Then it's really more of a test of whether each of the two equations is correct, because if the masses are not directly proportional, then one of the equations is wrong in purporting a linear dependence on m.
Yes, but the judge is a *federal* judge. His jurisdiction is not limited to Austin. Why couldn't he hold them in contempt and have them arrested and jailed *anyway*?
(This is the assumption that the m in F=ma and the m's in F= Gm1.m2/r^2 are the same thing).
How can they *not* be the same? Aren't they sort of defined to be equal via the fudge-factor "G" in the second equation? If the m's were different, the value of G would just be adjusted to make them the same again, no?
Granted, but then why are they only avoiding Austin? Why have there been no repurcussions over the past four years. Does the federal court's rulings have no teeth if the bailiff can't physically reach out and grab the guys?
The actual equation is: E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2. When all of the energy is due to mass (i.e. momentum is zero), you get the familiar equation E=mc^2. When all the energy is due to momentum (i.e. for photons), we get E=pc. Since we also know that for photons, E=h*nu, we can solve for p and get p = h*nu/c.
Ugh. I just posted the same thing, after looking at only a partial list of the replies to see if anyone else already did so. I was even going to end it with "Do you want me to draw out the truth table for you?", but I figured that would just be mean:-).
There are some "you can't do XXX unless you do YYY" agreements, but never ever ever a "if you do YYY you must do XXX."
Dude, the first is logically equivalent to "XXX implies YYY", and the second is logically equivalent to "YYY implies XXX". In other words, those two things are equivalent to each other under a change of variables.
So which is it? Do we see such agreements, or don't we?
Hear hear! I'm so sick of the incessant and ludicrous attempts to defend that nonsense.
As am I of the incessant and ludicrous attempts to deride it as nonsense. The coffee was sold to people via drive-through windows, intended to be consumed be people in cars. The woman wasn't driving. The car wasn't even moving. The coffee was a lot hotter than industry standards because McD's bean counters, who were already aware of the problem, ran the numbers and concluded that the money they'd save on keeping the coffee fresher longer outweighs the cost of the potential payoffs to their victims, so they decided "to hell with the people". The woman asked only for payment of her medical bills (approx $10K). McD said no. The judge rightfully bitch-slapped McD.
Gee, I didn't find the GP post to be all that informative. He deliberately misinterpreted the story-poster's blatantly obvious point (that why should he bother having a pagefile when 4GB should be enough for anything he needs to do) and then proceeds to tell us what everybody already knows about virtual memory. The story poster is *clearly* talking about the difference between physical RAM and the disk, and is *not* talking about the difference between direct physical *addressing* versus page-table address translation. And why exactly should the more-appropriate question be "why use physical memory in modern systems"? Is there some alternative to physical memory that I'm not aware of? (I.e., something that *replaces* physical memory rather than augments it.)
1) What is it that you think you can back down from, given that you started off saying that you already wrote the code as an employee?
2) What their source of funding was for paying you is irrelevant, but what do you mean you were hired "not directly by the university"? The simple question is: WHO IS YOUR EMPLOYER? Did you work for a contracting firm that leased you out to the university? This should be a simple question to answer: look at your W2 when you get it in January.
just like photon-particle interactions can make light travel slower than C when it passes through a medium
Light can travel slower than c in a medium, despite the fact that it's massless. Got it.
so can interactions between fermions and the Higgs field allow fermions to move at speeds lower than C , which implies they have mass.
How does this imply that they have mass, when you just got through saying that massless things can travel slower than c when interacting with other things?
The coup occurred in 2000, and was a multi-faceted effort. There was, for example, Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush's co-campaign chair and Florida's corrupt secretary of state, who oversaw the illegal purging of tens of thousands of legitimate Black voters. There was the manufactured mob of republican congressional aids flown in from DC to scream and pound on the doors of the canvassing boards, yelling "stop the fraud" in response to efforts to count the ballots accurately. And finally, there was the U.S. Supreme Court itself, with its "states rights" advocate judges, who overturned a Florida state Supreme Court ruling regarding Florida state election law, with special bonus points going to Justice Clarence Thomas, who considered the matter thoughtfully and fairly before casting the vote that would allow his wife to continue her work for the Bush transition team.
Argh! Please don't mention that song. It pops into my head every time I right-click at the bottom of my screen and I see the menu item "Lock the Taskbar".
Slashdot Mirror
Then it's really more of a test of whether each of the two equations is correct, because if the masses are not directly proportional, then one of the equations is wrong in purporting a linear dependence on m.
"It could last six seconds, six minutes, I doubt six hours."
-- Donald Rumsfeld
Yes, but the judge is a *federal* judge. His jurisdiction is not limited to Austin. Why couldn't he hold them in contempt and have them arrested and jailed *anyway*?
How can they *not* be the same? Aren't they sort of defined to be equal via the fudge-factor "G" in the second equation? If the m's were different, the value of G would just be adjusted to make them the same again, no?
Of course. Doing such things continuously will get you into trouble.
Granted, but then why are they only avoiding Austin? Why have there been no repurcussions over the past four years. Does the federal court's rulings have no teeth if the bailiff can't physically reach out and grab the guys?
Or does p=mv not apply at relativistic speeds?
Correct. That equation is correct only in the newtonian low-velocity limit.
The actual equation is:
E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2.
When all of the energy is due to mass (i.e. momentum is zero), you get the familiar equation E=mc^2. When all the energy is due to momentum (i.e. for photons), we get E=pc. Since we also know that for photons, E=h*nu, we can solve for p and get p = h*nu/c.
Ugh. I just posted the same thing, after looking at only a partial list of the replies to see if anyone else already did so. I was even going to end it with "Do you want me to draw out the truth table for you?", but I figured that would just be mean :-).
Dude, the first is logically equivalent to "XXX implies YYY", and the second is logically equivalent to "YYY implies XXX". In other words, those two things are equivalent to each other under a change of variables.
So which is it? Do we see such agreements, or don't we?
They are slandering Rove.
Only if the claims are false.
Thanks!
As am I of the incessant and ludicrous attempts to deride it as nonsense. The coffee was sold to people via drive-through windows, intended to be consumed be people in cars. The woman wasn't driving. The car wasn't even moving. The coffee was a lot hotter than industry standards because McD's bean counters, who were already aware of the problem, ran the numbers and concluded that the money they'd save on keeping the coffee fresher longer outweighs the cost of the potential payoffs to their victims, so they decided "to hell with the people". The woman asked only for payment of her medical bills (approx $10K). McD said no. The judge rightfully bitch-slapped McD.
Spoken like somebody to whom nobody owes any money.
ObPortman:
".. with thunderous applause"?
Gee, I didn't find the GP post to be all that informative. He deliberately misinterpreted the story-poster's blatantly obvious point (that why should he bother having a pagefile when 4GB should be enough for anything he needs to do) and then proceeds to tell us what everybody already knows about virtual memory. The story poster is *clearly* talking about the difference between physical RAM and the disk, and is *not* talking about the difference between direct physical *addressing* versus page-table address translation. And why exactly should the more-appropriate question be "why use physical memory in modern systems"? Is there some alternative to physical memory that I'm not aware of? (I.e., something that *replaces* physical memory rather than augments it.)
1) What is it that you think you can back down from, given that you started off saying that you already wrote the code as an employee?
2) What their source of funding was for paying you is irrelevant, but what do you mean you were hired "not directly by the university"? The simple question is: WHO IS YOUR EMPLOYER? Did you work for a contracting firm that leased you out to the university? This should be a simple question to answer: look at your W2 when you get it in January.
3) What did you sign?
Both of them, or just the good eye?
The term "human" refers to any member of the genus "homo". It's a human of a different species.
Light can travel slower than c in a medium, despite the fact that it's massless. Got it.
How does this imply that they have mass, when you just got through saying that massless things can travel slower than c when interacting with other things?
Maybe it was in that toolbox...
Even if religion is completely wrong and a complete fiction, adopting and truly believing it is the right philosophical life choice
I've always been perplexed by the notion of "choosing" to "believe" something.
It is a coup.
The coup occurred in 2000, and was a multi-faceted effort. There was, for example, Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush's co-campaign chair and Florida's corrupt secretary of state, who oversaw the illegal purging of tens of thousands of legitimate Black voters. There was the manufactured mob of republican congressional aids flown in from DC to scream and pound on the doors of the canvassing boards, yelling "stop the fraud" in response to efforts to count the ballots accurately. And finally, there was the U.S. Supreme Court itself, with its "states rights" advocate judges, who overturned a Florida state Supreme Court ruling regarding Florida state election law, with special bonus points going to Justice Clarence Thomas, who considered the matter thoughtfully and fairly before casting the vote that would allow his wife to continue her work for the Bush transition team.
Argh! Please don't mention that song. It pops into my head every time I right-click at the bottom of my screen and I see the menu item "Lock the Taskbar".
ERROR: No keyboard found. Hit F1 to continue.
(No, I'm not kidding.)