It is very simple: If you don't want to boil your self to death, you must ultimately radiate away all the energy you get from your star. The biggest common misunderstanding about energy is the idea that we consume it. We don't consume energy, we just pass it through our systems. Now in what form do you radiate it away? Well, in the most useless form possible, because otherwise you'd waste precious energy. That form is the form of heat radiation, and the spectrum is determined by only two parameters: How much energy the star produces (which is the amount of energy to be radiated away), and how large the Dyson sphere is.
Think about it like the water of a river used to drive machines. We let the water run through our machines to use its power, but if we would keep that water, we'd soon drown. Instead we have to let all the water we use flow out again.
With energy it is basically the same. If we don't ultimately get rid of all the energy we use, we heat up and boil to death. We have to eventually re-emit all the energy; we just do so in the form of heat radiation.
OK, there's one thing which could actually lower the energy emission: Conversion of energy into matter and antimatter. So if we assume that the advanced civilisation use up a considerable part of the energy in order to produce matter and antimatter, it would reduce their energy output. The matter could be used to build things inside the sphere. However, unless they found a way to convert antimatter to matter, they would have to get rid of all the antimatter (transforming back into energy would lead back to the original emission). If they just throw it into space, it would react with other matter there (remember, we are speaking about massive amounts of antimatter, if it shall make a noticeable difference in the energy output), which would give a very obvious signal which I'm sure would already have been detected.
So the only way to have lower energy output would be if the advanced civilisation found a way to transform antimatter into matter, and uses a large fraction of the energy to create new matter.
After that, make everybody in Africa take an IQ test and euthanize the ones who score lower than 110.
I guess you restricted that to Africa because you know that you wouldn't have a chance to get even 100 on the IQ test... but then, you'd no longer be alive at that point anyway, because in the previous step you advocated to euthanize all retards and morons.
If the work is done by robots anyway, then what is the advantage of producing in China (except when producing for the Chinese market)? You don't have the advantage of cheap workers (robots don't get wages), but you have the disadvantage of higher transport cost.
No, I think GP really does mean The Last Question. That's the Asimov story with the Cosmic AC that [spoiler alert] re-creates the universe after the Heat Death.
Since he answered to a comment talking about "The Last Question" with the recommendation to also read "The Last Answer", it is pretty obvious that he did not mean "The Last Question".
Most students are going to choose institutions where the certificate they get at the end will have the highest prestige attached. Now if certificates from universities with better teaching would provide higher prestige (which would make sense, because the students from there should be better educated, after all), then students would select the universities with the best teaching, and thus universities in turn would have a higher interest in improving their teaching in order to get more students.
I'll excuse them for the acting. It may not be Hollywood quality, but it was good enough.
I will not excuse them for the plot. It was a complete failure. They've shown in the past that they can do better, therefore they should have done better this time as well.
When I'm counting my money, I'm definitely not counting my currencies. Indeed, when counting my currencies, I'd be finished quite fast, because all my money is in a single currency.
BTW, a simpler rule for "less" vs. "fewer" is that "less" goes with singular ("less water"), while "fewer" goes with a plural ("fewer waters"). So applying "fewer" to "money" would result in "fewer monies" which isn't possible because money has no plural.
Indeed, a large fleet of unmanned ships controlled by only few manned ships which look the same as the unmanned ships would probably be the best strategy. Given that you need many ships, those ships would be made as cheap as possible with the constraint that the manned ships need to be able to support the people on them, and the unmanned ships must at least from the outside be made the same way. In addition you'll have support ships, probably automated and mostly unmanned so they can be both cheaper and even more frequent, because otherwise it will be a better strategy for your enemy to just kill all your support ships and then wait until you run out of food and have to surrender.
At the time the texts in question had been written, the past they are speaking about wasn't yet too far away, so they had to get the historical facts right, or instead of convincing people, they would have been laughed away like "Oh, what? Tiberius started a census, but Herod tried to kill your Jesus afterwards? Herod was long dead when Tiberius got co-emperor! Why should I believe the rest of your story if you start with such a nonsense?" The best way to make sure you get no errors which someone might spot is to set a fixed date for all the invented events (but be sure to never mention it, or else any little error you made anyway might be found out and used to discredit your story). So even if the birth of Jesus was just made up, most likely there was a certain birth date in the mind. And if there were notable events on the sky which could well be interpreted in a convenient way, and which happened in a convenient period, the evangelists could well have used those to add more credibility to their story (remember, back then astrology was more or less universally accepted). And if they did so, it makes sense to ask about which event they might have had in mind.
So no matter whether or not you believe Jesus did exist, it does make sense to ask which celestial events might have been interpreted as the star of Bethlehem.
But in this case it's more like the mum of your friend says "no coke in my house" and your mum says "don't care about what she says, I allow you to drink coke there, that's all that counts."
Slashdot Mirror
You know, living at the north pole, he eats fish 264 day a year. So it's very understandable that he wants to eat something different at that one day.
It is very simple: If you don't want to boil your self to death, you must ultimately radiate away all the energy you get from your star. The biggest common misunderstanding about energy is the idea that we consume it. We don't consume energy, we just pass it through our systems. Now in what form do you radiate it away? Well, in the most useless form possible, because otherwise you'd waste precious energy. That form is the form of heat radiation, and the spectrum is determined by only two parameters: How much energy the star produces (which is the amount of energy to be radiated away), and how large the Dyson sphere is.
Think about it like the water of a river used to drive machines. We let the water run through our machines to use its power, but if we would keep that water, we'd soon drown. Instead we have to let all the water we use flow out again.
With energy it is basically the same. If we don't ultimately get rid of all the energy we use, we heat up and boil to death. We have to eventually re-emit all the energy; we just do so in the form of heat radiation.
OK, there's one thing which could actually lower the energy emission: Conversion of energy into matter and antimatter. So if we assume that the advanced civilisation use up a considerable part of the energy in order to produce matter and antimatter, it would reduce their energy output. The matter could be used to build things inside the sphere. However, unless they found a way to convert antimatter to matter, they would have to get rid of all the antimatter (transforming back into energy would lead back to the original emission). If they just throw it into space, it would react with other matter there (remember, we are speaking about massive amounts of antimatter, if it shall make a noticeable difference in the energy output), which would give a very obvious signal which I'm sure would already have been detected.
So the only way to have lower energy output would be if the advanced civilisation found a way to transform antimatter into matter, and uses a large fraction of the energy to create new matter.
I blame the JEWS.
And I blame the ANONYMOUS COWARDS.
I guess you restricted that to Africa because you know that you wouldn't have a chance to get even 100 on the IQ test ... but then, you'd no longer be alive at that point anyway, because in the previous step you advocated to euthanize all retards and morons.
If the work is done by robots anyway, then what is the advantage of producing in China (except when producing for the Chinese market)? You don't have the advantage of cheap workers (robots don't get wages), but you have the disadvantage of higher transport cost.
You should probably also read The Last Answer, also freely available online. An equally thought-provoking short story.
I believe the story you're referring to is "The Last Question" by Isaac Asimov.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Answer
No, I think GP really does mean The Last Question. That's the Asimov story with the Cosmic AC that [spoiler alert] re-creates the universe after the Heat Death.
Since he answered to a comment talking about "The Last Question" with the recommendation to also read "The Last Answer", it is pretty obvious that he did not mean "The Last Question".
I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't let you do that.
FTFY
Darn browser! Went to the wrong thread!
Ah, so it wasn't a Nokia helmet with built-in mapping? :-)
So when will they partner with Monsanto?
Most students are going to choose institutions where the certificate they get at the end will have the highest prestige attached. Now if certificates from universities with better teaching would provide higher prestige (which would make sense, because the students from there should be better educated, after all), then students would select the universities with the best teaching, and thus universities in turn would have a higher interest in improving their teaching in order to get more students.
I've found the pocket to be ideal to carry my cell phone. It has just the right size, and I've got it with me all the time.
SCNR
You should probably also read The Last Answer, also freely available online. An equally thought-provoking short story.
I believe the story you're referring to is "The Last Question" by Isaac Asimov.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Answer
Well, the developers of Linux desktop environments are working hard to change that. :-)
Sure. If I'll ever come across your software, I'll probably not complain either. I'll just not use it.
Before I judge this paper, I'll first wait some time whether it will get retracted because of misconduct. :-)
I foresee a trademark process, unless their method involves a mini-salami. :-)
ObBettridge'sLawofHeadlines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_Law_of_Headlines
Maxwell Demon's Law of Headlines
I'll excuse them for the acting. It may not be Hollywood quality, but it was good enough.
I will not excuse them for the plot. It was a complete failure. They've shown in the past that they can do better, therefore they should have done better this time as well.
Unfortunately all re-rendering will not be able to fix the script.
Personally, I think they did not do a fine job on this film. Nothing wrong with the effects, but even the best effects cannot save a bad story.
Sintel, on the other hand, had a great story.
When I'm counting my money, I'm definitely not counting my currencies. Indeed, when counting my currencies, I'd be finished quite fast, because all my money is in a single currency.
BTW, a simpler rule for "less" vs. "fewer" is that "less" goes with singular ("less water"), while "fewer" goes with a plural ("fewer waters"). So applying "fewer" to "money" would result in "fewer monies" which isn't possible because money has no plural.
So? That's not it's function.
"Gee, Bob! This apple tastes pretty damn good, but how was it supposed to teach me go program again?
It's from the tree of the knowledge.
Indeed, a large fleet of unmanned ships controlled by only few manned ships which look the same as the unmanned ships would probably be the best strategy. Given that you need many ships, those ships would be made as cheap as possible with the constraint that the manned ships need to be able to support the people on them, and the unmanned ships must at least from the outside be made the same way. In addition you'll have support ships, probably automated and mostly unmanned so they can be both cheaper and even more frequent, because otherwise it will be a better strategy for your enemy to just kill all your support ships and then wait until you run out of food and have to surrender.
At the time the texts in question had been written, the past they are speaking about wasn't yet too far away, so they had to get the historical facts right, or instead of convincing people, they would have been laughed away like "Oh, what? Tiberius started a census, but Herod tried to kill your Jesus afterwards? Herod was long dead when Tiberius got co-emperor! Why should I believe the rest of your story if you start with such a nonsense?" The best way to make sure you get no errors which someone might spot is to set a fixed date for all the invented events (but be sure to never mention it, or else any little error you made anyway might be found out and used to discredit your story). So even if the birth of Jesus was just made up, most likely there was a certain birth date in the mind. And if there were notable events on the sky which could well be interpreted in a convenient way, and which happened in a convenient period, the evangelists could well have used those to add more credibility to their story (remember, back then astrology was more or less universally accepted). And if they did so, it makes sense to ask about which event they might have had in mind.
So no matter whether or not you believe Jesus did exist, it does make sense to ask which celestial events might have been interpreted as the star of Bethlehem.
But in this case it's more like the mum of your friend says "no coke in my house" and your mum says "don't care about what she says, I allow you to drink coke there, that's all that counts."