The currency has imploded, you just haven't been paying attention. In 50 years, the dollar has lost about 98% of its value. Yearly fluctuations do not invalidate the trend.
I'm 62. If Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid were annihilated today, the improvement in the nations economy would overwhelm the effects of losing the government programs for me.
Vote fraud is historically tied to the Democrat party, and the Chicago machine that spawned Obama is the well-known master of the process.
Republicans, and any honest person, support making registration more difficult. Where I live, you can walk into any polling place on election day, say "I live here now", and be given a ballot and allowed to vote. That is an open invitation to voter fraud, and ought to be changed.
Romney is closely coupled to his health care plan in Massachusetts, which he steadfastly refuses to disown.
A mandatory government-run healthcare program is economically disastrous, profoundly immoral, and fascist. Anyone who supports it (and that means both Obama and Romney) should be immediately rejected as a candidate for public office.
1. People are individuals As far as I can tell, some homosexuals are born that way, others are neutral and do have the ability to choose one way or the other. Don't say it ain't so, I've spoken to at least one of the latter group.
2. Have you read the Koran? I've read part of it, and what I read was vicious. Given that and the demonstrated behavior of Muslims that makes the news frequently, any rational person will decide that examining Muslims extra-closely is very important for top government positions. Is it bigotry to recognize that a group of people want to kill you, to say so, and to take steps to prevent it?
3. Many, probably most, of the Wall Street protesters are "mind-numbed robots", an insult to the concept of "human being". Cain has it right.
Alas, Ron Paul justified his politics on the basis of religion within the last few days.
Romney doesn't push religion because (possibly among other reasons) Mormonism stands out as silly even within the madhouse that is Christianity. That said, most religious people don't base the bulk of their decisions on religious doctrine (because if they did they'd be dead of natural causes in a few weeks.) The best that can be done is to listen to what the candidate actually says, watch what he does, and try to integrate that with the tendencies of the religious group in question. Mormons tend toward being good businessmen, but they also tend to be suckers (in fact there are groups of con men who specialize in Mormons because they are recognized as being credulous.)
We very much do not want another Republican gull as President, although even that is better than a tyrant like Obama.
Your tying of the Pauls' consistent support of freedom to racism is so dishonest it's breathtaking. Their message is freedom. For everybody who's not justly in jail. Everything else is in support of that principle or derived from it.
The Civil War resolved the question of whether a president dedicated to preserving the union at any cost, no matter how extreme, can defeat a militarily, economically, and philosophically weaker group of states that decide to secede. It was not a question of law, just raw force and determination.
A US government headed by a president who isn't power hungry, and who is sympathetic to the cause of a group of states that wanted to leave or who philosophically defended the right of a people to form their own government (as proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence) could persuade the rest of the country that "we don't need people who oppose us."
The only sitting president to lose a nomination was Franklin Pierce in 1856.
Although Lyndon Johnson beat Eugene McCarthy in the New Hampshire primary, the margin was pretty small. When Robert Kennedy also entered the race as an antiwar candidate, Johnson knew his chances of winning were poor and he withdrew from the race. As a result, Nixon beat Humphrey, even with George Wallace probably siphoning off more votes from Nixon than Humphrey.
No he does not need a special mentor, nor does he need special schooling. He needs to learn to function in the normal world.
That is precisely what he doesn't need, and is what would be most damaging to him. There's no need to drag him down to your level. A supergenius can do the most good for both himself and society if he can use his mind in the most effective manner and be insulated from the humdrum of common activities. This is the principle of division of labor, clarified by Adam Smith over 200 years ago and discovered by others long before that.
Well, lucky for Alaska, they are one of the least populated states in the union and thus can afford not to charge sales taxes.
That is extremely illogical, in fact, anti-logical. Denser, more populous states should enjoy economies of scale.
Alaska has a high cost of living because of cold weather and high transportation costs from manufacturing centers, among a myriad of problems.
There are a few states without general income or sales taxes. That's nice, but more important is a low overall tax burden. Low taxes and low government spending tend to go with efficient government, less government corruption, fewer slackers on the dole, higher productivity, and better general morality.
Solid propellant just works. Liquid propellant requires pumps or regulated gas pressure to drive the propellant to the combustion chamber. Liquid propellant is more difficult, thus more impressive.
AFAIK the best chemical propellants are liquified gasses: hydrogen with fluorine or O2 or O3. Better propellant is more impressive.
He didn't say escape velocity, he said orbital speed. In low earth orbit, 1 trip around the earth is approximately 90 minutes, or roughly 4-1/2 miles/second.
Yup, sure. Humans will wipe out all the endangered species on the Earth's moon, and Venus, and Mercury, and Mars, and the asteroids... Corporations will make all those places unfit for human life.
http://www.revetec.com/ claims to be the most efficient. The crankshaft is replaced with a desmodromic cam system. The claim is that efficiency is gained by having no cylinder wall drag and (mostly) by having better "mechanical advantage" between the piston and the driveshaft. (The argument seems fallacious to me.) In any case, it's an interesting design and fairly easy to understand. As a disadvantage, the design seems to be badly unbalanced.
Efficient external combustion engines can only be highly efficient if they are big, heavy, and run slowly. Also, most EC designs are less safe, because they have large high pressure vessels holding the acting fluid (usually water). Consider that one safety technique in areas with high pressure steam pipes is to walk around waving a piece of lumber in front of you. If the wood is lopped off, you've found (an invisible and unheard) steam leak.
As others have pointed out, having a second crankshaft is at least as big a disadvantage as having a cylinder head.
A second problem is the use of slide valves in an internal combustion engine. I'm not a mechanical engineer, but I know that IC engine valves take a lot of abuse and my guess is that slide valves aren't up to the job.
In addition, the claim that this engine is going to use 25% to 50% less fuel than a conventional IC engine is just plain bogus.
Slashdot Mirror
The currency has imploded, you just haven't been paying attention. In 50 years, the dollar has lost about 98% of its value. Yearly fluctuations do not invalidate the trend.
I'm 62. If Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid were annihilated today, the improvement in the nations economy would overwhelm the effects of losing the government programs for me.
Vote fraud is historically tied to the Democrat party, and the Chicago machine that spawned Obama is the well-known master of the process.
Republicans, and any honest person, support making registration more difficult. Where I live, you can walk into any polling place on election day, say "I live here now", and be given a ballot and allowed to vote. That is an open invitation to voter fraud, and ought to be changed.
Romney is closely coupled to his health care plan in Massachusetts, which he steadfastly refuses to disown.
A mandatory government-run healthcare program is economically disastrous, profoundly immoral, and fascist. Anyone who supports it (and that means both Obama and Romney) should be immediately rejected as a candidate for public office.
Nope, no such person as Condoleezza Rice. No such person as Clarence Thomas. No such person as Colin Powell.
Given that the vast majority of "blacks" are Democrats, they are remarkably well accepted and supported in the Republican party.
1. People are individuals As far as I can tell, some homosexuals are born that way, others are neutral and do have the ability to choose one way or the other. Don't say it ain't so, I've spoken to at least one of the latter group.
2. Have you read the Koran? I've read part of it, and what I read was vicious. Given that and the demonstrated behavior of Muslims that makes the news frequently, any rational person will decide that examining Muslims extra-closely is very important for top government positions. Is it bigotry to recognize that a group of people want to kill you, to say so, and to take steps to prevent it?
3. Many, probably most, of the Wall Street protesters are "mind-numbed robots", an insult to the concept of "human being". Cain has it right.
Alas, Ron Paul justified his politics on the basis of religion within the last few days.
Romney doesn't push religion because (possibly among other reasons) Mormonism stands out as silly even within the madhouse that is Christianity. That said, most religious people don't base the bulk of their decisions on religious doctrine (because if they did they'd be dead of natural causes in a few weeks.) The best that can be done is to listen to what the candidate actually says, watch what he does, and try to integrate that with the tendencies of the religious group in question. Mormons tend toward being good businessmen, but they also tend to be suckers (in fact there are groups of con men who specialize in Mormons because they are recognized as being credulous.)
We very much do not want another Republican gull as President, although even that is better than a tyrant like Obama.
So Murray Rothbard never wrote a 4 volume history of the United States, "Conceived in Liberty"?
Your tying of the Pauls' consistent support of freedom to racism is so dishonest it's breathtaking. Their message is freedom. For everybody who's not justly in jail. Everything else is in support of that principle or derived from it.
The Civil War resolved the question of whether a president dedicated to preserving the union at any cost, no matter how extreme, can defeat a militarily, economically, and philosophically weaker group of states that decide to secede. It was not a question of law, just raw force and determination.
A US government headed by a president who isn't power hungry, and who is sympathetic to the cause of a group of states that wanted to leave or who philosophically defended the right of a people to form their own government (as proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence) could persuade the rest of the country that "we don't need people who oppose us."
Although Lyndon Johnson beat Eugene McCarthy in the New Hampshire primary, the margin was pretty small. When Robert Kennedy also entered the race as an antiwar candidate, Johnson knew his chances of winning were poor and he withdrew from the race. As a result, Nixon beat Humphrey, even with George Wallace probably siphoning off more votes from Nixon than Humphrey.
Semtex is.
That is precisely what he doesn't need, and is what would be most damaging to him. There's no need to drag him down to your level. A supergenius can do the most good for both himself and society if he can use his mind in the most effective manner and be insulated from the humdrum of common activities. This is the principle of division of labor, clarified by Adam Smith over 200 years ago and discovered by others long before that.
That is extremely illogical, in fact, anti-logical. Denser, more populous states should enjoy economies of scale.
Alaska has a high cost of living because of cold weather and high transportation costs from manufacturing centers, among a myriad of problems.
There are a few states without general income or sales taxes. That's nice, but more important is a low overall tax burden. Low taxes and low government spending tend to go with efficient government, less government corruption, fewer slackers on the dole, higher productivity, and better general morality.
Furthermore, it's located near Townsville, so they'll have to deal with the Powerpuff Girls
Solid propellant just works. Liquid propellant requires pumps or regulated gas pressure to drive the propellant to the combustion chamber. Liquid propellant is more difficult, thus more impressive.
AFAIK the best chemical propellants are liquified gasses: hydrogen with fluorine or O2 or O3. Better propellant is more impressive.
He didn't say escape velocity, he said orbital speed. In low earth orbit, 1 trip around the earth is approximately 90 minutes, or roughly 4-1/2 miles/second.
Yup, sure. Humans will wipe out all the endangered species on the Earth's moon, and Venus, and Mercury, and Mars, and the asteroids... Corporations will make all those places unfit for human life.
http://www.revetec.com/ claims to be the most efficient. The crankshaft is replaced with a desmodromic cam system. The claim is that efficiency is gained by having no cylinder wall drag and (mostly) by having better "mechanical advantage" between the piston and the driveshaft. (The argument seems fallacious to me.) In any case, it's an interesting design and fairly easy to understand. As a disadvantage, the design seems to be badly unbalanced.
Efficient external combustion engines can only be highly efficient if they are big, heavy, and run slowly. Also, most EC designs are less safe, because they have large high pressure vessels holding the acting fluid (usually water). Consider that one safety technique in areas with high pressure steam pipes is to walk around waving a piece of lumber in front of you. If the wood is lopped off, you've found (an invisible and unheard) steam leak.
Particularly interesting is Penguin Motors, located on the shores of the McMurdo Sound.
As others have pointed out, having a second crankshaft is at least as big a disadvantage as having a cylinder head.
A second problem is the use of slide valves in an internal combustion engine. I'm not a mechanical engineer, but I know that IC engine valves take a lot of abuse and my guess is that slide valves aren't up to the job.
In addition, the claim that this engine is going to use 25% to 50% less fuel than a conventional IC engine is just plain bogus.
Read their website. It's a 4 stroke design, not 2.
Magnetization occurs very quickly, nanoseconds to milliseconds depending upon the material and the physical size and shape of the material.
With completely new memory technology, say goodbye to the justly-hated RAMBUS and their patent-trolling stifling of the DRAM industry. Good riddance.