A perfect (diffraction limited) lens gives more resolution, the bigger it is. However, a lens bigger than f/8 (6.25 mm, or 1/4 inch for a 50mm focal length) is not likely to be both perfect and affordable. Most film cannot take advantage of higher resolution than would be provided by an f/8 lens. These are rough approximations, of course.
Most of the power dissipation occurs in the transistors, not the wires. The power is dissipated more because capacitance is being charged through the resistance of the transistors, than because of simultaneous conduction ("shootthough").
Although better conductivity in both wires and transistors would be helpful (people cool CPUs to accomplish this), too much can be a bad thing. With no resistance, circuits would ring badly, causing high instantaneous voltage and gate breakdown.
It's easier to understand, if you realize that the smallest thing you can resolve is proportional to the wavelength. Using a fluid medium reduces the wavelength in inverse proportion to the index of refraction of the fluid.
The waste output of battery factories will not rise exponentially. At worst, it will rise in direct linear proportion to the mass of the batteries produced.
Old batteries will be (and are being) recycled. It is one area where recycling is actually economically practical.
Cambridge, Mass. had (1970) and may still have a system of electric busses powered by overhead wires. It's really funny to see the driver jump out and reconnect the bus to the wires every time the connection breaks.
When the market for inefficient vehicles dries up, manufacturers will stop making them. Consumers drive the market, not manufacturers. This isn't 1947 when anything out of Detroit could be sold.
Nice stuff is heavy (sound deadening material, plushy seats, wider tires, more room) and makes the car less efficient (automatic transmission, AC, high power engine). Until you're willing to pay $100,000 for a car with a carbon-fiber chassis and body, you can't get both luxury and high economy.
I'd love to see a hydrogen car, but hydrogen is an invisible gas. Additionally, hydrogen is lighter than air, so a hydrogen car would just float away. Or did you mean a car which uses hydrogen as fuel?
I like this idea on speculative execution. For general purpose activities, it might not be as helpful as regular multithreading, but there are lots of times when it would be very helpful. Multicores used in this manner would probably need to be more tightly coupled, and probably would be optimized differently.
Image resolution is determined by wavelength, lens size and distance to the object being imaged. The laws are hundreds of years old and have not changed. Do the math yourself for a 1 meter mirror at 100 mi. altitude; you'll find that a 2 inch item is at the limit of detection. This is no secret, you just need a little knowledge of optics and the energy to do the calculation.
And further, it's probably not a bad idea for health applications.
Wanna bet? What percentage of these won't be sterile when implanted? What percentage will cause an allergic reaction? What percentage will cause poisoning to someone hypersensitive to the trace elements in the chip (such as arsenic)? How many people, furious at the invasion required by implanting the chip but afraid to resist the implantation, cause their own deaths digging it out afterwards?
How many people have to die because of this piece of tyrannical idiocy?
One problem, among many, of using "God" as an axiom is that an axiom must not cause contradictions. Most nontrivial conventional definitions of "God" lead to contradictions.
Your claim that there is no current research in evolution is blatantly false. Archaeology is constantly digging up evidence that applies to the history of evolution. Biologists observe current variation in species. Genetics researchers are working on the mechanisms of evolution.
Although I have not read his work, it is my understanding the Stephen Jay Gould has done quite a bit of criticizing of the details of evolutionary theory while supporting its main thrust.
The difficulty that makes people supporting evolution seem different is that the supporters are having to spend a lot of time opposing the wacky claims of their opponents. Astronomers, on the other hand, don't see the need to attack the Flat Earth Society, which does not have a somewhat successful program forcing its views to be taught in public schools.
"Religious fundies and priest-bashers have this in common : they use religion or science to gain power."
I bash religion for two reasons. The first is to protect myself from religious-motivated threats, censorship, and theft. (Theft? Yes. It's been less than 200 years since some states in the U.S. had established churches that were supported by tax. Can you say "faith-based initiatives?") This is not trying to gain power, but protecting myself from the abuse of power.
Participating in representative government does NOT mean you consent to it, any more than locking your doors means you consent to robbery. The purpose for both things is the same, protection against government/robbers.
Oh, good. Let's raise a few generations that can't defend themselves. Close down the Department of Defense and open the Department of Pansies. It will be really embarrassing when the U.S. is defeated by the armed might of Monaco.
A mere century ago, the usual age for marraige in most cultures was 12 to 16. Can you explain to me what has changed from that time, besides the views of society?
People live longer, so there is no necessity to breed quickly before you die (a good thing). Parents baby their children longer (not a good thing), so they are not ready for an adult relationship at age 12. Delay allows time for a person to develop some wisdom, education, and wealth before reproduction (also a good thing).
Slashdot Mirror
A perfect (diffraction limited) lens gives more resolution, the bigger it is. However, a lens bigger than f/8 (6.25 mm, or 1/4 inch for a 50mm focal length) is not likely to be both perfect and affordable. Most film cannot take advantage of higher resolution than would be provided by an f/8 lens. These are rough approximations, of course.
Although better conductivity in both wires and transistors would be helpful (people cool CPUs to accomplish this), too much can be a bad thing. With no resistance, circuits would ring badly, causing high instantaneous voltage and gate breakdown.
It's easier to understand, if you realize that the smallest thing you can resolve is proportional to the wavelength. Using a fluid medium reduces the wavelength in inverse proportion to the index of refraction of the fluid.
I'd call a laser beam (wavelength ~400 nm) bigger than an atom (~0.1 nm).
A patent looks pretty nice when framed. It also looks good on your resume.
A patent enhances a company's price if the company is sold. I've heard a figure of about $1e6 per patent.
A patent gives trading/bargaining power with respect to other company's patents.
A patent can be a source of income without suing, if you're fortunate enough to deal with honorable companies and ask a reasonable price.
Old batteries will be (and are being) recycled. It is one area where recycling is actually economically practical.
Cambridge, Mass. had (1970) and may still have a system of electric busses powered by overhead wires. It's really funny to see the driver jump out and reconnect the bus to the wires every time the connection breaks.
When the market for inefficient vehicles dries up, manufacturers will stop making them. Consumers drive the market, not manufacturers. This isn't 1947 when anything out of Detroit could be sold.
Nice stuff is heavy (sound deadening material, plushy seats, wider tires, more room) and makes the car less efficient (automatic transmission, AC, high power engine). Until you're willing to pay $100,000 for a car with a carbon-fiber chassis and body, you can't get both luxury and high economy.
Hey, jerk. The referenced article names a diesel engine, not a hybrid. And it does give a price, $17,000.
Have you heard of the the psychological term projection , Mr. P.?
Old batteries contain lots of the materials that new batteries are made from. That's why most car batteries are recycled, not discarded.
I'd love to see a hydrogen car, but hydrogen is an invisible gas. Additionally, hydrogen is lighter than air, so a hydrogen car would just float away. Or did you mean a car which uses hydrogen as fuel?
I like this idea on speculative execution. For general purpose activities, it might not be as helpful as regular multithreading, but there are lots of times when it would be very helpful. Multicores used in this manner would probably need to be more tightly coupled, and probably would be optimized differently.
IIRC AMD started by making high performance TTL before x86 existed. This is about 1974, when the I8008 was current.
Memory controllers are not difficult to design, and the concept of an integrated memory controller is not new.
For biodiesel, silos and other grain warehouses. For energy already in electric form, pump water up a hill.
Image resolution is determined by wavelength, lens size and distance to the object being imaged. The laws are hundreds of years old and have not changed. Do the math yourself for a 1 meter mirror at 100 mi. altitude; you'll find that a 2 inch item is at the limit of detection. This is no secret, you just need a little knowledge of optics and the energy to do the calculation.
Wanna bet? What percentage of these won't be sterile when implanted? What percentage will cause an allergic reaction? What percentage will cause poisoning to someone hypersensitive to the trace elements in the chip (such as arsenic)? How many people, furious at the invasion required by implanting the chip but afraid to resist the implantation, cause their own deaths digging it out afterwards?
How many people have to die because of this piece of tyrannical idiocy?
One problem, among many, of using "God" as an axiom is that an axiom must not cause contradictions. Most nontrivial conventional definitions of "God" lead to contradictions.
Although I have not read his work, it is my understanding the Stephen Jay Gould has done quite a bit of criticizing of the details of evolutionary theory while supporting its main thrust.
The difficulty that makes people supporting evolution seem different is that the supporters are having to spend a lot of time opposing the wacky claims of their opponents. Astronomers, on the other hand, don't see the need to attack the Flat Earth Society, which does not have a somewhat successful program forcing its views to be taught in public schools.
I bash religion for two reasons. The first is to protect myself from religious-motivated threats, censorship, and theft. (Theft? Yes. It's been less than 200 years since some states in the U.S. had established churches that were supported by tax. Can you say "faith-based initiatives?") This is not trying to gain power, but protecting myself from the abuse of power.
The second reason is to advance civilization.
Participating in representative government does NOT mean you consent to it, any more than locking your doors means you consent to robbery. The purpose for both things is the same, protection against government/robbers.
Oh, good. Let's raise a few generations that can't defend themselves. Close down the Department of Defense and open the Department of Pansies. It will be really embarrassing when the U.S. is defeated by the armed might of Monaco.
People live longer, so there is no necessity to breed quickly before you die (a good thing). Parents baby their children longer (not a good thing), so they are not ready for an adult relationship at age 12. Delay allows time for a person to develop some wisdom, education, and wealth before reproduction (also a good thing).