The fact that older TV's don't go above channel 100 is irrelevant to this discussion because cable boxes decode the digital content and remodulate it to channel 3 or the baseband data is available at a video input. This device has a 70 channel digital decoder. This is useless with most digital cable because the digital cable content is at channels > 100 (all digital channels in my case). So we are back to the problem again, "what about a card that decodes like a cable box" which this card clearly does not do.
RTFAMT (more thoroughly) it has a digital over the air tuner for up to 75 over the air channels and it has another connector for *analog cable/antenna* not digital cable. Hence, to receive ones analog cable channels, not digital channels.
Well, I don't believe you will see this effect for just a couple people, but eventually if there is a wall of antennas in front of another antenna, the power received at the back antenna will be significantly less than if that wall were not there.
To consider this further, consider a 13.5 kW radio transmitter located ~18.6 miles (30 km) from where you are. Assuming it is an isotropic radiator, (I would imagine that radio station antennas can be considered close to that). The power density where you are due to that station is 1.9 microwatts/square meter. So to get even power on the order of a milliwatt, you would need to collect power from an area of about 500 square meters. Now, see if you can fill that gym with several of these 500 square meter collectors without blocking each other so you can your friends can get a few milliwatts of power.
Well, how would power companies decide where to radiate this power to? It wouldn't be very efficient to radiate it isotropically out into space. Also, at some frequencies, it may not be too healthy to have all that power radiating through the air. This presents similar, and probably more problem, than having a satellite in space beam power down to a collector. At least the satellite will be aiming for a fixed point.
As far as the available power that exists out in the air now, I would imagine you will not be able to collect much (less than milliwatts). You seem to have the idea that if we just keep adding antennas we can keep collecting energy, which is not the case because energy would not be conserved.
Copper interconnects refer to both the vias and the traces connecting the transistors, not just the vias. The "plugs" that connect one layer to another are called vias.
For me check out http://zdnet.com.com/2100-11-518399.html?legacy=zd nn . A quote says
"Put simply, copper is a more efficient conductor than aluminum, making it useful in processors because it allows for smaller, thinner interconnects. Interconnects are tiny pieces of wire that connect transistors inside a processor."
You are still missing the point. I know power matters. The whole argument was that cost/power is not a figure of merit, cost/energy is. Do I want a cell that will cost 10 dollars, and produce 100 watts of power for 1 minute? No, because it would then cost me 600 dollars for 100 watt-hrs of energy. The unit of cost/power doesn't tell me what I need to know about how much the energy is actually going to cost me in the long run. I'm a EE, I know the difference between power and energy.
Well, with that said, how long you used the cell shouldn't effect the cost/watt it is the cost/watt-time that is going to change. If it lasts one second, you paid 20c for a watt. If it lasts 20 years you paid 20c for a watt. The original poster is correct, you need to know what the cost of the energy will be, I believe that was his point. If i have to buy a 20c, 1 watt cell, every 10 seconds, that is going to get prohibitively expensive.
If you want a small computer, check out the pc-104 computers. They are even smaller than this board and available with many stackable expansion cards. Go to www.pc104.org for more info.
If you want some kind of embedded computer, check out the PC-104 form factor computers. I believe this form factor is probably smaller than the via motherboard. Also, there are many devices available in this form factor. The whole thrust for the form factor was embedded computing. Visit www.pc104.org for more info.
I may be incorrect about this because I am kind of new to Linux, but aren't there compatability issues between different desktop environments like Gnome and KDE. Some programs will work on one but not the other correct? If this is not correct ignore the rest of this comment, if it is then this is a significant difference, though the desktop has minor differences in different versions of Windows, applications tend to run equally well on both versions.
But we don't define a day as the 1/365 of a year or 1/365 the time it takes to circle the sun. We define a day as the time it takes for the earth to rotate 360 degrees. Of course those different definition of days do not match up. So a day is actually 24 hours or the time it takes for the earth to make a rotation on its axis. If you were to say a day was your definition of day, eventually it would start being sunrise at midnight because we would be creeping everyday by that difference in time.
In response to drag racing, if you figure a car is going about 300 miles an hour after 4.5 seconds and assume constant acceleration (which I'm sure isn't true) you get about 3 G's or 30 m/(s^2)
Also, it seems like everyone is blowing this out of proportion considering they say that even the rollercoaster that currently exposes users to the highest acceleration has less than a 5.6 G maximum acceleration.
Re:Coherent != parallel, and sunlight isn't parall
on
Solar Surgery
·
· Score: 1
Of course they weren't parallel after hitting the mirror, because then the mirror wouldn't be concentrating just redirecting. The point was that if they are parallel when they hit the mirror, then can all be directed to the same focal point thus concentrating the light. If they weren't parallel when they hit the mirror, they would reflect off in various directions.
People always say there must be a God, cause if there wasn't where could we all come from. Therefore, God must have created us. What I always wonder about then is who do the religious think created God? Is there an infinite loop of Gods? Is it alright to not question his creation, but to question ours?
That is exactly what is being done. They are trying to cash in on the fact that some people will only buy an American motorcyle. I think it was Polaris that actually bought the name and is now making the Indian motorcycles.
Slashdot Mirror
The fact that older TV's don't go above channel 100 is irrelevant to this discussion because cable boxes decode the digital content and remodulate it to channel 3 or the baseband data is available at a video input. This device has a 70 channel digital decoder. This is useless with most digital cable because the digital cable content is at channels > 100 (all digital channels in my case). So we are back to the problem again, "what about a card that decodes like a cable box" which this card clearly does not do.
RTFAMT (more thoroughly) it has a digital over the air tuner for up to 75 over the air channels and it has another connector for *analog cable/antenna* not digital cable. Hence, to receive ones analog cable channels, not digital channels.
Well, I don't believe you will see this effect for just a couple people, but eventually if there is a wall of antennas in front of another antenna, the power received at the back antenna will be significantly less than if that wall were not there. To consider this further, consider a 13.5 kW radio transmitter located ~18.6 miles (30 km) from where you are. Assuming it is an isotropic radiator, (I would imagine that radio station antennas can be considered close to that). The power density where you are due to that station is 1.9 microwatts/square meter. So to get even power on the order of a milliwatt, you would need to collect power from an area of about 500 square meters. Now, see if you can fill that gym with several of these 500 square meter collectors without blocking each other so you can your friends can get a few milliwatts of power.
Well, how would power companies decide where to radiate this power to? It wouldn't be very efficient to radiate it isotropically out into space. Also, at some frequencies, it may not be too healthy to have all that power radiating through the air. This presents similar, and probably more problem, than having a satellite in space beam power down to a collector. At least the satellite will be aiming for a fixed point. As far as the available power that exists out in the air now, I would imagine you will not be able to collect much (less than milliwatts). You seem to have the idea that if we just keep adding antennas we can keep collecting energy, which is not the case because energy would not be conserved.
Copper interconnects refer to both the vias and the traces connecting the transistors, not just the vias. The "plugs" that connect one layer to another are called vias. For me check out http://zdnet.com.com/2100-11-518399.html?legacy=zd nn . A quote says
"Put simply, copper is a more efficient conductor than aluminum, making it useful in processors because it allows for smaller, thinner interconnects. Interconnects are tiny pieces of wire that connect transistors inside a processor."
You are still missing the point. I know power matters. The whole argument was that cost/power is not a figure of merit, cost/energy is. Do I want a cell that will cost 10 dollars, and produce 100 watts of power for 1 minute? No, because it would then cost me 600 dollars for 100 watt-hrs of energy. The unit of cost/power doesn't tell me what I need to know about how much the energy is actually going to cost me in the long run. I'm a EE, I know the difference between power and energy.
That was my point. My point was they have to give a cost/energy not a cost/power. Cost/power is a useless number.
Well, with that said, how long you used the cell shouldn't effect the cost/watt it is the cost/watt-time that is going to change. If it lasts one second, you paid 20c for a watt. If it lasts 20 years you paid 20c for a watt. The original poster is correct, you need to know what the cost of the energy will be, I believe that was his point. If i have to buy a 20c, 1 watt cell, every 10 seconds, that is going to get prohibitively expensive.
If you want a small computer, check out the pc-104 computers. They are even smaller than this board and available with many stackable expansion cards. Go to www.pc104.org for more info.
If you want some kind of embedded computer, check out the PC-104 form factor computers. I believe this form factor is probably smaller than the via motherboard. Also, there are many devices available in this form factor. The whole thrust for the form factor was embedded computing. Visit www.pc104.org for more info.
No, he is related to Bootsy Lee Farnsworth. Host of the "50 Dollar Sack Pyramid".
I may be incorrect about this because I am kind of new to Linux, but aren't there compatability issues between different desktop environments like Gnome and KDE. Some programs will work on one but not the other correct? If this is not correct ignore the rest of this comment, if it is then this is a significant difference, though the desktop has minor differences in different versions of Windows, applications tend to run equally well on both versions.
But we don't define a day as the 1/365 of a year or 1/365 the time it takes to circle the sun. We define a day as the time it takes for the earth to rotate 360 degrees. Of course those different definition of days do not match up. So a day is actually 24 hours or the time it takes for the earth to make a rotation on its axis. If you were to say a day was your definition of day, eventually it would start being sunrise at midnight because we would be creeping everyday by that difference in time.
In response to drag racing, if you figure a car is going about 300 miles an hour after 4.5 seconds and assume constant acceleration (which I'm sure isn't true) you get about 3 G's or 30 m/(s^2)
Also, it seems like everyone is blowing this out of proportion considering they say that even the rollercoaster that currently exposes users to the highest acceleration has less than a 5.6 G maximum acceleration.
Of course they weren't parallel after hitting the mirror, because then the mirror wouldn't be concentrating just redirecting. The point was that if they are parallel when they hit the mirror, then can all be directed to the same focal point thus concentrating the light. If they weren't parallel when they hit the mirror, they would reflect off in various directions.
Yes, that is when you buy a CD that was recorded at a concert they call it the "Live" version. It was all done real time without retakes.
I think the point is not that we are looking for someplace to inhabit but more so looking to find other life forms.
People always say there must be a God, cause if there wasn't where could we all come from. Therefore, God must have created us. What I always wonder about then is who do the religious think created God? Is there an infinite loop of Gods? Is it alright to not question his creation, but to question ours?
That is exactly what is being done. They are trying to cash in on the fact that some people will only buy an American motorcyle. I think it was Polaris that actually bought the name and is now making the Indian motorcycles.