You are absolutely right that many -- perhaps most -- Republican politicians are not fiscally conservative, in terms of either low spending or low deficit (or both). However, any politician that is fiscally conservative (i.e., actually wants to reduce government spending) is a Republican (or at least not a Democrat).
FDR is one of my heroes but I think that's one of the darkest moments of US history.
There, fixed that for you. If anyone is ever wondering why we have a ~$3,000,000,000,000 Federal budget (and ~$10,000,000,000,000 national debt), that's why.
Fun fact of the day: MA is a commonwealth because John Adams decided to call it that when he was writing the MA Constitution, and no one bothered to really discuss it one way or the other.
And there are reasons why many people *do* want this to happen. Mostly because they're big government, socialist/communist types (or more simply, they are happy to vote other people's money into their own back pocket).
FYI the line item veto was passed by a Republican Congress under the Clinton administration (i.e., a Congress really did pass something to limit their own power, and expand the power of the executive of the other party).
Incidentally, it was ruled unconstitutional. The new version proposed by Bush a while ago implemented the idea differently in order to get around this precedent.
How you feel about the safety is irrelevant to the actual safety. How many deaths a year happen directly due to gas in a car igniting (particularly compared to the deaths that happen from car accidents)?
As I see it, the biggest possible advantage of ultracaps is cost. If the cost/energy stored is less than the cheapest battery (lead?), then they are a huge advancement, especially since they are a relatively new technology, with significant advances likely as more research is carried out. The EEStor wiki page seems to indicate this is the case.
Yes but the reason this is not (entirely) insignificant is that there is a big lobby out there saying video games/Internet use correlate with "bad" behavioral traits in children, such as violence. So now we can refute those bad statistics with more bad statistics. Yay!
I disagree that the tax policy of the Federal government should be to maximize revenue. That does not take in to account that raising taxes takes more of the wealth that I as an individual have created out of my back pocket. Of course to your typical politician, they just want to spend as much money as they can (well, OK, they just want to get reelected, and they do that by spending as much money as they can).
According the wikipedia, the total federal budget from 2003-2008 is $15.27 trillion dollars. The cost of the war in Iraq is about.6 trillion. That's less than 4% of the Federal budget going to Iraq.
Now don't get me wrong, I think spending $15.27 trillion of tax payer money is a prime example of a criminally bloated government, but the majority of the blame does not fall on the Iraq war--or even all of the DoD budget.
I'm sure it's not that good. Imperfections could certainly be distinguished with an atomic force microscope or electron microscope. The point is that they could not be distinguished by the intended use of this thing.
This isn't insightful, it is ignorant. YES, measurement at the atomic level is good enough. It can essentially measure the exact quantum state of the mirror. You cannot do any better than that.
That's not true. In this case, you can have perfect to the atomic level. And you can even measure the surface to the atomic level. Of course, this mirror is not actually perfect.
What if that crap being spewed out is nitrogen? What if it's oxygen? What if it's just pure carbon dioxide? CO2 is no more a pollutant than nitrogen or oxygen.
I think it's funny that some of the only comments on this page I agree with are marked Troll (yours and those of c6gunner). Maybe I should browse at -1 so I can pick up all the good comments here haha.
The proof for anything illegal being planned does not need to be made public in order for an arrest to be made, only for a conviction (generally speaking). Oh, and it turns out you don't need to look any further for evidence. I'm sure now that it's clear how wrong you were you will apologize to the police, FBI, the White House, and anyone else you insulted with your wild accusations.
Haha just kidding I'm sure you don't care about actual evidence, you just want an excuse to hate.
The fine structure is not the same as the fine structure constant (though they are of course related). If you had bothered to read either my post or the wikipedia article on hyperfine structure you would have realized that (the fine structure constant is discussed prominently on that page).
The communications networks get their time hacks from clocks based upon the decay rate of isotopes (e.g. a cesium clock).
It's actually based on the frequency of a transition in cesium, but the point is that these transitions are sensitive to the fine structure constant. If some field from the sun is changing that, it should be detectable in atomic clocks.
One possible explanation proposed in this paper is:
In their theory,
the Sun produces a scalar field which would modulate
the terrestrial value of the electromagnetic fine structure
constant EM.
The fine structure constant (about 1/137) has been measured to a whopping 10 significant digits, one of the most precisely measure physical constants. If there is a seasonal variation enough to influence decay rates by.1%, wouldn't this show up in different experiments measuring the fine structure constant?
Also, it is only these two isotopes that are mentioned, presumably because most other isotopes tested do not have this sort of periodic effect.
I stand corrected! From the paper:
Although there are hundreds of potentially useful nuclides whose half-lives have been measured, the data from many of the experiments we examined were generally not useful, most often because data were not acquired continuously over sufficiently long time periods.
Probably not. The change in decay rate was on the order of.1% (see Fig. 1 of the paper), which is I believe smaller than the error in carbon (or other radioactive) dating. Also, it is only these two isotopes that are mentioned, presumably because most other isotopes tested do not have this sort of periodic effect.
Slashdot Mirror
You are absolutely right that many -- perhaps most -- Republican politicians are not fiscally conservative, in terms of either low spending or low deficit (or both). However, any politician that is fiscally conservative (i.e., actually wants to reduce government spending) is a Republican (or at least not a Democrat).
FDR is one of my heroes but I think that's one of the darkest moments of US history.
There, fixed that for you. If anyone is ever wondering why we have a ~$3,000,000,000,000 Federal budget (and ~$10,000,000,000,000 national debt), that's why.
And if Lincoln had had no problem with slavery (and had somehow still been elected), there would not have been a war.
Fun fact of the day: MA is a commonwealth because John Adams decided to call it that when he was writing the MA Constitution, and no one bothered to really discuss it one way or the other.
And there are reasons why many people *do* want this to happen. Mostly because they're big government, socialist/communist types (or more simply, they are happy to vote other people's money into their own back pocket).
attorneys can do what amounts to a Google search
No, they can do a search. Why compare it to Google?
FYI the line item veto was passed by a Republican Congress under the Clinton administration (i.e., a Congress really did pass something to limit their own power, and expand the power of the executive of the other party).
Incidentally, it was ruled unconstitutional. The new version proposed by Bush a while ago implemented the idea differently in order to get around this precedent.
It feels safer
How you feel about the safety is irrelevant to the actual safety. How many deaths a year happen directly due to gas in a car igniting (particularly compared to the deaths that happen from car accidents)?
As I see it, the biggest possible advantage of ultracaps is cost. If the cost/energy stored is less than the cheapest battery (lead?), then they are a huge advancement, especially since they are a relatively new technology, with significant advances likely as more research is carried out. The EEStor wiki page seems to indicate this is the case.
Yes but the reason this is not (entirely) insignificant is that there is a big lobby out there saying video games/Internet use correlate with "bad" behavioral traits in children, such as violence. So now we can refute those bad statistics with more bad statistics. Yay!
I disagree that the tax policy of the Federal government should be to maximize revenue. That does not take in to account that raising taxes takes more of the wealth that I as an individual have created out of my back pocket. Of course to your typical politician, they just want to spend as much money as they can (well, OK, they just want to get reelected, and they do that by spending as much money as they can).
According the wikipedia, the total federal budget from 2003-2008 is $15.27 trillion dollars. The cost of the war in Iraq is about .6 trillion. That's less than 4% of the Federal budget going to Iraq.
Now don't get me wrong, I think spending $15.27 trillion of tax payer money is a prime example of a criminally bloated government, but the majority of the blame does not fall on the Iraq war--or even all of the DoD budget.
I'm sure it's not that good. Imperfections could certainly be distinguished with an atomic force microscope or electron microscope. The point is that they could not be distinguished by the intended use of this thing.
This isn't insightful, it is ignorant. YES, measurement at the atomic level is good enough. It can essentially measure the exact quantum state of the mirror. You cannot do any better than that.
That's not true. In this case, you can have perfect to the atomic level. And you can even measure the surface to the atomic level. Of course, this mirror is not actually perfect.
What if that crap being spewed out is nitrogen? What if it's oxygen? What if it's just pure carbon dioxide? CO2 is no more a pollutant than nitrogen or oxygen.
I think it's funny that some of the only comments on this page I agree with are marked Troll (yours and those of c6gunner). Maybe I should browse at -1 so I can pick up all the good comments here haha.
The proof for anything illegal being planned does not need to be made public in order for an arrest to be made, only for a conviction (generally speaking). Oh, and it turns out you don't need to look any further for evidence. I'm sure now that it's clear how wrong you were you will apologize to the police, FBI, the White House, and anyone else you insulted with your wild accusations.
Haha just kidding I'm sure you don't care about actual evidence, you just want an excuse to hate.
The amount of correction to the Bohr energy levels due to hyperfine splitting of the hydrogen atom is of the order
m/mp*alpha^4*m*c^2
where
m is the mass of an electron,
mp is the mass of a proton,
alpha is the fine structure constant (alpha approx 1/137.036),
c is the speed of light.
The fine structure is not the same as the fine structure constant (though they are of course related). If you had bothered to read either my post or the wikipedia article on hyperfine structure you would have realized that (the fine structure constant is discussed prominently on that page).
Uranium 238 is not radioactive enough to be concerned about (or at least its far down the list of isotopes to be concerned about).
The communications networks get their time hacks from clocks based upon the decay rate of isotopes (e.g. a cesium clock).
It's actually based on the frequency of a transition in cesium, but the point is that these transitions are sensitive to the fine structure constant. If some field from the sun is changing that, it should be detectable in atomic clocks.
In their theory, the Sun produces a scalar field which would modulate the terrestrial value of the electromagnetic fine structure constant EM.
The fine structure constant (about 1/137) has been measured to a whopping 10 significant digits, one of the most precisely measure physical constants. If there is a seasonal variation enough to influence decay rates by .1%, wouldn't this show up in different experiments measuring the fine structure constant?
Also, it is only these two isotopes that are mentioned, presumably because most other isotopes tested do not have this sort of periodic effect.
I stand corrected! From the paper:
Although there are hundreds of potentially useful nuclides whose half-lives have been measured, the data from many of the experiments we examined were generally not useful, most often because data were not acquired continuously over sufficiently long time periods.
So the possible ramifications of this increase!
Probably not. The change in decay rate was on the order of .1% (see Fig. 1 of the paper), which is I believe smaller than the error in carbon (or other radioactive) dating. Also, it is only these two isotopes that are mentioned, presumably because most other isotopes tested do not have this sort of periodic effect.