`fixed term of many years' -- not in the postdoc world. I have a trail of e-mail addresses that appear on papers and conference proceedings (because of the `operational identity' issue) but that are now defunct. Many people I know have been through more institutions than me. There might well come a point where a persistent e-mail address would outweigh the disadvantages of a homebrew mail domain.
They intend to use adaptive optics to compensate for the effects of the atmosphere, though if you read the science case they haven't quite decided on how to do this yet.
cd burning works fine in sarge with the sarge 2.6 kernel and IDE device names. Just don't use SCSI emulation in 2.6 (I burnt my first ever Linux coaster finding this out).
However, it isn't how these measurements were made. The plasma that they're observing doesn't emit spectral lines. They measure proper motions -- discrete blobs of plasma moving on the sky.
This is nothing new, by the way. Just someone's press release has got enough attention to make a headline. People have been using this technique and getting this sort of number for about 20 years.
Leibniz's published output and range of interests were both far larger than Newton's, in fact. Newton was a great (if unpleasant) man, but his reputation doesn't need boosting at the expense of others'.
Moreover, this sort of resolution (or better) has been available for a long, long time in radio interferometry. The technical interest in this story is that they did it in real time (rather than recording on tape or hard drive and then correlating after the observation), not the resolution they obtained.
There is no part of the sky that the HST can't look at, though obviously at any given time its choices are more limited (e.g. it can't point within 50 degrees of the Sun, but the Sun moves wrt the stars...)
The key point about this work is that it would be much, much, much cheaper than HST. Moreover, it's looking at the moment as though the JWST, HST's successor, as well as being very expensive to the US taxpayer, will be restricted to the infrared. A ground-based optical telescope with high resolution could clean up at that point. Pity we can't have another one in the northern hemisphere, though.
> Then again, "dark matter" seems just as silly.
We know that there is (at least some) matter that we would not be able to detect at the distances involved. We don't have any independent evidence for a modification of Newton's laws. So, a priori, `dark matter' is not `just as silly' (which is why it's the preferred hypothesis until it can be ruled out).
A bunch of paid journal staff to send out papers for review and deal with the boring and mundane aspects of running a journal make it a lot easier. (Paying the editors for their time is also a good idea.) I've seen the contrast between the efficiency of journals with page charges (and many paid staff) and none (a couple of poorly paid staff in a basement) and it makes me worried about this model.
Don't forget the velocity dispersions of clusters of galaxies, which should come in somewhere between 1 and 2.
Rotation curves of galaxies tend to give lower values for the amount of dark matter needed, but you're right that the other measurements are in reasonable agreement.
You're still missing a couple of points. One is that the law of libel and slander is part of English Common Law; as such, it pre-dates the U.S. Constitution, never mind the First Amendment, and there's no sense in which subsequent acts of Congress governing it have *abridged* the right to free speech by making it less free. The second is that defamation is not a crime; you *do* have the right to libel or slander someone. But they have the right to sue you when you do.
Go there and you'll learn (1) it isn't CERN, it's a different european consortium, and (2) it isn't 'this': it's magnetically confined fusion, an entirely different kettle of worms. The people working on inertially confined fusion (lasers) are trying to solve some of the problems that magnetic confinement produces. But it's true that they are a long way behind. ITER will be along before all that long...
Slashdot Mirror
Yes they do. (There's no alternative for any deep space probe.)
`fixed term of many years' -- not in the postdoc world. I have a trail of e-mail addresses that appear on papers and conference proceedings (because of the `operational identity' issue) but that are now defunct. Many people I know have been through more institutions than me. There might well come a point where a persistent e-mail address would outweigh the disadvantages of a homebrew mail domain.
No we don't. The hereditary element was abolished some years ago.
A decent motherboard will let you run the fans slower than max speed if the temperature is low (PWM).
>but ever tried to read a 10-year-od tape on a new machine?
Yes, DATs I wrote more than 10 years ago still read fine. They've lived all that time in a succession of desk drawers.
See man xscreensaver and the pointerhysteresis option. xscreensaver-command is your friend for binding to a `turn monitor off' icon.
`Moral rights' is what you mean.
They intend to use adaptive optics to compensate for the effects of the atmosphere, though if you read the science case they haven't quite decided on how to do this yet.
cd burning works fine in sarge with the sarge 2.6 kernel and IDE device names. Just don't use SCSI emulation in 2.6 (I burnt my first ever Linux coaster finding this out).
No consensus yet. Go here, search astro-ph for `Pioneer' and you'll find people still arguing about it.
Like Opterons do, you mean?
Even that isn't a difference. Plenty of journals operate `author pays' already -- and then charge the reader as well.
Not that this isn't total bullshit; just not for that reason.
However, it isn't how these measurements were made. The plasma that they're observing doesn't emit spectral lines. They measure proper motions -- discrete blobs of plasma moving on the sky. This is nothing new, by the way. Just someone's press release has got enough attention to make a headline. People have been using this technique and getting this sort of number for about 20 years.
Leibniz's published output and range of interests were both far larger than Newton's, in fact. Newton was a great (if unpleasant) man, but his reputation doesn't need boosting at the expense of others'.
Moreover, this sort of resolution (or better) has been available for a long, long time in radio interferometry. The technical interest in this story is that they did it in real time (rather than recording on tape or hard drive and then correlating after the observation), not the resolution they obtained.
MRO will be an optical interferometer, with all the limitations that implies. Not a general-purpose instrument.
There is no part of the sky that the HST can't look at, though obviously at any given time its choices are more limited (e.g. it can't point within 50 degrees of the Sun, but the Sun moves wrt the stars...) The key point about this work is that it would be much, much, much cheaper than HST. Moreover, it's looking at the moment as though the JWST, HST's successor, as well as being very expensive to the US taxpayer, will be restricted to the infrared. A ground-based optical telescope with high resolution could clean up at that point. Pity we can't have another one in the northern hemisphere, though.
> Then again, "dark matter" seems just as silly. We know that there is (at least some) matter that we would not be able to detect at the distances involved. We don't have any independent evidence for a modification of Newton's laws. So, a priori, `dark matter' is not `just as silly' (which is why it's the preferred hypothesis until it can be ruled out).
A bunch of paid journal staff to send out papers for review and deal with the boring and mundane aspects of running a journal make it a lot easier. (Paying the editors for their time is also a good idea.) I've seen the contrast between the efficiency of journals with page charges (and many paid staff) and none (a couple of poorly paid staff in a basement) and it makes me worried about this model.
The plural of penis ought to be penes, if you were sticking to Latin plurals. Fortunately we aren't, and it isn't.
Don't forget the velocity dispersions of clusters of galaxies, which should come in somewhere between 1 and 2. Rotation curves of galaxies tend to give lower values for the amount of dark matter needed, but you're right that the other measurements are in reasonable agreement.
You're still missing a couple of points. One is that the law of libel and slander is part of English Common Law; as such, it pre-dates the U.S. Constitution, never mind the First Amendment, and there's no sense in which subsequent acts of Congress governing it have *abridged* the right to free speech by making it less free. The second is that defamation is not a crime; you *do* have the right to libel or slander someone. But they have the right to sue you when you do.
Ephesus, is what it's more usually called in English.
Go there and you'll learn (1) it isn't CERN, it's a different european consortium, and (2) it isn't 'this': it's magnetically confined fusion, an entirely different kettle of worms. The people working on inertially confined fusion (lasers) are trying to solve some of the problems that magnetic confinement produces. But it's true that they are a long way behind. ITER will be along before all that long...