The article mentioned that the production model would be able to display two 8.5x11 pages. Maybe the production model will be more than 2560x2048 pixels.
I remember when I first heard of DirectX and games being built to run in Windows. I thought, "why slow down a game by running it in Windows when you can run it in DOS". Mind you, this is when I knew little technically. But as computers became more powerful, the small (or not so small, depending on the code) decrease in game speed paid off in interoperability with many video and sound cards, and other hardware.
I think the same is true for XUL/XML, DOM et al. In adding the extra layers (running an application on top of a browser on top of a virtual machine on top of an OS,...) performance may be hit, but when the technology fills out, we will truly be able to run an application anywhere. Windows or Linux, who will care? - mostly developers, but eventually they will be as significant to the end user as the microcode on your CPU.
The post was refering to a troll, but I was calling it a troll itself... Thus making it a troll about a troll. Hence the recursive nature of my statement. nevermind
You make a couple of mistakes here. Particles are not "aware" of each other. The common terminology is that the particles are entangled. A (not perfect) analogy of entangled particles:
You are in Los Angeles. You have a red ball and a white ball. You put on a blind fold, send one ball to Boston, and put another in the sock drawer. Currently the balls are in an unknown state. But once you open the sock drawer and see what color the ball is, you then know what color the ball in Boston is. Is that communication faster than the speed of light? No.
David Deutsch, a leading physicist and father of quantum algorithms for quantum computers, posits an interpretation of quantum mechanics which would explain the above phenomenon. Essentially, he believes in the multiverse, and that your experience is in one of the parallel universes. The universes interact with each other though. In the case of the ball, when you look in the sock drawer and see a red ball, your universe is parallel to another where you looked in the sock drawer and saw a white ball.
As for using entangled particles for communication faster than the speed of light, no dice buddy. You'd need a constant stream of entangled particles, because once you observe one of them, then they are no longer entangled. You can't switch the ball with one of another color, and expect the one in Boston to switch too.
Objects near the edge of the screen would lose the 3rd dimension (because of the delta between the left and right images displayed on the screen), so wouldn't a 3d scene have an annoying fuzzy area around the entire edge of the screen that gives you a headache? -Ellis
I can't believe all the posts in response to this article... come on: "Oh, I have to live with someone to afford rent"; "I'm only making 45k"; "Expensive Sweatshops"; "The Darkside of the free market".
You people are on top of the world right now. You're making a killing financially. Leave this kind of whining to the NBA.
Your ad hominem attack on MuppetBoy does nothing for your case against mysticism, but that is beside the point.
The acceptance of Eastern philosophy is not in contradiction with science. In fact, a greater knowledge of the two can be complimentary.
I'll speak in the language of modern western culture and science for you: In the billions years of our universe's existence, and the multitude of schemas of reality our species has experienced, it would be unfortunate to so quickly discount all other views in the name of science.
Slashdot Mirror
The article mentioned that the production model would be able to display two 8.5x11 pages. Maybe the production model will be more than 2560x2048 pixels.
I remember when I first heard of DirectX and games being built to run in Windows. I thought, "why slow down a game by running it in Windows when you can run it in DOS". Mind you, this is when I knew little technically. But as computers became more powerful, the small (or not so small, depending on the code) decrease in game speed paid off in interoperability with many video and sound cards, and other hardware.
...) performance may be hit, but when the technology fills out, we will truly be able to run an application anywhere. Windows or Linux, who will care? - mostly developers, but eventually they will be as significant to the end user as the microcode on your CPU.
I think the same is true for XUL/XML, DOM et al. In adding the extra layers (running an application on top of a browser on top of a virtual machine on top of an OS,
LS
The post was refering to a troll, but I was calling it a troll itself... Thus making it a troll about a troll. Hence the recursive nature of my statement. nevermind
The above message is really just a well crafted troll made to look like a message.
You can find the complete list of accredited and operational, accredited and non-operational, and pre-accredited registrars here.
You make a couple of mistakes here. Particles are not "aware" of each other. The common terminology is that the particles are entangled. A (not perfect) analogy of entangled particles:
You are in Los Angeles. You have a red ball and a white ball. You put on a blind fold, send one ball to Boston, and put another in the sock drawer. Currently the balls are in an unknown state. But once you open the sock drawer and see what color the ball is, you then know what color the ball in Boston is. Is that communication faster than the speed of light? No.
David Deutsch, a leading physicist and father of quantum algorithms for quantum computers, posits an interpretation of quantum mechanics which would explain the above phenomenon. Essentially, he believes in the multiverse, and that your experience is in one of the parallel universes. The universes interact with each other though. In the case of the ball, when you look in the sock drawer and see a red ball, your universe is parallel to another where you looked in the sock drawer and saw a white ball.
As for using entangled particles for communication faster than the speed of light, no dice buddy. You'd need a constant stream of entangled particles, because once you observe one of them, then they are no longer entangled. You can't switch the ball with one of another color, and expect the one in Boston to switch too.
LS
Objects near the edge of the screen would lose the 3rd dimension (because of the delta between the left and right images displayed on the screen), so wouldn't a 3d scene have an annoying fuzzy area around the entire edge of the screen that gives you a headache? -Ellis
You people are on top of the world right now. You're making a killing financially. Leave this kind of whining to the NBA.
-LS
Those of you in the crusade for linguistic precision should take some tips in activism from this site. LS
Your ad hominem attack on MuppetBoy does nothing for your case against mysticism, but that is beside the point.
The acceptance of Eastern philosophy is not in contradiction with science. In fact, a greater knowledge of the two can be complimentary.
I'll speak in the language of modern western culture and science for you: In the billions years of our universe's existence, and the multitude of schemas of reality our species has experienced, it would be unfortunate to so quickly discount all other views in the name of science.
Science is simply a way, not THE way.