You might say know: Well, that's because SCO's claims are fucked and rubbish. Therefore these strange implications. But remember that this is a lawsuit in the US. You can get several millions of dollars for being too stupid to open a McDonalds coffee cup there.
The temperature of the coffee was so high, that she had to have reconstructive surgery on her vagina!
McDonalds employed persons to calculate the perfect temperature for the coffee to be maintained at.
How long it would be (on average) between the pooring of the coffee and the consumer's first sip a few miles down the road.
And then given cooling, how temperate did the coffee need to be initially for the coffee to still be good and hot when the average drive through customer took their first sip down the road.
And you know what the calculations turned out as an answer? Close to boiling temperature was required! Like 185 deg F or something. Newtonian cooling dictates an exponential fall off in temperature. Someone should have thought twice!
Besides, I'd rather pay an extra $10 in taxes this year than let some poor kid with a bullet in her stomach die on the street.
I am afraid that you are seriously ignorant of the American healthcare. Almost half of my extendend family works in the medical field.
If you come into the emergency room with a serious injury you will be treated - in fact it would he illegal for you not to be. Many poor people are treated for heart attacks and gun shot wounds, and they almost never end up paying for their treatment.
In such a situation, you are far more likely to be killed by a really bad insurance policy that would have you drive over to a different hospital while your gut bleeds all over your car seats.
A situation where a poor person might not recieve good treatment would be, say a person that needs a transplant of some sort, or something else really expensive. However there are childrens hospitals and other structures in place to deal with some of this.
But short and to the point, if you are a 60 year old hobo that needs a new liver - then you are probably going to die.
Re:It's that way with nuclear too....
on
Flavor vs. Flavour
·
· Score: 2, Funny
You think that's funny, but the second I discover the 5th fundamental force, I shall name it the nucular force!
Science doesn't get reality right a good precentage of the time; of course, this is just brushed under the carpet as 'statistical anomalies' where it doesn't fit a particular neatly held concept of how the system being measured works - and the simple act of measuring it can change the thing you intend to measure anyway.
Ehh. Most all biologists know that the concept of species is nonexistant idea only used for simple comprehension. There is no scientific model that has ever been found to be absolutely true. Even Dirac's theory of the electron is just a model.
I don't think you get what science is about at all. Maybe you had a bad teacher in high school or something. But a scientist that sweeps disagreeable data under the carpet is a bad scientist. And investigating events in nature that disagree with well established models is a BIG and IMPORTANT part of science.
Reality is not black and white - locked like ice crystals in a frozen pond. Reality is a constantly changing and evolving mess - that will usually change at the very point where we think we have it locked down. Reality is Murphy's Law in action.
Well science does assume that the world is rational. It would be reasonable to argue against that assumption, but doing so with a computer is a bit hypocritical. Because even if you can argue that science does not give us the ultimate truth (and you can), you cannot deny that it brings many short term gains that other philosophies do not.
The ultimate hubris is to think you know, without a shred of doubt, how anything really is. Murphy usually has a way of deflating our ego at that point; if we are lucky it doesn't involve the death of anyone.
That is a key point to science. I could go so far as to say that it is the great and golden rule of Feynman himself! Nothing is known to be sure, everything is to be questioned. This is the great difference between scientific thinking and dogmatic thinking. A scientific thinker has no faith.
And none of this has anything to do with Murphy's Law - the thing that goes wrong must first be possible.
Everything is just a rough approximation, hence the abandonment of my parent's myopic view of race, religeon, and the primacy of man's scientific control over mother nature. My life is an attempt to suck less than my parents. So far, so good.
I must say that neither Einstein nor Feynman had such silly ideas about the Truth in science.
And don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just because your stupid parents liked something doesn't mean that it is stupid too.
My friend had a PS and I had a Saturn. He bought Tomb Raider when it came out and I enjoyed it. I bought it on the Saturn and it was noticably worse than its PS counter part. Its colors were more muddy; its textures weren't as good; and it lacked some transparency effects with the plants and stuff.
RGB is an addative process for producing color to the eye. CMYK is a subtractive process for producing color on surfaces that bounce light to your eye. They don't equate.
If CMYK is subtractive, then how come when I add white to white, I don't get black?
Yeah so, big deal. I tried to sound sarcastic after that statement with the "wow man".
It is not original and it is not sufficiently, mathematically descriptive enough. His epic conclusion is but a passing thought for first year QM students.
An example of a good paper would be "Intervals of space/time contain no points, but instead they are composed of blah blah. Instead of using points set topology we must instead rely on blah blah. We measure distances using blah blah blah. Our model is approximately continuous in the limit blah blah blah."
Your criticism tend to fall in the journalistic realm. In most published papers some reviewers agree with the paper and some think it is hogwash. Criticizing a sound-byte is unwise as it puts meaning into a meaningless statement. As you mention, the Hiesenberg uncertainty principle (dx dp > hbar) applies to location and only indirectly to time. However, the fact that he is now asserting that time is smeared, and gives not explanation why, is not a big issue. The famous Planck postcard did not give a justification for quantization, it merely indicated that the black body paradox was solved if one assumed energy was quantized.
Pffft, what do you know of Heisenberg uncertainty
You have time-energy uncertainty as well as position-momentum uncertainty. This is because time and position are a 4 vector, as well as energy and momentum.
Or more specifically [x_mu,p_nu] = i h_bar eta_{mu,nu} where eta is the SR metric
First of all this kid needs to take a class in calculus and analysis. Though he took a limit of a geometric sum, it is very obvious that he doesn't really understand calculus in its rigor. All this paradox stuff is easily solved with analysis and can be a nonproblem when you aren't on a continuous interval. He seems to make no distinction between how you can think about space time and how it behaves. And he adds absolutely no new ideas to anything.
Secondly this kid needs to take a class in topology. HE REALLY NEEDS TO TAKE A CLASS IN TOPOLOGY. He tries to make some really bad descriptions of what intervals in space time are like, but it is quite obvious that he lacks the tools to properly describe his nonsense. He just keeps describing space time with intervals that contain no points. Wow man.
Thirdly he needs to take some fucking QM. He keeps using HU but he seems to have no effing clue as to what phase space is. And this goes back to the previous. How can you possibly try to describe the topology of space time if you don't even know what a fucking spin foam is.
Finally, whatever professor let this shit out needs to be kicked out of the science club. And whatever journal accepts this garbage needs to be burned.
I've had stupid ideas. I still have stupid ideas. But my peers don't let me go around showing off my ignorance to the world when I stumble upon a subject that I am inadequitely equiped to deal with.
Frankly all of this smells of some kind of reverse Sokal hoax, or those French twins that wrote those terrible cosmology papers where ++++ metrics magically transformed into +--- metrics in the beginning of time.
Regarding books, he had a vague request so I'll make some vague suggestions. Springer Verlag publishes lots of great mathbooks, as well as quite a few not so great. Some of them I can even read, and they do have a some series and books advertised for undergraduates. Look for yellow in any self respecting University library or technical bookstore.
Bwa, ha ha, ha ha, ha, ha
If you can learn from a yellow bound book without the help of a professor, then you don't need any help.
***IANAM BIAAP. I only own seven of their books, which is probably not a representative sample***
It would have been funny to me, if the band was actually dead like they claimed. But (un)fortunately, Blue Oyster Cult is one of the few bands that survived past its prime. It was hard for me to laugh when the script was full of blatant factual errors.
http://www.blueoystercult.com/Road-main.html
They still play to this day.
Seems like a stupid point to bring up, but I just couldn't find anything funny when my first reaction was "No they aren't!".
"Rex Nebular and the Cosmic Gender Bender" by Microprose
which would seem to load the game, but would actually load the terrible death scene of your head exploding in outerspace because you didn't seal the cracked windshield. On a single speed CD-ROM, this would make a dictionary attack very slow.
I swear to god that this was a real game, please don't mod me as a goat troll.
: fewer medicines would be taken through expensive trials if there was no prospect of a short-term monopoly
That may be a very bad example. Many people have noticed that companies are FAR more concerned with producing treatments than cures. Because a treatment is a steady flow of money and a cure is one-shot.
Also, drugs like AIDS medicines are highly inflated. Many countries want to illegaly procuce such medicines for a cheap price. You could probably find plenty of information about this with a few google searches.
In short, there are many advantages, but there are some terrible disadvantages as well.
You show me where that squid (or whatever) grew wings. You show me significant, non-fatal mutations of anything. You show me exactly how a pool of glop from wherever turns into life at all, much less the complicated being that you are...apparently skipping intermediary forms.
No guesses. No speculation. FACT. Pure and simple.
I find it very strange that you require vast amounts of evidence and logic to support a belief in some natural process that has almost no relevance to your everyday life.
Meanwhile you support a belief in God that is comparatively unjustified. Your belief in God is far more meaningful than your belief in evolution. But you have constrained the belief of evolution to such a level that it would be impossible to believe in God under the same constraints. I find that to be unbalanced.
You are an emotional thinker. Life is easier for you if your belief system feels right, than if it is logically consistant. That is your basis. You will never be able to come to terms with a logical thinker. Neither one of you can possibly argue to the other's satisfaction.
Slashdot Mirror
The temperature of the coffee was so high, that she had to have reconstructive surgery on her vagina!
McDonalds employed persons to calculate the perfect temperature for the coffee to be maintained at.
And you know what the calculations turned out as an answer? Close to boiling temperature was required! Like 185 deg F or something. Newtonian cooling dictates an exponential fall off in temperature. Someone should have thought twice!
Besides, I'd rather pay an extra $10 in taxes this year than let some poor kid with a bullet in her stomach die on the street.
I am afraid that you are seriously ignorant of the American healthcare. Almost half of my extendend family works in the medical field.
If you come into the emergency room with a serious injury you will be treated - in fact it would he illegal for you not to be. Many poor people are treated for heart attacks and gun shot wounds, and they almost never end up paying for their treatment.
In such a situation, you are far more likely to be killed by a really bad insurance policy that would have you drive over to a different hospital while your gut bleeds all over your car seats.
A situation where a poor person might not recieve good treatment would be, say a person that needs a transplant of some sort, or something else really expensive. However there are childrens hospitals and other structures in place to deal with some of this.
But short and to the point, if you are a 60 year old hobo that needs a new liver - then you are probably going to die.
You think that's funny, but the second I discover the 5th fundamental force, I shall name it the nucular force!
I shall set physics back decades.
But we call crisps chips
On that note
Isn't odd to be named "Catherine Zeta Jones"
How can you be named after a greek letter? What kind of a name is that?
What the hell is that "Zeta" short for? And if it is short for something, then why can't we call you "Catherine Zee Jones"?
Science doesn't get reality right a good precentage of the time; of course, this is just brushed under the carpet as 'statistical anomalies' where it doesn't fit a particular neatly held concept of how the system being measured works - and the simple act of measuring it can change the thing you intend to measure anyway.
Ehh. Most all biologists know that the concept of species is nonexistant idea only used for simple comprehension. There is no scientific model that has ever been found to be absolutely true. Even Dirac's theory of the electron is just a model.
I don't think you get what science is about at all. Maybe you had a bad teacher in high school or something. But a scientist that sweeps disagreeable data under the carpet is a bad scientist. And investigating events in nature that disagree with well established models is a BIG and IMPORTANT part of science.
Reality is not black and white - locked like ice crystals in a frozen pond. Reality is a constantly changing and evolving mess - that will usually change at the very point where we think we have it locked down. Reality is Murphy's Law in action.
Well science does assume that the world is rational. It would be reasonable to argue against that assumption, but doing so with a computer is a bit hypocritical. Because even if you can argue that science does not give us the ultimate truth (and you can), you cannot deny that it brings many short term gains that other philosophies do not.
The ultimate hubris is to think you know, without a shred of doubt, how anything really is. Murphy usually has a way of deflating our ego at that point; if we are lucky it doesn't involve the death of anyone.
That is a key point to science. I could go so far as to say that it is the great and golden rule of Feynman himself! Nothing is known to be sure, everything is to be questioned. This is the great difference between scientific thinking and dogmatic thinking. A scientific thinker has no faith.
And none of this has anything to do with Murphy's Law - the thing that goes wrong must first be possible.
Everything is just a rough approximation, hence the abandonment of my parent's myopic view of race, religeon, and the primacy of man's scientific control over mother nature. My life is an attempt to suck less than my parents. So far, so good.
I must say that neither Einstein nor Feynman had such silly ideas about the Truth in science.
And don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just because your stupid parents liked something doesn't mean that it is stupid too.
it will be a cold day in hell when your little toy OS even comes close to the UNREAL ability of SunOS to stay up under all kinda punishment
Ya. It's really too bad they dumped SunOS and switched to Solaris.
with the best Tomb Raider version
My friend had a PS and I had a Saturn. He bought Tomb Raider when it came out and I enjoyed it. I bought it on the Saturn and it was noticably worse than its PS counter part. Its colors were more muddy; its textures weren't as good; and it lacked some transparency effects with the plants and stuff.
>>Perhaps realize that a fair proportion of gameboy owners are adults and make more adult type games for it?
>There are even decent RPGs such as Golden Sun and Pokemon Ruby
I don't think you understand American culture.
RGB is an addative process for producing color to the eye. CMYK is a subtractive process for producing color on surfaces that bounce light to your eye. They don't equate.
If CMYK is subtractive, then how come when I add white to white, I don't get black?
That's why you get a Ti-89
It has all of the software of the Ti-92+ in the Ti-8X form factor and it has a better contrast screen.
And now that you can program Ti-89/92/83 in both assembly and C, the HP's have absolutely no more advantage left.
It isn't a good enough replacement for a scientist, but it works well for high school students and non-physics/math/EE majors.
If someone were to port LISP and Maxima (which are free) to a PDA, it would immediately be a magnitude more powerful than the Ti-89.
Yeah so, big deal. I tried to sound sarcastic after that statement with the "wow man".
It is not original and it is not sufficiently, mathematically descriptive enough. His epic conclusion is but a passing thought for first year QM students.
An example of a good paper would be "Intervals of space/time contain no points, but instead they are composed of blah blah. Instead of using points set topology we must instead rely on blah blah. We measure distances using blah blah blah. Our model is approximately continuous in the limit blah blah blah."
It's a big steaming pile of shit.
No, i don't think that is right
Wheeler coined it in the late 60's
before that they were known as gravitationally collapsed stars
and before that (and before GR) they were known as dark stars
Your criticism tend to fall in the journalistic realm. In most published papers some reviewers agree with the paper and some think it is hogwash. Criticizing a sound-byte is unwise as it puts meaning into a meaningless statement. As you mention, the Hiesenberg uncertainty principle (dx dp > hbar) applies to location and only indirectly to time. However, the fact that he is now asserting that time is smeared, and gives not explanation why, is not a big issue. The famous Planck postcard did not give a justification for quantization, it merely indicated that the black body paradox was solved if one assumed energy was quantized.
Pffft, what do you know of Heisenberg uncertainty
You have time-energy uncertainty as well as position-momentum uncertainty. This is because time and position are a 4 vector, as well as energy and momentum.
Or more specifically [x_mu,p_nu] = i h_bar eta_{mu,nu}
where eta is the SR metric
This is all old hat stuff.
The paper is garbage; it all stinks of a hoax.
I read this shit and here is what I have to say
First of all this kid needs to take a class in calculus and analysis. Though he took a limit of a geometric sum, it is very obvious that he doesn't really understand calculus in its rigor. All this paradox stuff is easily solved with analysis and can be a nonproblem when you aren't on a continuous interval. He seems to make no distinction between how you can think about space time and how it behaves. And he adds absolutely no new ideas to anything.
Secondly this kid needs to take a class in topology. HE REALLY NEEDS TO TAKE A CLASS IN TOPOLOGY. He tries to make some really bad descriptions of what intervals in space time are like, but it is quite obvious that he lacks the tools to properly describe his nonsense. He just keeps describing space time with intervals that contain no points. Wow man.
Thirdly he needs to take some fucking QM. He keeps using HU but he seems to have no effing clue as to what phase space is. And this goes back to the previous. How can you possibly try to describe the topology of space time if you don't even know what a fucking spin foam is.
Finally, whatever professor let this shit out needs to be kicked out of the science club. And whatever journal accepts this garbage needs to be burned.
I've had stupid ideas. I still have stupid ideas. But my peers don't let me go around showing off my ignorance to the world when I stumble upon a subject that I am inadequitely equiped to deal with.
Frankly all of this smells of some kind of reverse Sokal hoax, or those French twins that wrote those terrible cosmology papers where ++++ metrics magically transformed into +--- metrics in the beginning of time.
Regarding books, he had a vague request so I'll make some vague suggestions. Springer Verlag publishes lots of great mathbooks, as well as quite a few not so great. Some of them I can even read, and they do have a some series and books advertised for undergraduates. Look for yellow in any self respecting University library or technical bookstore.
Bwa, ha ha, ha ha, ha, ha
If you can learn from a yellow bound book without the help of a professor, then you don't need any help.
***IANAM BIAAP. I only own seven of their books, which is probably not a representative sample***
"I just wonder if a monkey can keep a beat, that'll show 'em. Hey, you know you aren't doing a good job if a beat-box can replace you."
How many drummers does it take to replace a light bulb?
None, we have a machine that can do that now.
It would have been funny to me, if the band was actually dead like they claimed. But (un)fortunately, Blue Oyster Cult is one of the few bands that survived past its prime. It was hard for me to laugh when the script was full of blatant factual errors.
http://www.blueoystercult.com/Road-main.html
They still play to this day.
Seems like a stupid point to bring up, but I just couldn't find anything funny when my first reaction was "No they aren't!".
That's where people look when they are thinking hard.
Seriously.
Ahh, but I had a game,
7 18 .html
"Rex Nebular and the Cosmic Gender Bender" by Microprose
which would seem to load the game, but would actually load the terrible death scene of your head exploding in outerspace because you didn't seal the cracked windshield. On a single speed CD-ROM, this would make a dictionary attack very slow.
I swear to god that this was a real game, please don't mod me as a goat troll.
http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin/data/11
That may be a very bad example. Many people have noticed that companies are FAR more concerned with producing treatments than cures. Because a treatment is a steady flow of money and a cure is one-shot.
Also, drugs like AIDS medicines are highly inflated. Many countries want to illegaly procuce such medicines for a cheap price. You could probably find plenty of information about this with a few google searches.
In short, there are many advantages, but there are some terrible disadvantages as well.
The last digit is going to be rounded anyhow, so the uncertainty is atleast 0.5*10^-n, for the last nth digit.
so the uncertainty of the honeytoken number will have the uncertainty of about 10 good numbers added together.
I would say the chances of a scientist doing a calculation
is slim to none.
and wars!
No guesses. No speculation. FACT. Pure and simple.
I find it very strange that you require vast amounts of evidence and logic to support a belief in some natural process that has almost no relevance to your everyday life.
Meanwhile you support a belief in God that is comparatively unjustified. Your belief in God is far more meaningful than your belief in evolution. But you have constrained the belief of evolution to such a level that it would be impossible to believe in God under the same constraints. I find that to be unbalanced.
You are an emotional thinker. Life is easier for you if your belief system feels right, than if it is logically consistant. That is your basis. You will never be able to come to terms with a logical thinker. Neither one of you can possibly argue to the other's satisfaction.