You have posed a clever question to which I don't know the answer. Let me alter your question a bit to add some further possibilities. Suppose a photon is aimed off-center in the general direction of a black hole, so that gravitational forces alter the trajectory of the photon, but do not pull it into the center of the black hole or cause it to collide with something.
Depending on who you listen to, a photon either has some vestigial mass or it only has a resting mass equivalent to its energy. As it nears the black hole, its effective mass might increase, and/or its frequency/wavelength might change (implying a change of energy), and/or it might (magically) somehow split to shed the excess energy (I think I'm being silly here.) On to my more important point: if the photon passes the event horizon, still being aimed not to collide with anything, what stops it from coming back out again? Don't say it can't because nothing can come back out once having passed the event horizon, that's just begging the question. What mechanism actually prevents it from coming back out if nothing acts on it to reduce its energy? If something reduces its energy, what is it and how does it do so?
Keep in mind that close to a black hole calculations have to include relativistic effects, thus numeric results are going to be different for different frames of reference. Intuitive answers may be invalid.
The properties of nothingness are changing to become space at a speed faster than the maximum speed at which matter can travel through it.
Congratulations, you win the Sarah Palin Word Salad Award.
To the extent and in the context in which the word "space" has a cosmological meaning, it is not finite, does not go into or come out of existence, and most certainly doesn't happen when the "properties of nothingness are changing".
"Space" is a mental and mathematical handle for grabbing hold of the universe. Many words in common English simply can't be applied to it and the attempt to do so results in nonsense. For instance, space has neither an "outside" nor an "edge".
By what I know about space, distant objects are also 'older' than nearer objects.
That's your flawed premise. Distance doesn't imply the age of an object, but since we know the speed of light, we know that the light from something far away was emitted a long time ago. That "long time ago" establishes a floor for its age (after adjusting for relativity.)
Your understanding of relativity fails. I don't know the exact numbers, but roughly speaking, it goes like this. If planet A is moving left away you at 0.9c, and planet B is moving right away from you at 0.9c, then an observer on planet A will say that planet B is receding from him at 0.99c, and vice versa.
The last two elections have been charming and evil versus boring and mediocre. That's a huge difference, and Mr. Evil proved there are a lot of suckers.
Encouraging voting more than a couple of days before the election day is a bad idea. Some of the worst scandals only appear in the waning days of the campaign, so early voting gives scoundrels an advantage.
I'll tell you another group of people that don't like to register: people with an outstanding warrant for their arrest, which they are evading. Please explain what is wrong with that.
As I've pointed out above, proportional representation is disadvantageous for those states that use it.
Making proportional representation mandatory for all states would require a Constitutional amendment, and that's unlikely. But supposing it does pass, some very odd things happen. Small states become more powerful. Do you want a place as packed with loonies as Vermont to have more influence? What do you do about states with an even number of electors? Take 4 as an example. Does the party/candidate with 1 vote over 50% get 3 votes, and the other candidate 1? That state gains disproportionate influence. Should the deciding line be 62.5%, which would normally be considered a landslide, before it's allowed to be 3:1? That doesn't seem like a good idea to me; in almost all elections the split would be 2:2 and the state's electors would have absolutely no effect. How's that for the bogus issue of disenfranchisement, your state has no effect whatsoever?
I see you drank the Kool-Aid -- not the Jim Jones variety, but the Ken Kesey variety.
The court action in the Bush re-election was to prevent obvious abuse through repeated recounts until Democrats got what they wanted. Failing that, we would have ended up with another human turd like Al Franken and his stolen election. Wake up and see that major Democrat politicians are cheat, liars, and worse, without exception.
It is a serious problem that you think a politician should appeal to over half the people. Politicians (and everybody) should do what is right, and not what is popular.
And as for democracy being a good thing:
Think about the average uncultivated field
There's twenty thousand weeds for every flower
And over in the corner where manure's piled high
You'll find the weeds who want to be in power
--- Eileen McGann
You have placed yourself squarely in the middle of those who have a little information - the surface story provided by the popular press - but not enough information to actually understand the truth. You're obviously not aware that it is illegal for the President to send in the National Guard to help a state in an emergency without a request from the state's governor, and the La. governor refused to make such a request, for the purpose of making Bush look bad, until it was too late for the feds to help with the early damage.
Most of the blame for the disaster in New Orleans goes to the city and the state, although the Army Corps of Engineers deserves considerable blame for inadequate flood prevention.
"Little people" - individuals incompetent to make decisions for themselves of high enough quality to give them success in life - are not people who should be in a position to force their views on other people.
Obama has never had the potential to become anything but the worst American president. He's stated that he's lazy. His lifelong goal has been to destroy the United States of America. He is sympathetic to civilization's worst enemies (Russia and all the Islamists) and an enemy to America's best allies, Great Britain and Israel. Arguably, he is the most evil man ever to have lived.
everyone is issued a social security number at birth
That's a lie. Not everybody is born in a hospital where such a thing might be automatic. Naturalized citizens don't get a social security number at birth. I was born in Manhattan and didn't get one until I opened a bank account at about age 8.
Requiring a picture ID keeps many poor people from voting.
Another lie. State picture IDs are available at MVDs for either nothing or almost nothing, and last many years. One call to the headquarters of either major party would provide all the help needed to get the ID. If a person is too incompetent to get such an ID, he's far too mentally incompetent to be allowed to vote.
I think that election day should be a national holiday and no for-profit business should be allowed to be open.
You have just demonstrated that you are either too vicious or too ignorant to be allowed to vote. Most doctors are either in private for-profit business or a for-profit corporation. Some hospitals and many smaller medical centers are for-profit. So are some ambulance services and some fire companies. There are for-profit guard companies. Do you intend to shut down airlines? Railroads? Bus companies and taxi companies, that some people would need to use to get to the polls? Water companies? Telephone companies? Electric companies (Oh wouldn't that be jolly)? Private highways? Privately owned bridges?
1. In 1984 Reagan took all states except Minnesota.
2. "Winner takes all" rule is set by each state; it's not part of federal law. Some states have toyed with the idea of proportional voting, but it severely weakens that state's clout. Consider what a candidate would think about a state with eleven electoral votes. If the state were winner-take-all, he'd campaign hard to get 11 votes. If it were proportional, in all likelihood the best outcome would be 6 to 5, a net 1 vote advantage. Why bother when there are better return-on-effort states available?
An i7 has about 730 million transistors. Assume that's equivalent to 200 million 2 input NAND gates or 50 million 7400 packages. Dissipation is 10 mW per gate, so a 7400 equivalent to an i7 would draw 500 kW, and probably could not reach 5 MHz. Low power Schottky (74LS00) and the use of packaged flipflops could cut the dissipation greatly, and packaged RAM even more. Don't get any more complex than that, or hidden modes could be designed into the chips.
Anyone care to make an estimate for vacuum tubes? Relays?
Slashdot Mirror
You have posed a clever question to which I don't know the answer. Let me alter your question a bit to add some further possibilities. Suppose a photon is aimed off-center in the general direction of a black hole, so that gravitational forces alter the trajectory of the photon, but do not pull it into the center of the black hole or cause it to collide with something.
Depending on who you listen to, a photon either has some vestigial mass or it only has a resting mass equivalent to its energy. As it nears the black hole, its effective mass might increase, and/or its frequency/wavelength might change (implying a change of energy), and/or it might (magically) somehow split to shed the excess energy (I think I'm being silly here.) On to my more important point: if the photon passes the event horizon, still being aimed not to collide with anything, what stops it from coming back out again? Don't say it can't because nothing can come back out once having passed the event horizon, that's just begging the question. What mechanism actually prevents it from coming back out if nothing acts on it to reduce its energy? If something reduces its energy, what is it and how does it do so?
Keep in mind that close to a black hole calculations have to include relativistic effects, thus numeric results are going to be different for different frames of reference. Intuitive answers may be invalid.
Congratulations, you win the Sarah Palin Word Salad Award.
To the extent and in the context in which the word "space" has a cosmological meaning, it is not finite, does not go into or come out of existence, and most certainly doesn't happen when the "properties of nothingness are changing".
"Space" is a mental and mathematical handle for grabbing hold of the universe. Many words in common English simply can't be applied to it and the attempt to do so results in nonsense. For instance, space has neither an "outside" nor an "edge".
That's your flawed premise.
Distance doesn't imply the age of an object, but since we know the speed of light, we know that the light from something far away was emitted a long time ago. That "long time ago" establishes a floor for its age (after adjusting for relativity.)
Your understanding of relativity fails. I don't know the exact numbers, but roughly speaking, it goes like this. If planet A is moving left away you at 0.9c, and planet B is moving right away from you at 0.9c, then an observer on planet A will say that planet B is receding from him at 0.99c, and vice versa.
I think someone is failing to understand Zeno's paradox.
A. Nothing can go faster than the snail.
B. The balloon goes faster than the snail.
A. contradicts B.. The argument shoots itself in the head before it gets moving.
The last two elections have been charming and evil versus boring and mediocre. That's a huge difference, and Mr. Evil proved there are a lot of suckers.
Encouraging voting more than a couple of days before the election day is a bad idea. Some of the worst scandals only appear in the waning days of the campaign, so early voting gives scoundrels an advantage.
I'll tell you another group of people that don't like to register: people with an outstanding warrant for their arrest, which they are evading. Please explain what is wrong with that.
How on earth are your feelings relevant?
As I've pointed out above, proportional representation is disadvantageous for those states that use it.
Making proportional representation mandatory for all states would require a Constitutional amendment, and that's unlikely. But supposing it does pass, some very odd things happen. Small states become more powerful. Do you want a place as packed with loonies as Vermont to have more influence? What do you do about states with an even number of electors? Take 4 as an example. Does the party/candidate with 1 vote over 50% get 3 votes, and the other candidate 1? That state gains disproportionate influence. Should the deciding line be 62.5%, which would normally be considered a landslide, before it's allowed to be 3:1? That doesn't seem like a good idea to me; in almost all elections the split would be 2:2 and the state's electors would have absolutely no effect. How's that for the bogus issue of disenfranchisement, your state has no effect whatsoever?
I see you drank the Kool-Aid -- not the Jim Jones variety, but the Ken Kesey variety.
The court action in the Bush re-election was to prevent obvious abuse through repeated recounts until Democrats got what they wanted. Failing that, we would have ended up with another human turd like Al Franken and his stolen election. Wake up and see that major Democrat politicians are cheat, liars, and worse, without exception.
It is a serious problem that you think a politician should appeal to over half the people. Politicians (and everybody) should do what is right, and not what is popular.
And as for democracy being a good thing:
Think about the average uncultivated field
There's twenty thousand weeds for every flower
And over in the corner where manure's piled high
You'll find the weeds who want to be in power
--- Eileen McGann
You're assuming a perfect sample with no bias. 37% is not adequate for instance if a whole social economic group excludes itself.
FTFY.
You have placed yourself squarely in the middle of those who have a little information - the surface story provided by the popular press - but not enough information to actually understand the truth. You're obviously not aware that it is illegal for the President to send in the National Guard to help a state in an emergency without a request from the state's governor, and the La. governor refused to make such a request, for the purpose of making Bush look bad, until it was too late for the feds to help with the early damage.
Most of the blame for the disaster in New Orleans goes to the city and the state, although the Army Corps of Engineers deserves considerable blame for inadequate flood prevention.
"Little people" - individuals incompetent to make decisions for themselves of high enough quality to give them success in life - are not people who should be in a position to force their views on other people.
Obama has never had the potential to become anything but the worst American president. He's stated that he's lazy. His lifelong goal has been to destroy the United States of America. He is sympathetic to civilization's worst enemies (Russia and all the Islamists) and an enemy to America's best allies, Great Britain and Israel. Arguably, he is the most evil man ever to have lived.
Where in the constitution, or you're a liar.
That's a lie. Not everybody is born in a hospital where such a thing might be automatic. Naturalized citizens don't get a social security number at birth. I was born in Manhattan and didn't get one until I opened a bank account at about age 8.
Another lie. State picture IDs are available at MVDs for either nothing or almost nothing, and last many years. One call to the headquarters of either major party would provide all the help needed to get the ID. If a person is too incompetent to get such an ID, he's far too mentally incompetent to be allowed to vote.
You have just demonstrated that you are either too vicious or too ignorant to be allowed to vote. Most doctors are either in private for-profit business or a for-profit corporation. Some hospitals and many smaller medical centers are for-profit. So are some ambulance services and some fire companies. There are for-profit guard companies. Do you intend to shut down airlines? Railroads? Bus companies and taxi companies, that some people would need to use to get to the polls? Water companies? Telephone companies? Electric companies (Oh wouldn't that be jolly)? Private highways? Privately owned bridges?
Think before posting.
1. In 1984 Reagan took all states except Minnesota.
2. "Winner takes all" rule is set by each state; it's not part of federal law. Some states have toyed with the idea of proportional voting, but it severely weakens that state's clout. Consider what a candidate would think about a state with eleven electoral votes. If the state were winner-take-all, he'd campaign hard to get 11 votes. If it were proportional, in all likelihood the best outcome would be 6 to 5, a net 1 vote advantage. Why bother when there are better return-on-effort states available?
Polls are commonly open at least 11 hours a day. Very few people are working the whole time the polls are open.
Some plastics produce toxic fumes when burned. I'd guess that others produce residues like wood burning creates creosote.
What part of "Read Only" do you not understand?
Socket the ROM. If a vulnerability is discovered, pull it out and plug in a corrected ROM.
An i7 has about 730 million transistors. Assume that's equivalent to 200 million 2 input NAND gates or 50 million 7400 packages. Dissipation is 10 mW per gate, so a 7400 equivalent to an i7 would draw 500 kW, and probably could not reach 5 MHz. Low power Schottky (74LS00) and the use of packaged flipflops could cut the dissipation greatly, and packaged RAM even more. Don't get any more complex than that, or hidden modes could be designed into the chips.
Anyone care to make an estimate for vacuum tubes? Relays?
For most people, good judgement is not achieved until late 20s.