But you can't keep the borrowed energy, so you could never jump to the top of a roof, even if it were no taller than the wall you just jumped over.
Well, most of the time you can't keep the energy. Hawking Radiation is, however, a case where one of the particles does get to keep the borrowed energy.
yes, but what happens if you stand between the projector and your glass screen? Wouldnt that then cast your shadow, blocking part of the prjected [sic] image from ever reaching the reflective phosphors and the plexiglass/glass?
Or worse, what if the projector is behind the glass you look at it? You get it in the eyes.
That said, why do we care exactly what projector you were using?
Next, if the reaction happens actually because of contact with air, then it's safe to assume that it actually NEEDS constant exposure to that air to react. If that's the case, no problem.
Or the reaction scheme could be
A +air -> B -> C
where B is the readable state and degrades on its own to C. i.e. The air makes some unstable compound that makes the disk readable and that compound just decomposes on its own (no help from air).
The reason to believe that this is that (acording to above posts) they thought of forcing you to get air in there in the first place, so the probably thought of you excluding air (oxygen) after you started the reaction to make it readable.
I might believe that they made U-233 from Th-232. However, when you state that "no one claims they made Pu, except you." You are way off base.
This claim is made above and in the New York Timesarticle.
Also, you state that a "breeder reactor is one that [...]" that's right, A breeder reactor is a reactor. What they built was a neutron source and a target, not a reactor.
Finaly they probably wanted to observe the Th-233 decay (into U-233) which would be evidence of the existnace of the U-233, and much easier to observe. However, they are very few people who understand taking these measurements at near background levels because most nuclear physicists don't work near background--no reason and it is hard and not as useful.
look I'm not trying to say that they didn't do something interesting, I'm just saying it is a little hyped up.
Re:Breeder reactor
on
ScavHunt211
·
· Score: 0, Troll
i read the old posts and they showed that the posters did not really understand the physics.
Recall that a Ph.D. in physics who knows lots about their research area does not know all of physics. I interact with Ph.D. physicists who know lots about their very specific area but know very little about, other core areas of physics.
Breeder reactor
on
ScavHunt211
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
All right, they so did not build a breeder reactor. Even given the definition that anything that produced Pu is a breeder (which would make every reactor in the world a breeder reactor), they did not do it. You need U-238 and a lot of neutrons.
While they claim that they observed emissions from Pu, this is not well documented and they may have simply been observing cosmic background or Pu desposed globaly from wepons tests or Am-241 x-rays
I don't see the bend the case post, but this person appears to have fixed one with the slightly less drastic procedure of replacing the foot on the battery.
Justin...and others:
When you get the new feet, check to see if they are the same size as the one in the battery. I was looking at a machine in a local retailer today that exhibited the wobble. I was talking to the salesperson and we decided to do a littel experiment on the display model and found that if you replace the 'foot' on the battery the machine sits nice and level! the foot that came in the battery was simply too short. Reading many of these other posts, it seems this may be a common problem...much better than the 'battery is warped' theory...
Yeah, i realized (shortly after i posted) that i forgot to point out that this was an advantage that these have over other purifiers.
I guess i got too into the article
Available scientific evidence shows that at concentrations that do not exceed public health standards, ozone has little potential to remove indoor air contaminants.
OK, lets make sure that you feel this way. Please answer the following questions. Since you have nothing to hide, it shouldn't bother you to answer them.
Last time you had an argument with your mother, what was it about?
For your entire immediate family, name that thing that they do that annoys you that you haven't told them annoys you.
Please describe in detail their most embarrassing thing you have ever done to someone else (i.e. something rude).
If in a relationship, do the same for your significant other.
Describe at least one detail about your boss that annoys you / something you think they do that represents poor performance on their part.
Should you answer all these questions with believable answers I might start to believe you.
Did anybody else notice that they had just 256MB in the computer? 10.2 launches and that's it, its all swap from there on out. If you actualy have $30 to blow on memory your computer will perform much better and differently than these tests.
in 1940s It was a whole lot of people in a room running Monte Carlo code.
Note that Monte Carlo codes are very parallelizable, one often needs to transport billions of particles, and the problem is only ~10 kbytes; so set it up on each computer, give each a distinct seed (that's the tricky part) and let each transport 1/n particles.
Or, in 1944, just run it all on the same "machine."
Well, there appear to be a number of people out there concerned with fair taxation. While many make broad claims and appeal to "what is right" the Tennesseans for Fair Taxation takes a more detailed look at the actual effects of a sales tax system look at this page as an example of what is wrong with this "fair tax."
gw
launching browser in OS X, 0.3 seconds longer...
launching word in OS X, 0.5 seconds longer...
watching the icon hop in the dock while it is launcing...
priceless.
But really, I'm not sure weather my computer a work (1.3MHz AMD in win2k) or my home computer (667MHz G4 in OS X.1.5) launches its browser faster or gets word going faster. But I am sure that the OS X dock gets me to the app and between apps much faster and this is the task that my computer can most slow me down on / get my mind off my work and onto how I am using the OS.
Slashdot Mirror
But you can't keep the borrowed energy, so you could never jump to the top of a roof, even if it were no taller than the wall you just jumped over.
Well, most of the time you can't keep the energy. Hawking Radiation is, however, a case where one of the particles does get to keep the borrowed energy.
Hawking Radiation is covered will in this USA today article.
Good point. You may care to know that the Department of Energy has the the halflife of free neutrons is about 10 minutes 15 seconds.
They have not changed Bi-209's page yet. I think it will take them some time.
Yeah, but think of all the time you can save typesetting your code.
the other thing to note is that none of these are O(N ln(N)) for a presorted list, they are all O(N^2).
Or worse, what if the projector is behind the glass you look at it? You get it in the eyes.
That said, why do we care exactly what projector you were using?
I can't wait until they update 802.11b to include this.
Or the reaction scheme could be
where B is the readable state and degrades on its own to C. i.e. The air makes some unstable compound that makes the disk readable and that compound just decomposes on its own (no help from air).
The reason to believe that this is that (acording to above posts) they thought of forcing you to get air in there in the first place, so the probably thought of you excluding air (oxygen) after you started the reaction to make it readable.
Dificult to tell with out more information.
An article was also posted at yahoo
I might believe that they made U-233 from Th-232. However, when you state that "no one claims they made Pu, except you." You are way off base. This claim is made above and in the New York Timesarticle.
Also, you state that a "breeder reactor is one that [...]" that's right, A breeder reactor is a reactor. What they built was a neutron source and a target, not a reactor.
Finaly they probably wanted to observe the Th-233 decay (into U-233) which would be evidence of the existnace of the U-233, and much easier to observe. However, they are very few people who understand taking these measurements at near background levels because most nuclear physicists don't work near background--no reason and it is hard and not as useful.
look I'm not trying to say that they didn't do something interesting, I'm just saying it is a little hyped up.
i read the old posts and they showed that the posters did not really understand the physics.
Recall that a Ph.D. in physics who knows lots about their research area does not know all of physics. I interact with Ph.D. physicists who know lots about their very specific area but know very little about, other core areas of physics.
All right, they so did not build a breeder reactor. Even given the definition that anything that produced Pu is a breeder (which would make every reactor in the world a breeder reactor), they did not do it. You need U-238 and a lot of neutrons.
While they claim that they observed emissions from Pu, this is not well documented and they may have simply been observing cosmic background or Pu desposed globaly from wepons tests or Am-241 x-rays
Slashdot looks forward to a new area in which posts can be made again and again and again.
Yeah, i realized (shortly after i posted) that i forgot to point out that this was an advantage that these have over other purifiers. I guess i got too into the article
is there a public comment that anyone knows about?
Yeah, cause Geordi had the Enterprise running at 98%
Huh?
what is compact heat dispersal? If it means all the heat is move to a small area, isn't this the problem in the first place?
OK, lets make sure that you feel this way. Please answer the following questions. Since you have nothing to hide, it shouldn't bother you to answer them.
Should you answer all these questions with believable answers I might start to believe you.
http://www.spamhaus.com/addressverifier.asp?adress = cmdrtaco@slashdot.org
Come on people this is really amazing! a 9% increase! This is as great as when we went from 2x to 2.18x.
Did anybody else notice that they had just 256MB in the computer? 10.2 launches and that's it, its all swap from there on out. If you actualy have $30 to blow on memory your computer will perform much better and differently than these tests.
in 1940s It was a whole lot of people in a room running Monte Carlo code.
Note that Monte Carlo codes are very parallelizable, one often needs to transport billions of particles, and the problem is only ~10 kbytes; so set it up on each computer, give each a distinct seed (that's the tricky part) and let each transport 1/n particles. Or, in 1944, just run it all on the same "machine."
Well, there appear to be a number of people out there concerned with fair taxation. While many make broad claims and appeal to "what is right" the Tennesseans for Fair Taxation takes a more detailed look at the actual effects of a sales tax system look at this page as an example of what is wrong with this "fair tax." gw
launching browser in OS X, 0.3 seconds longer... launching word in OS X, 0.5 seconds longer... watching the icon hop in the dock while it is launcing... priceless. But really, I'm not sure weather my computer a work (1.3MHz AMD in win2k) or my home computer (667MHz G4 in OS X.1.5) launches its browser faster or gets word going faster. But I am sure that the OS X dock gets me to the app and between apps much faster and this is the task that my computer can most slow me down on / get my mind off my work and onto how I am using the OS.