The (quantum) state of these systems varies according to a well-known equation, called the Schrodringer equation. This is a very simple equation that describes the evolution of the system (the derivative of the current vector state) in respect to the current current state & time.
What Schrodinger equation are you looking at? The one I'm looking at is definitely NOT simple, and even less so to actually solve the equation.
"And, virtually every CEO in this great country is more of a sleaze than most spammers, a much bigger leach on society. Are they too, "stupid"?
What? This is insult to every person who has ever started their own business. I know several people (CEOs) who started companies that provide a service, employ many people (including myself), and provide huge economic additions to this country. This country is (economically) built on corporate businesses being successful, through the effort of CEO 'sleazes' who are 'a much bigger leach on society' than spammers. Of course there are some corrupt CEOs, having that much power can do that to some people. But to say that 'virtually every CEO' is corrupt is insulting to the men and women who have made this country what it is through their business success.
Stupid idea.
Unless one of your friends on that ISP are hosting a bandwidth-intensive server, it doesn't matter that you could potentially be getting really fast connection speeds between you. What, you get your IMs faster? Awesome.
Of course that happens, there are 'bad' people in control of companies as well as 'good' people. Of course I wouldn't condone a company shipping toxic waste to a front company in a 3rd world country, where it is then dumped into the ocean.
You don't get it. You're in the mindset of "individual success = bad." The point of a business is to make money, what's so hard to understand about that? and what's so bad about that?
That being said, a nice business owner will of course try to ensure that all of his employees are happy. It is, as a you said, what a moral person would do. However, starting a business with the goal of providing a place where you employ happy, well-paid workers isn't gonna get you far...soon those happy, well-paid workers will be unhappy, formerly well-paid unemployment recipients if your business isn't making money.
The purpose of an American company is not to make money. Their purpose is to create jobs. That's it. That's the reason the government protects their interests. To make jobs for Americans. Welcome to America, the soon to be Service Industry of the world. Where the rich get richer and everyone else continues to clean their toilets and serve them Slurpees.
Ummm...yes it is. Ask any small business owner/starter. They don't start a business thinking, "Hopefully someday I'll be able to provide someone else a nice job." They think, "I want to provide MYSELF a nice job. If other people get nice jobs here, that's great too."
Communism is the ultimate form of democracy, because it elminates any form of government and hierarchy. In a truly communistic system, everybody is equal, and everybody works towards a common goal.
Uh...no. Maybe you're thinking of socialism. In Communism, EVERYTHING is controlled by the government.
One more thing I want to say--I am certainly not opposed to medicine developed without patents. If a group wants to get together and develop beneficial drugs which they will share with everyone, that's great! Unfortunately, I don't see this sort of contribution being significant any time soon. Real research is too expensive, and the private sector will dominatie it for a long time to come.
Patents for medicine/drugs is ESSENTIAL, and you are naive and foolish if you think otherwise. Almost all drugs developed are developed by companies with one goal: make money. If you remove patents, the company that poured all the money into R&D gets no advantage over a company that can steal their results. If you remove patents, you remove incentive to develop drugs, and drug development will come to a screeching halt.
You say that patents should be removed so that Africans dying of AIDS can get drugs cheaply/free. I say that without patents, the drugs wouldn't exist at all. Like it not, patents for medicine are crucial, and here to stay.
OK, I'll bite on this one. Face it: there are too many IT people here (US), particularly too many under-qualified IT people. Tech boom is over. There were too many people who got a tech degree thinking they would be making the huge bucks from Internet companies. Big surprise that didn't pan out. There will always be positions for high quality IT workers, but the grunt programming job is a low-level job that can (and will) be easily outsourced. Adapt to this (ie, get a new job in a new field, or become 'good' enough to get a job here), or don't work.
"If you are one of five widget makers, and you all subtly agree not to compete on quality, then it's easy to fire 90% of your customer service center, hire shoddy brute-force armies of programmers and end up paying far less than you would need to if your customers actually got a real choice of widget to buy."
What are you talking about? American companies are around for one reason, and one reason only: to make money. They hire GOOD programmers in India CHEAPLY. They save money. Simple as that. There is no 'conspiracy' for a group of companies to not compete over quality: as soon as this happens, a new player will come in not following these rules and take over the market. It's how free trade works.
"what's worse? a tax and spend liberal or a borrow and spend neocon?
I think a borrow and spend neocon is worse because WE have to pay interest on THEIR accumulating debt.:("
While they are both bad, a borrow and spend neocon accumulates debt for the GOVERNMENT. I am not the government. I don't believe that crap about "you owe $22,000 personally to the national dept". The only way the government gets MY money is by taxes--so I don't want em. If the gov't is having money problems, stop spending so much (which hopefully will happen in Bush's next turn).
I wonder if I'll be modded down for this...
I think they are just taking this a step further. You guys whine about windows but, this is REAL vendor lock-in. You get batteries from us or all your shit stops working.
I don't suggest trying to exploit the US Military in this regard..."Sell us batteries at a fair price, or we make sure we have just enough to destroy you":)
Bernoulli's principle is a theorem of inviscid flow.
OK, I guess I meant the principle of pressure difference due to speed in a fluid, not exactly Bernoulli's.
Sure, they're related (away from the boundary layers, the flow is almost inviscid), and the pressure drop will be a contributory factor, but the experiments I've seen, in a Hall cell, suggest that purely inviscid lift is not enough.
I wasn't suggesting that the force resulting from a Bernoulli-like pressure difference is all that holds a plane up, but merely that it does contribute.
Bernoulli's principle (aka the "principle of equal transit times"), which holds only in inviscid fluids (and thus utterly invalid in the presence of a boundary layer), is a convenient lie, told to people who don't have enough maths to understand the real reason.
No, that's not correct. Bernoulli's principle IS partially the reason an airplane stays in the air, although I agree that the "principle of equal transit times" does not apply. The principle of fluids travelling faster leads to lower pressure is correct, and applys even if the air above and below the wing does not 'meet up' at the end of the wing (although you can't use the same formula obviously). The downwash, as the article you quoted states, is associated with (and proportional to) lift, but the interpretation of the article is not fully correct in what is causing what. For every force (Bernoulli's due to a pressure difference), there is an equal and opposite force (the downwash), not the other way around.
Another way of thinking about it is how the air can possible exert any force onto the wing. Imagine having a way of viewing what the pressure is at every point of the surface of the wing. The only way for there to be a net force on the wing is for surface integral of P*A is negative (remember surface integrals? you know, the most evil sort of integral possible?). Part of this pressure is certainly from deflecting some air, but part of it is certainly due to Bernoulli's as well.
There are scientists in the field of fluid dynamics that dispute how much of an airplane's lift is a result of Bernoulli's principle versus something else. It's something that is still not fully resolved.
Why is this modded imformative? No, distance and time are not the same thing. When you're dealing with space-time, time can be thought of as a dimension in the same way the other 3 coordinates we all know and love are, but its not the same thing.
Also, you're perception of the past is wrong. If I'm a light-year away from something and see something happening, I can say that in my reference frame, that happened a year ago. Someone travelling at speeds approaching c might disagree, but that's another story.
And a light-year is a measure of distance. If you specify "the time it takes for light to travel a light-year" than you have a measure of time, but that was not what the original story poster wrote (although you could assume it since the telescopes are recieving light).
I'm surprised no one has mentioned it before, but Timothy Zahn's latest two Star Wars books (which came out 5-6 years ago I think) gives the details of the 'dark energy field' on Dagobah. A Dark Jedi goes partially insane and ends up on Dagobah, where Yoda kills him. The beacon Luke found on Dagobah in the earlier Zahn books came from this guy. This happened maybe 20 years or so before Luke shows up there, IIRC.
If your a man in the field, you can get a special PDA-like device that would send messages back in forth via towers or satellite, using 500 MB of a one-time pad stored in memory. 500 MB would be plenty of network bandwidth for text emails.
This isn't insightful. The grandparent was showing how someone listening in on the line does not compromise security, which would not be the case if it was implemented via parent's suggestions.
Slashdot Mirror
What Schrodinger equation are you looking at? The one I'm looking at is definitely NOT simple, and even less so to actually solve the equation.
You said what you said. The villification of every successful businessman is not productive (or right), and I was pointing that out.
Exactly my reaction when I saw this.
"And, virtually every CEO in this great country is more of a sleaze than most spammers, a much bigger leach on society. Are they too, "stupid"?
What? This is insult to every person who has ever started their own business. I know several people (CEOs) who started companies that provide a service, employ many people (including myself), and provide huge economic additions to this country. This country is (economically) built on corporate businesses being successful, through the effort of CEO 'sleazes' who are 'a much bigger leach on society' than spammers. Of course there are some corrupt CEOs, having that much power can do that to some people. But to say that 'virtually every CEO' is corrupt is insulting to the men and women who have made this country what it is through their business success.
Stupid idea. Unless one of your friends on that ISP are hosting a bandwidth-intensive server, it doesn't matter that you could potentially be getting really fast connection speeds between you. What, you get your IMs faster? Awesome.
yeah, i really hate that word.
Of course that happens, there are 'bad' people in control of companies as well as 'good' people. Of course I wouldn't condone a company shipping toxic waste to a front company in a 3rd world country, where it is then dumped into the ocean.
That being said, a nice business owner will of course try to ensure that all of his employees are happy. It is, as a you said, what a moral person would do. However, starting a business with the goal of providing a place where you employ happy, well-paid workers isn't gonna get you far...soon those happy, well-paid workers will be unhappy, formerly well-paid unemployment recipients if your business isn't making money.
Is it really necessary for me to specify "to make money within legal and moral bounds?" Consider it specified.
Ummm...yes it is. Ask any small business owner/starter. They don't start a business thinking, "Hopefully someday I'll be able to provide someone else a nice job." They think, "I want to provide MYSELF a nice job. If other people get nice jobs here, that's great too."
Uh...no. Maybe you're thinking of socialism. In Communism, EVERYTHING is controlled by the government.
One more thing I want to say--I am certainly not opposed to medicine developed without patents. If a group wants to get together and develop beneficial drugs which they will share with everyone, that's great! Unfortunately, I don't see this sort of contribution being significant any time soon. Real research is too expensive, and the private sector will dominatie it for a long time to come.
You say that patents should be removed so that Africans dying of AIDS can get drugs cheaply/free. I say that without patents, the drugs wouldn't exist at all. Like it not, patents for medicine are crucial, and here to stay.
OK, I'll bite on this one. Face it: there are too many IT people here (US), particularly too many under-qualified IT people. Tech boom is over. There were too many people who got a tech degree thinking they would be making the huge bucks from Internet companies. Big surprise that didn't pan out. There will always be positions for high quality IT workers, but the grunt programming job is a low-level job that can (and will) be easily outsourced. Adapt to this (ie, get a new job in a new field, or become 'good' enough to get a job here), or don't work.
What are you talking about? American companies are around for one reason, and one reason only: to make money. They hire GOOD programmers in India CHEAPLY. They save money. Simple as that. There is no 'conspiracy' for a group of companies to not compete over quality: as soon as this happens, a new player will come in not following these rules and take over the market. It's how free trade works.
"what's worse? a tax and spend liberal or a borrow and spend neocon? I think a borrow and spend neocon is worse because WE have to pay interest on THEIR accumulating debt. :("
While they are both bad, a borrow and spend neocon accumulates debt for the GOVERNMENT. I am not the government. I don't believe that crap about "you owe $22,000 personally to the national dept". The only way the government gets MY money is by taxes--so I don't want em. If the gov't is having money problems, stop spending so much (which hopefully will happen in Bush's next turn).
I wonder if I'll be modded down for this...
Presumably this system will also cancel noise from hard drives, CD-ROM drives, video card fans, etc. Didn't RTFA, so I'm not sure.
Half the weight. Hydrogen is diatomic.
I don't suggest trying to exploit the US Military in this regard..."Sell us batteries at a fair price, or we make sure we have just enough to destroy you" :)
OK, I guess I meant the principle of pressure difference due to speed in a fluid, not exactly Bernoulli's.
Sure, they're related (away from the boundary layers, the flow is almost inviscid), and the pressure drop will be a contributory factor, but the experiments I've seen, in a Hall cell, suggest that purely inviscid lift is not enough.
I wasn't suggesting that the force resulting from a Bernoulli-like pressure difference is all that holds a plane up, but merely that it does contribute.
No, that's not correct. Bernoulli's principle IS partially the reason an airplane stays in the air, although I agree that the "principle of equal transit times" does not apply. The principle of fluids travelling faster leads to lower pressure is correct, and applys even if the air above and below the wing does not 'meet up' at the end of the wing (although you can't use the same formula obviously). The downwash, as the article you quoted states, is associated with (and proportional to) lift, but the interpretation of the article is not fully correct in what is causing what. For every force (Bernoulli's due to a pressure difference), there is an equal and opposite force (the downwash), not the other way around.
Another way of thinking about it is how the air can possible exert any force onto the wing. Imagine having a way of viewing what the pressure is at every point of the surface of the wing. The only way for there to be a net force on the wing is for surface integral of P*A is negative (remember surface integrals? you know, the most evil sort of integral possible?). Part of this pressure is certainly from deflecting some air, but part of it is certainly due to Bernoulli's as well.
There are scientists in the field of fluid dynamics that dispute how much of an airplane's lift is a result of Bernoulli's principle versus something else. It's something that is still not fully resolved.
Also, you're perception of the past is wrong. If I'm a light-year away from something and see something happening, I can say that in my reference frame, that happened a year ago. Someone travelling at speeds approaching c might disagree, but that's another story.
And a light-year is a measure of distance. If you specify "the time it takes for light to travel a light-year" than you have a measure of time, but that was not what the original story poster wrote (although you could assume it since the telescopes are recieving light).
Yes, I know way too much about SW...
If your a man in the field, you can get a special PDA-like device that would send messages back in forth via towers or satellite, using 500 MB of a one-time pad stored in memory. 500 MB would be plenty of network bandwidth for text emails.
This isn't insightful. The grandparent was showing how someone listening in on the line does not compromise security, which would not be the case if it was implemented via parent's suggestions.