I'm not sure I agree with the way you phrased the bit about the rules of refraction/reflection changing, but I agree that Rayleigh scattering (or the sky being blue) comes from the large number of small bits rather than increasing atmospheric density (which would only cause tiny refraction, since the index of refraction of air nearly one (~1.003 IIRC)).
Excellent points. Though I suppose it depends on how you define being stumped...I'd say not knowing, and then looking it up, is being "stumped", and of course perfectly acceptable.
OK this is getting somewhat technical, but I totally disagree with that statement. That's like saying atomic transitions are the same thing as refraction, since the reaction to the polarization is really off-resonance pumping.
To be fair, some of those questions are hard. I doubt many people could give a proper answer on why the sky is blue, particularly if you want a more in-depth answer than "blue light is scattered more" (see here for more details). There have even been incorrect answers on this thread.
Some screens/phone are now avoiding this problem. I'm not sure what the mechanism is, but there is not angle where my phone (HTC G1, aka google phone) is "dark". It does kind of change the colors though. Maybe its a pixel-by-pixel orientation. Or actually what just occurred to me is more likely: a quarter-wave plate after the polarizer...I'll have to test this now:)
Hm perhaps you should do a little research. Start with this. Notice the line "The 35 hours was the legal standard limit" in the summary!
And yes, I see those taxes as a bad thing. That is because I crave freedom, and despise any collectivist attempt to take the wealth that I produce away from me at gunpoint. Just as I despise any attempt from any other thief taking my wealth from me at gunpoint.
High unemployment (average of double digit unemployment over the past 20 years or so). High taxes, including a 20% VAT, 40% income tax, 12% social tax, just to name a few. Higher crime rates (with a source). I could go on.
And what if I want to work more than 35 hours a week (I do)? Who are you to tell me I should legally not be allowed to?
What if I want to work more than 47 weeks a year (I do)? Who are you to tell me I should legally not be allowed to?
Your definition of free is sorely mistaken (see taxes above, large copayments (10-40%), and >90% with private insurance).
What about stuff like this (subscription required for full article)? It turns out an effect clouds have means all the models so far have been wrong by an average* of about 50% in terms of temperature increase. In this case, the study indicates the temperature will increase more because of this unknown effect, but the point is it just could have easily been the other way around. Either way, all the chicken littles running around saying "the science is settled, we're all doomed" were completely wrong.
*I say average because there is no one model that is right. All of the models are wrong and hugely variant, but we just take the middle and pretend the Earth's climate will do what we say. It's absurd to be basing multi-trillion dollar policy decisions on this garbage.
Much like we hope for a unified field theory for physics we believe the ideal world would lack governments but haven't figured out the details on how that would work.
I disagree. A proper government is much better than no government. You need someone with authority to enforce laws that protect people, provide for the national defense, etc. Pretending we can get rid of unacceptable behavior such as murder, making government unnecessary, is unrealistically optimistic at best.
Apple is not interested in allowing you to control your own hardware. This is just another example among many. I hope this sort of thing makes the iPhone and other Apple crap die a painful death.
'Since before even the arrival of the car, people have worried that maps sever us from real places, render the world untouchable, reduce it to a bare outline of Cartesian lines and intersections,' writes Moran.
Medicare: gut it completely, it is an immoral redistribution of wealth and it's unconstitutional. Elementary schools: no Federal funding for this, it's also unconstitutional Interstate highway system: keep it, funded by the people who use it through a fuel tax, as it already is (and it's even constitutional!) Unemployment benefits: get rid of it, see Medicare
Except in this case, the externality is made up (just like all of the other made up environmental emergencies, designed to get us to beg the politicians to remove our freedom, except this one finally stuck).
While Eason said the confirmation was being provided with Jobs' approval, he cited patient confidentiality in saying that he could not reveal any further information on the specifics of Jobs' surgery.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure I agree with the way you phrased the bit about the rules of refraction/reflection changing, but I agree that Rayleigh scattering (or the sky being blue) comes from the large number of small bits rather than increasing atmospheric density (which would only cause tiny refraction, since the index of refraction of air nearly one (~1.003 IIRC)).
Rayleigh scattering and refraction are two divergent phenomena based on the same principle, sharing as much similarity as radar and x-ray imaging.
Excellent points. Though I suppose it depends on how you define being stumped...I'd say not knowing, and then looking it up, is being "stumped", and of course perfectly acceptable.
Look, a monkey! *points at you*
And yes, I am a quantum optics physicist.
OK this is getting somewhat technical, but I totally disagree with that statement. That's like saying atomic transitions are the same thing as refraction, since the reaction to the polarization is really off-resonance pumping.
To be fair, some of those questions are hard. I doubt many people could give a proper answer on why the sky is blue, particularly if you want a more in-depth answer than "blue light is scattered more" (see here for more details). There have even been incorrect answers on this thread.
The sky is not blue due to refraction. It is blue due to Rayleigh scattering, which increases as the wavelength decreases.
Failure to get catastrophic health insurance (about $50/month if you're young and healthy) is a poor financial decision.
Some screens/phone are now avoiding this problem. I'm not sure what the mechanism is, but there is not angle where my phone (HTC G1, aka google phone) is "dark". It does kind of change the colors though. Maybe its a pixel-by-pixel orientation. Or actually what just occurred to me is more likely: a quarter-wave plate after the polarizer...I'll have to test this now :)
Haha I love how this is a troll and the parent isn't. Is it because I backed up my claims with facts? That must be it...
Hm perhaps you should do a little research. Start with this. Notice the line "The 35 hours was the legal standard limit" in the summary!
And yes, I see those taxes as a bad thing. That is because I crave freedom, and despise any collectivist attempt to take the wealth that I produce away from me at gunpoint. Just as I despise any attempt from any other thief taking my wealth from me at gunpoint.
That must be why we have some of the lowest crime across the board =]
High unemployment (average of double digit unemployment over the past 20 years or so). High taxes, including a 20% VAT, 40% income tax, 12% social tax, just to name a few. Higher crime rates (with a source). I could go on.
And what if I want to work more than 35 hours a week (I do)? Who are you to tell me I should legally not be allowed to?
What if I want to work more than 47 weeks a year (I do)? Who are you to tell me I should legally not be allowed to?
Your definition of free is sorely mistaken (see taxes above, large copayments (10-40%), and >90% with private insurance).
No.
What about stuff like this (subscription required for full article)? It turns out an effect clouds have means all the models so far have been wrong by an average* of about 50% in terms of temperature increase. In this case, the study indicates the temperature will increase more because of this unknown effect, but the point is it just could have easily been the other way around. Either way, all the chicken littles running around saying "the science is settled, we're all doomed" were completely wrong.
*I say average because there is no one model that is right. All of the models are wrong and hugely variant, but we just take the middle and pretend the Earth's climate will do what we say. It's absurd to be basing multi-trillion dollar policy decisions on this garbage.
Much like we hope for a unified field theory for physics we believe the ideal world would lack governments but haven't figured out the details on how that would work.
I disagree. A proper government is much better than no government. You need someone with authority to enforce laws that protect people, provide for the national defense, etc. Pretending we can get rid of unacceptable behavior such as murder, making government unnecessary, is unrealistically optimistic at best.
Apple is not interested in allowing you to control your own hardware. This is just another example among many. I hope this sort of thing makes the iPhone and other Apple crap die a painful death.
Long live Android!
'Since before even the arrival of the car, people have worried that maps sever us from real places, render the world untouchable, reduce it to a bare outline of Cartesian lines and intersections,' writes Moran.
I think "Moran" misspelled his own name...
Don't tell me what to like, you totalitarian bastard.
Medicare: gut it completely, it is an immoral redistribution of wealth and it's unconstitutional.
Elementary schools: no Federal funding for this, it's also unconstitutional
Interstate highway system: keep it, funded by the people who use it through a fuel tax, as it already is (and it's even constitutional!)
Unemployment benefits: get rid of it, see Medicare
Problems solved!
Except in this case, the externality is made up (just like all of the other made up environmental emergencies, designed to get us to beg the politicians to remove our freedom, except this one finally stuck).
It's horrifying to me that the idea of government spending less doesn't even cross your mind as a possibility.
While Eason said the confirmation was being provided with Jobs' approval, he cited patient confidentiality in saying that he could not reveal any further information on the specifics of Jobs' surgery.
Read your own quote, dumbass.
The American War of Independence was not supported by a majority of Americans, it was more like 30%.