advertising, and limited information, shows only the state of the target demographic: mainstream viewers.
I never really cared for techtv, however, i thought the show was great for people that, although tech-oriented, did not have that great a footing in the area. It is a crying shame that the target demographic is so infantile and, well, stupid, that educational tv is being phased out to generate ad revenue.
Slashdot Mirror
I hear this argument a lot but I think it is kind of naive... Game developers are focusing their efforts on Windows games. By reimplementing a stable Win32 API for Linux, this makes getting these games on Linux much simpler and cost-effective for the game developers.
It's because of apps like this no-one wants to adopt Linux as a gaming platform.
Wrong. It is because the Linux user-base does not represent a target demographic that the game companies can reap reasonable profit from. Cedega does not present developers with a means of complacentcy towards Linux, but an easier entry point when they are convinced it would be a viable market.
The road will be long and hard but we must stop buying stuff like this and also stop buying Windows games, only when the companies realise there is a genuine market for Linux games will there be any progress.
stop buying stuff like this will only prove to the gaming companies that Linux is not a viable market with which to sell its goods.
I can hold out, can you?
That's silly. Do you think you are actually helping anything by actively boycotting these products? You are taking your capital (as is your choice) and not providing it to the companies that may, very well, create the games on the platform you are so fighting for. If it turns out that Cedega, Wine, etc become a viable API for companies to develop on, due to its compatibility with win32, why not accept that as such? You want them to just up and switch to OpenGL/OpenAL when they are using DirectX? Why not just create DirectX for Linux and make their lives easier? This sort of community good-will will tell these companies that Linux's user-base genuinely wants their titles to run on that platform and they will in turn, ensure that their products run just as well on our Win32 API as it does on Windows Win32 API.
Remember, when dealing with corporations, it is up to you to prove to the investor that they will make a return. Until we can prove to the gaming industry that Linux presents a great investment, they will not make any efforts on our behalf (unless it is in the form of a kind gesture a la ID, Epic).
Using CentOS or RHEL for that matter with a Fedora repository is one of the only definite ways to smash up your system....
This is what i do: keep yum and up2date pointed at standard centos mirrors. Install apt-get, point it to freshrpms, dag, newrpms, etc...
I use yum for my system updates, apt-get (with "sanitized" repository settings, no base/core/updates) for my extra packages like mplayer, flash, et al.
Works quite well actually.
For those of you that are unaware, since the poster doesn't explain at all what Infiniband is, I will explain it for you.
Infiniband is a high-speed, low-latency interconnect used heavily with beowulf clusters (currently). Infiniband, like Myrinet, addressed many of the problems that are inherent with using interconnects like ethernet.
The biggest problem with any TCP/IP based transport, in the world of supercomputing, is latency. The amount of error checking that is involved creates latencies that bring fine-grained (lots of memory reads/writes/swaps) calculations to their knees. As many clusters use MPI (Message Passing Interface) for sharing memory between nodes, a low-latency interconnect was needed to replace ethernet and TCP/IP. People have worked on reducing latencies over ethernet by designing raw transport stacks, relying on the switch and the quality/brevity of the ethernet connections (using short, shielded cables proved useful), to ensure accurate data transport, but none of these methods have proven viable.
Infiniband has also been used as an interconnect for network storage devices as there are obvious advantages to this; eliminating much of that latency makes reads and writes to a device much simpler thus reducing overhead and improving overall throughput.
More information on Infiniband can be found here at the Infiniband sourceforge page. This should give a sufficiently technical overview of what it does without any of the marketing talk.
firefox not firewall.
um, it seems like gentoo has shielded you from the world of actually compiling software yourself... if a program can use alsa, but you don't have it, chances are, there is a --disable-alsa switch in the ./configure script. It's not all that difficult to throw commands... Sure, emerge something sounds nice and all, but what do you really learn? A lot of gentoo folk claim that they 'learn' a lot about linux during the install... I think that this is more along the lines of "they learn about gentoo" more than anything else.
With fedora, it should take less than two minutes to disable the services that you don't need either through the System Services gui, or through the chkconfig command. Why the above poster even bothers removing packages (unless he has drive space constraints) is beyond me. And I have found that You will spend alot more time fixing a redhat system. is pure B.S. Care to elaborate on that a little bit, back it up with some real-world situations? up2date... with a good mirror, I have all the latest and greatest security patches in 1/50th the time it takes you to recompile all of your packages. Wanna upgrade my distro? Point yum to the new repository... 1/2 hour, done. Over the course of a year, it is obvious that gentoo requires a lot more work than a package based distro.
Some algorithms do not parallelize very nicely... especially, in general, the abstract phrase video editing. On a shared memory system (big sun SMPs or in this case, dual cores), it would be pretty easy to parallelize such things as filters and the transforms needed for encoding, but as for editing, I don't see that happening. I'm a beowulf guy so I have grown accustomed to course-grained, embarassingly parallel, to moderately parallel applications. These chips will fit in quite nicely with our MPICH/OpenMP environments but these dual core chips will likely do nothing for consumers rather than allow them to run more things at once. I can't say I seriously see software companies writing parallel versions of video renderers, encoders, or any other cpu intesive stuff simply for consumers to use.
I don't know whats worse: a dupe or a story thats almost 3 years old... I certainly hope the editors aren't paid to do what they do. You subscription holders should really rethink your purchase.
Correction. CentOS uses sources that are given to RedHat from a community that RedHat is heavily involved in. If you think that RedHat has contributed 1% of the code in the entire distro, you are mad and an insult to the developers that work on it. Still, the point of my post was not who the source came from, but RedHat's policies, that are quite fair, regarding the rebuilding and redistribution of binaries based on their source releases.
There is no reason for you or the CentOS guys to be one bit pissed about this. The letter from RedHat's legal team was very polite and the demands made were very simple: they just wanted perfect clarity on the nature of CentOS and RedHat Enterprise Linux. They did not want CentOS taking Enterprise clients away from their products. I think this is completely fair as the CentOS team USES the RedHat sources that were given to the community by RedHat to build their distro. BTW, I run CentOS on all my servers at work, so I have no axe to grind with the CentOS guys.
A solution to this is to install the AdBlock extension for Mozilla/Firefox. Once you've done this, grab this list of search strings. Once you've done this, import the text file and you should be home free. Try to keep that file updated as it should be a good starting-off point, but will become outdated as time goes by.
This has been going on for a long time now... since August. He got some new advertisers that use requested clicks to display ads. It seems now, he's using something else that causes it to pop up when you first visit, which seemed to start a month ago.
Pretty fucking hard. The NSA doesn't lend out CPU time on classified supercomputers to anyone but a select few government organizations. As much as I think the congress and various others are in cahoots with the RI/MPAA, the NSA would probably not stand for such a thing.
God, I hope you work for an advertising firm so we can see brilliance like that on television. Bravo!
Parent is a troll. These trolls have been around for a while and yet moderators still fall for them. The How long until x slashdot user makes some statement... posts have been getting rather annoying and it always seems to be the same folks doing it too. If you don't want to see M$ sux0rz posts, then you need to view at +2/+3 because often times, those guys don't get modded up.
Score:-1, Troll
Screw using it as a replacement for CD/DVD/Blue-Ray, I want to use it to replace current hard drive technology! I'm sure that there must be away to adapt this technology so that it could be used in this manner. I wonder if there is a limit to the number of writes that can be performed on the medium?
Written by Diane Warren and sung by Russell Watson. I see no Rod Stewarts in there. Russell Watson sounds nothing like Rod Stewart anyway. Here's proof.
At my shop, we have been using CentOS 3 for quite some time now, and are extremely satisfied with it. Now, if you work for a big company that gets off on spending lots of money to make sure they got something tangible, then go for Red Hat Enterprise linux. People like to run their mouths about how disorganized RedHat is etc. Its untrue, at least presently speaking. Yum is an admin's dream come true when it comes to updates. Now, as CentOS 3 is just a recompile of the RedHat Enterprise sources, CentOS has been completely compatible with all that good stuff(TM) that is certified to run on RHEL 3, like oracle, not to mention completely free (as in beer/speech). I would wait until February, when RedHat Enterprise 4 comes out as it will include the 2.6 kernel series and much more up to date software. CentOS will likely build those sources and create CentOS 4 near or around that same time.
CentOS Page
Notice the pattern of the numbers in the statement above. Its not random. There is no way you'd account for the data on your cd's unless the data on the cd's somehow magically conformed to that pattern.
Booya
Throwing insults wasn't exactly what I had in mind when I said I would appreciate more insight into why In essence, everything I said is wrong, more of a set me straight kind of thing.
I am truly sorry if you feel that I have in some way marginalized the work of real physicists, though, that was, obvious to anyone, not my intention nor were any real physicists harmed in the making of this statement.
Your #7 is a little unfair. A lot of people take those sorts of courses and learn that material but never are given or develop a good enough visualization of these more complex topics in physics.
#8 Having NO theory is more accurate than having an incorrect theory. although this is true, having an incorrect theory at least shows that someone is truly thinking about something. Eventually, said person will either conform to and learn the current upheld theories or be, as you said, a crackpot.
Calling it "Frame Grabbing" was an innocent technical mistake not based on naivety, but simply a mistake. If you read other comments, I'm fairly sure i referenced it correctly.
The onus is not on me to prove it right, but to prove that other theories are incorrect and that mine would be a "better fit". You cannot prove anything in science, you can only make predictive observations. Though I thought I was describing, generally, some behaviors of GR, I was wrong. I can admit that and I can also admit that I have some more reading to do.
I'm hard pressed to think of even special cases where gravity has any quantitative agreement with the dynamics of a fluid.
;)
I did some reading and I'm forced to agree with you. I am wrong that ST has properties similar to a fluid. With regards to a quantitative agreement, yes. With regards to very limited general behavioral similarities, maybe in some small sense if any (i'm thinking of how gravity, ahem, "travels", limited by c, traversing ST in an almost wave-like pattern,etc). In any event, you're good
It's true that in general relativity, frame dragging is not the cause of time dilation
I've seen nothing that says the two are not at all related.
It also makes no sense in GR to speak of "a number of frames being dragged", let alone whether that number increases or decreases under different circumstances.
My mistake. I did not mean that literally. I tried to use the term "frame" and "dragging" in a context that is easy to grasp.
And the mechanics of frame dragging is not that similar to the mechanics of motion through a medium such as a gas. (If anything, it's more analogous to magnetodynamics.)
You are right on this, but, in some observations, space-time exhibits qualities similar to a fluid and granted, in a lot of others, a similarity to magnetodynamics, like you said.
If you're talking about your own pet theory that isn't GR, well, who knows? You need to write down some field equations to say anything concrete about it.
Its not really a pet theory, its a generalization of what I have learned about GR, a way to make it make literal sense. As for the field equations, I'm hoping that my "description" lines up with most of the established theories before cracking down on my own work. I think the biggest problem was my wording. Perhaps I knew what it meant but others scratched their heads like "WTF?". I was trying to think in terms of those fancy graphics that they put in video clips on shows like Nova, etc.
In essense, everything you said was wrong, but hey relativity is like that sometimes.
First, thanks for the link. Quite informative. However, I may not be as wrong as you claim. It may simply just be a matter of semantics. In fact, much of what was stated in that article seems to reinforce a lot of what I said.
From the article Lense and Thirring predicted that the rotation of an object would alter space and time, dragging a nearby object out of position compared to the predictions of Newtonian physics.
These rotating objects must be fairly massive for any equipment to pick this up. Why would only a rotating object produce the frame dragging phenomenon? It makes little sense that only a rotating object would alter space-time and not an object moving in a more linear fashion. What Lense and Thirring describe is almost a sort of Space-Time draft, similar to what happens to bodies travelling through a gas in close proximity.
None of the matter that we have on hand to experiment with Frame-Dragging is travelling fast enough to produce an effect of the magnitude described in the above post. Perhaps those hot balls of gas travelling at 99% c will yield us some information.
I welcome any counters to anything I've said and why what I've said may or may not be completely wrong, meaning, I would appreciate more insight into why In essence, everything I said is wrong. Perhaps the way I described it (as close to a Saganish explanation as I could give) may be a bit confusing?
I do think that I may have been wrong with regards to the scope of the term Frame-Dragging, not being on such a small scale as I described; as seems to be alluded to by the Wiki entry.
There is a lot of talk and a lot of debate going on here with regards to the effects of near-light speed travel. A theory that seems to fit General Relativity and recent expeditions to measure a phenomenon called "Frame Grabbing" should provide some insight:
1- Any object that travels through space-time has an effect on space time. Think, for a second, of space-time as a gas. When you accelerate an object through this gas, much of the surrounding gas is pulled along with the craft due to drag. Any object/material traveling through space-time will pull along with it "Frames" of space-time. This, in theory, is the cause of Time Dilation, as predicted by General Relativity.
2- As you approach c, you are dragging more "Frames" with you. Hence the reason Time Dilation is more evident and further exagerated the closer you get to c.
3- To achieve speeds faster than that of c, the material must be "invisible" to space-time itself. Any drag on space-time, produced by a craft or any sort of matter will render any attempt to break the limit c impossible. Current linear motion produces an almost cavitational effect, where frames are, in essence, skipped while older frames are continually dragged by the mass causing clock skew and a need for even more energy to achieve acceleration. This is not dissimilar to the effect of breaking the sound barrier, only we are describing a completely different medium, space-time, not gas.
4- By skipping over current frames and dragging older ones with you, the time lapse occuring on or within that particular body will appear slower to the observer than said observer's time lapse. It is because of this that it is theoretically impossible to travel backwards in time and only possible to travel forward at different rates.
If anyone has any objections to this, let me know. IANAP (I am not a physicist) so I could be dead wrong. It is just that, this makes the most sense to me and seems to fit the facts best.
[seemingly sarcastic remark] See, now we can use our guns for their constitutionally intended purpose: to overthrow our increasingly despotic regime. [/seemingly sarcastic remark] Bills like this prove that the government no longer belongs to the people and needs to be replaced.
Gotta run, its the Thought Police...
In the line-up of standard cable channels, real educational channels have been usurped by revenue-generating, reality tv. With the exception of the History channel, which to this day, still airs great material, every other channel has gone down this path.
TLC: WTF happened to that channel?
Discovery: Unless you have the extendend package, the only thing that airs anymore are these assinine motorcycle shows which have absolutely no relevance. In no way do these shows give any real insight into mechanics or building a motorcycle. Its all about the "reality" aspect.
TechTV is just another victim in the war for demographics. Like food companies, tv companies must find ways to make their shows appealing to the most people. The fact that our beloved channels have become little more than outlets for social drivel, product advertising, and limited information, shows only the state of the target demographic: mainstream viewers.
I never really cared for techtv, however, i thought the show was great for people that, although tech-oriented, did not have that great a footing in the area. It is a crying shame that the target demographic is so infantile and, well, stupid, that educational tv is being phased out to generate ad revenue.