He pushes his incorrect Gravity theory that inserts a gravitational potential term into the field equations.
Upon talking to him it becomes absolutely clear that he hasn't the slightest clue as to the fundamentals of Riemannian Geometry. I.E. he makes claims about the fallacy of GR that would prove Riemannian Geometry to be false as well. And we all know that you can prove physics to be wrong but math is axiomatic and perfect by design.
I don't take Gravity until next year and even I can tell that he is full of shit.
But he was once an experimentalist and now he has tenor. So what the hell can you do.
The reason is that the human ear cannot locate the source of low bass very well. The wavelength of the sound is very long and our ears are not so large. Therefore it is cheaper, easier, and more efficient to simply seperate to low frequencies from the rest of the audio.
This (could) give more frequency range to the rest of music. This allows you to have 5 very small speakers.
Perhaps if we were elephants or blue whales, then this would be a problem. But seperating the low bass is no worse than cutting the frequency off at 20-24k as far as humans are concerned.
A real shell can handle spaces just fine by one of two methods 1) put the file name in quotes, i.e. "My Computer" 2) use the escape sequence (or what other method) , i.e. "\ " or something.
My choice of shell, bash, works just fine with spaces; tab completion and everything.
You would have to know the internal address of the router. It is 192.168.1.1 by default, but it can be changed.
Also the vulnerable firmware versions are fairly old, and it is very easy to upgrade the firmware. You can either tftp the file to the device or use its webserver to upload the file from a webpage.
Trust me, I love PHP. I wrote a book on PHP and think it can do great things.. but for enterprise level applications and for quite a few tasks it just isn't there.
So according to you running Yahoo is not enterprise?
You are forgeting that Linus and AC and all of the other uber hackers work on the bleeding edge.
Here is the list of _maintained_ stable kernels
We are almost to 2.0.40 We have 2.2.22 We are almost to 2.4.20 (current stable) Soon we will be on 2.6.0 or 3.0.0 as well
Apple could have easily started on the stable 2.0 and then jumped to the next stable series every few years.
So that can't be the reason. I can only assume that they thought a micro kernel would be some great technology. But then again Mach has been a big fat whore since before MKLinux.
Why would you encode an ogg with a CBR. That is pointless. If you are concerned about streaming then you would just want to limit the max BR. Otherwise you are wasting data. And if ogg can't do this, then it isn't useful for streaming.
I know this, and I have no clue as to which sounds better.
This arrangement is the worst possible, since you will have 100% phase cancellation (in theory).
I assume by phase cancellation, you mean destructive interference.
No.
In theory, any interference will depend on where you are sitting and the frequency of the sound.
In theory you calculate the distance you are from each speaker and then take the difference. You then see if that difference is closer to a integer or integer and a half number of wavelengths.
Also if the frequencies change very rapidly, then you have to factor that in as well.
This effect will vary greatly due to diffraction
What are you saying that the waves are diffracting around? Do you listen to music in another room, or perhaps behind some slits.
And we consider them to be one entity, the EM stress energy tensor, not E and B seperately.
And we don't look so hard for magnetic charge, because we have written our equations in a manner that doesn't suggest their existence as much.
Technically speaking, Maxwells equations give a coupled system of PDE's between E and B, while SR gives one nice tensor equation. Go see for your self.
Google AlltheWeb Alta Vista AOL Search| MAX mp3 21,600,000 40,389,194 6,028,345 15,500,000| 40,389,194 sex 61,600,000 34,187,160 20,407,458 34,000,000| 61,600,000
And this is, in fact, how things work. It costs public universities much more money to educate a foreigner, because the state may not help. Therefore the schools pick only a few, very talented foreigners out of the hundreds of foreign applications. It is a problem of constraints, money versus quality and quantity.
The universities know how much money they have to work with. They know how much an American student will cost them. They know how much a foreign student will cost them (much more). They know the merit of the applicants. The only thing they don't know is the acceptance percentage and the attrition rate. Therefore they do some statistical guess work in giving out acceptances.
"Most of the decent schools accept mostly American students, and only a small number of overseas students (who are usually much stronger). Some of the weaker universities accept a lot of foreign students."
This seems to be true in general, but I wanted to share something that I noticed when I visted graduate schools. I will not name my subject because I do not want to get anyone in trouble.
I applied to schools not entirely based on rank so the schools I visted ranged from the top 10's, top 20, top 30, and even top 40. I did notice that the higher ranked schools had less foreign students.
But I also noticed something very odd. The top 10 schools are mostly (if not all) private. And their foreign students consisted almost entirely of white, english speaking foreigners (African, Australian,...). I thought that perhaps this was because they must all be very good students. But one student I met seemed to have a fairly weak undergraduate background - this student would have never been accepted to this school if they were an applying American. This leads me to believe that there is some sort of racism occuring in the prestigious, private schools.
This is different from undergraduate school, because in my field no one pays for graduate school, it is always free. Public universities always accept as few foreigners as possible, because state taxes want to pay for American education. But private schools are free to do as they please, so I hypothesize that they want to accept some minimum number of foreigners and from the pool of applicants they pick based on some social motivations.
I you read the material that comes with the GRE study guide that you get in the mail, then you would know this to be true. So for people that have taken the GRE, this is well known.
For example, today, because the math section is so stupidly easy you can often miss no questions in math and still only score a 96%, because many other people made perfect as well.
Also, in the general GRE, you are tested in 4 sections where one section is completely experimental. When I took the GRE I figured out that my first logic section was experimental because I am good at logic but later into the test (the questions get more difficult as you answer correctly) the problems became a mess of (like 12) variables with huge diagrams. I became frantic because I couldn't finish the section. But the second logic section that came up was as simple as those in the practice exams.
(*) Sigmund Freud, the modern founder of psychology, however misguided his conclusions might be considerd today, did start by collecting and publishing tons of data from his patients.
Yes but his sample was extremely biased.
It would be like making a theory of brownian motion from Beta-decay data.
Your argument implies that you are giving two choices that are set compliment. That is, you can choose A or not A.
So when I ask "have you told your parents that you are gay?", then it seems that you can only answer yes or no, though both would imply that you are gay.
Your argument implies that there are only two choices: sacrifice the innocent to the mob or let the mob harm other innocents, though both would result in bad things happening.
In addition, there is another flaw that I did not immediately see. Your argument only applies to a moral system that attempts to achieve a maximum/minimum of pleasure/pain. Moral systems of this type are easily trashed, and you have probably already realized this.
I hope you understand this now. (But I am not saying that I disagree.)
Re:The proof that physic isn't full of fraud...
on
Ununoctium Wrapup
·
· Score: 1
Your argument is getting way off track.
I can define red as a certain wavelength. Other people can claim they have red when they really have orange, but that will not change anything. They can also redefine red as being orange, but that will also not change anything.
You can take statements like "creationist-scientists are not scientists because they do not follow the scientific method" to be true because they follow from the definitions.
And yes the definition does matter, precisely because science is not some God-like transcendental idea; it is a human idea. Implicit to science is honesty, and if you cannot see how that immediately rejects psuedo-scientific data mungers, then you have seriously confused your self. And if you can't figure out whose definitions you should be using, then that is your own personal problem.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh dear god, that's like the goatse of anime posts!
Oh! memories leave me alone!
Yup, we have a crank at my university.
He pushes his incorrect Gravity theory that inserts a gravitational potential term into the field equations.
Upon talking to him it becomes absolutely clear that he hasn't the slightest clue as to the fundamentals of Riemannian Geometry. I.E. he makes claims about the fallacy of GR that would prove Riemannian Geometry to be false as well. And we all know that you can prove physics to be wrong but math is axiomatic and perfect by design.
I don't take Gravity until next year and even I can tell that he is full of shit.
But he was once an experimentalist and now he has tenor. So what the hell can you do.
The reason is that the human ear cannot locate the source of low bass very well. The wavelength of the sound is very long and our ears are not so large. Therefore it is cheaper, easier, and more efficient to simply seperate to low frequencies from the rest of the audio.
This (could) give more frequency range to the rest of music.
This allows you to have 5 very small speakers.
Perhaps if we were elephants or blue whales, then this would be a problem. But seperating the low bass is no worse than cutting the frequency off at 20-24k as far as humans are concerned.
nope, I'm afraid that you're both incorrect
A real shell can handle spaces just fine by one of two methods
1) put the file name in quotes, i.e. "My Computer"
2) use the escape sequence (or what other method) , i.e. "\ " or something.
My choice of shell, bash, works just fine with spaces; tab completion and everything.
You would have to know the internal address of the router. It is 192.168.1.1 by default, but it can be changed.
Also the vulnerable firmware versions are fairly old, and it is very easy to upgrade the firmware. You can either tftp the file to the device or use its webserver to upload the file from a webpage.
Trust me, I love PHP. I wrote a book on PHP and think it can do great things.. but for enterprise level applications and for quite a few tasks it just isn't there.
So according to you running Yahoo is not enterprise?
You are forgeting that Linus and AC and all of the other uber hackers work on the bleeding edge.
Here is the list of _maintained_ stable kernels
We are almost to 2.0.40
We have 2.2.22
We are almost to 2.4.20 (current stable)
Soon we will be on 2.6.0 or 3.0.0 as well
Apple could have easily started on the stable 2.0 and then jumped to the next stable series every few years.
So that can't be the reason. I can only assume that they thought a micro kernel would be some great technology. But then again Mach has been a big fat whore since before MKLinux.
At least they didn't wait for Hurd.
Why would you encode an ogg with a CBR. That is pointless. If you are concerned about streaming then you would just want to limit the max BR. Otherwise you are wasting data. And if ogg can't do this, then it isn't useful for streaming.
I know this, and I have no clue as to which sounds better.
If I had designed that OS, then you would have erased your floppy disk.
This arrangement is the worst possible, since you will have 100% phase cancellation (in theory).
I assume by phase cancellation, you mean destructive interference.
No.
In theory, any interference will depend on where you are sitting and the frequency of the sound.
In theory you calculate the distance you are from each speaker and then take the difference. You then see if that difference is closer to a integer or integer and a half number of wavelengths.
Also if the frequencies change very rapidly, then you have to factor that in as well.
This effect will vary greatly due to diffraction
What are you saying that the waves are diffracting around? Do you listen to music in another room, or perhaps behind some slits.
I bought my mobo over a year ago. It has 4 slots with 256MB in each slot for a total of 1GB RAM. I'm sure I payed around $200 for it.
Perhaps you are speaking about Intel motherboards, because that simply isn't true for AMD mobos.
Well Stephen Wolfram is a crack. Have you read his book.
Iraq as a target has nothing to do with "terrorism" and everything to do with a Bush family grudge
Exactly.
When Saddam writes those checks to the widowed families of suicide bombers, he does it out of love and compassion.
Yes, but ...
Today we consider them to be one force, E&M.
And we consider them to be one entity, the EM stress energy tensor, not E and B seperately.
And we don't look so hard for magnetic charge, because we have written our equations in a manner that doesn't suggest their existence as much.
Technically speaking, Maxwells equations give a coupled system of PDE's between E and B, while SR gives one nice tensor equation. Go see for your self.
Google AlltheWeb Alta Vista AOL Search| MAX
mp3 21,600,000 40,389,194 6,028,345 15,500,000| 40,389,194
sex 61,600,000 34,187,160 20,407,458 34,000,000| 61,600,000
sex rules!
Are you sure that a Firewire PCI card is going to be faster than USB2 built into the motherboard?
And this is, in fact, how things work. It costs public universities much more money to educate a foreigner, because the state may not help. Therefore the schools pick only a few, very talented foreigners out of the hundreds of foreign applications. It is a problem of constraints, money versus quality and quantity.
The universities know how much money they have to work with. They know how much an American student will cost them. They know how much a foreign student will cost them (much more). They know the merit of the applicants. The only thing they don't know is the acceptance percentage and the attrition rate. Therefore they do some statistical guess work in giving out acceptances.
"Most of the decent schools accept mostly American students, and only a small number of overseas students (who are usually much stronger). Some of the weaker universities accept a lot of foreign students."
...). I thought that perhaps this was because they must all be very good students. But one student I met seemed to have a fairly weak undergraduate background - this student would have never been accepted to this school if they were an applying American. This leads me to believe that there is some sort of racism occuring in the prestigious, private schools.
This seems to be true in general, but I wanted to share something that I noticed when I visted graduate schools. I will not name my subject because I do not want to get anyone in trouble.
I applied to schools not entirely based on rank so the schools I visted ranged from the top 10's, top 20, top 30, and even top 40. I did notice that the higher ranked schools had less foreign students.
But I also noticed something very odd. The top 10 schools are mostly (if not all) private. And their foreign students consisted almost entirely of white, english speaking foreigners (African, Australian,
This is different from undergraduate school, because in my field no one pays for graduate school, it is always free. Public universities always accept as few foreigners as possible, because state taxes want to pay for American education. But private schools are free to do as they please, so I hypothesize that they want to accept some minimum number of foreigners and from the pool of applicants they pick based on some social motivations.
I you read the material that comes with the GRE study guide that you get in the mail, then you would know this to be true. So for people that have taken the GRE, this is well known.
For example, today, because the math section is so stupidly easy you can often miss no questions in math and still only score a 96%, because many other people made perfect as well.
Also, in the general GRE, you are tested in 4 sections where one section is completely experimental. When I took the GRE I figured out that my first logic section was experimental because I am good at logic but later into the test (the questions get more difficult as you answer correctly) the problems became a mess of (like 12) variables with huge diagrams. I became frantic because I couldn't finish the section. But the second logic section that came up was as simple as those in the practice exams.
My professor wondered why a cat always lands right side up.
He took a cat and video taped it falling.
He looked at the footage and noticed that the cat's tail was spinning in the opposite direction - to conserve angular momentum.
So he decided to tape the cat's tail down and rerun the experiment.
All this while running the video camera.
The cat was sick of experiments and violently lashed out at him.
All on tape.
(*) Sigmund Freud, the modern founder of psychology, however misguided his conclusions might be considerd today, did start by collecting and publishing tons of data from his patients.
Yes but his sample was extremely biased.
It would be like making a theory of brownian motion from Beta-decay data.
Are you sure you didn't read that somewhere? His famous "reduction to absurdidty" is the same scenario.
Your argument implies that you are giving two choices that are set compliment. That is, you can choose A or not A.
So when I ask "have you told your parents that you are gay?", then it seems that you can only answer yes or no, though both would imply that you are gay.
Your argument implies that there are only two choices: sacrifice the innocent to the mob or let the mob harm other innocents, though both would result in bad things happening.
In addition, there is another flaw that I did not immediately see. Your argument only applies to a moral system that attempts to achieve a maximum/minimum of pleasure/pain. Moral systems of this type are easily trashed, and you have probably already realized this.
I hope you understand this now. (But I am not saying that I disagree.)
Your argument is getting way off track.
I can define red as a certain wavelength. Other people can claim they have red when they really have orange, but that will not change anything. They can also redefine red as being orange, but that will also not change anything.
You can take statements like "creationist-scientists are not scientists because they do not follow the scientific method" to be true because they follow from the definitions.
And yes the definition does matter, precisely because science is not some God-like transcendental idea; it is a human idea. Implicit to science is honesty, and if you cannot see how that immediately rejects psuedo-scientific data mungers, then you have seriously confused your self. And if you can't figure out whose definitions you should be using, then that is your own personal problem.
Your argument is crap. You present a black and white, binary choice that forces you into acting immorally to achieve success.
This is similar to the following
"Did you tell your parents that you are gay?"