You shouldnt argue in terms of planck units. They simply dont fit well into the physics (being on the border of the laws).
Its a much easier picture if you just think about the particle / wave aspect of photons: Photoeffect is, basically, strictly particle. But considering the wave nature of photons, you have a wavepacket that has a physical size. This allows for many photons to have a probability of existing in the _same_ spot, at the _same_ time. Now all you need is fermis golden rule, and some matrix elements to calculate the probabilties.
Because focussed correctly, the extremely high field strenght in the focal point can create effects that at first seem physically implausible.
For example there is one effect that seems to "break" quantum phyiscs (or more exactly, the photo-effect): You can excite electrons out of energy levels that are bound stronger than the photon energy. Even if they are bound _a_ lot stronger. The electric fields can be strong enough to strip atoms from everything down to and including the k-shell (I have one seen a presenter show a silde mentioning 37-photon effects...) This can be used to create hard x-rays, or, of course, as a particle accelerator: You can GeV on ion energyies from them with a relatively simple setup.
This is of course for "normal" FS-Lasers, wich fill not much more than a large optical bank. But something tells me that _this_ one can make even more intersting stuff happen:)
americans seem to have. While visiting the hoover dam, there also was talk about "cheap electricity" for people in the vincinity. isnt it uneconomical to sell it cheap if its more worth somewhere else? With 320 kV lines, you could transmit electricity across the united states with losing 20%, at most. And to reach states with much higher electricity prices, you could stay within single digit percentages of loss. So why sell it for cheap? its not like the capacities are unlimited...
Well, basically that was all i wanted to say. I wasnt claiming that they are MUCH larger than hubble. Its just that in the public eye hubble is often presented as a unique archivement. Thats why a spysat "better than hubble" seems so unbelievable to them. I just wanted to put that fact in relation.
That doesnt changa a thing for the lumens. Thats integrated per definition And they are not _extremely_ directional. Or have you never seen a led besides those 5mm ones? Nice nearly lambertian 180 degree leds are easily available, and that helps total efficiency a lot, because you dont need a reflector.
a) Hubble was mothballed for many years because of the challanger disaster. It was perfectly finished in the 80s b) They made 5meter mirrors before that. c) They had bigger lauch vehicles available (anybody know what a saturn 2, or even 5, could lift to a polar LEO?) d) They could use film. Earth is plenty bright to that low quantum efficiency doesnt hurt, and they would have a person up there to handle it. Hubble is using a decade-old ccd technology (the original before the retrofit operation was a technology now a quarter century out of date). Because they had to (observing dim objects, need for fully electonic path even though the tech was still immature).
There are spysats around that are bigger than hubble, today, too. Just because we dont hear about them doesnt mean they dont exist. Hell, even the shuttle as we know was made to be as big as it is in order to lauch those spysats.
The way i understand those kind of claims, they showed him the thing for 10 minutes, and pressured him "Explain Exactly How This Works!".
If he gives an evading answer, like "i cannot say anything from this, i need to examin it closer", the wonders of press will make a "Professor cannot explain what happens!!!1" out of it.
Just a userland-application with container-files would be fine:
They can listen to each other, and each file gets replicated on every node. If the filling level gets higher, copies are purged up to a minimal redundancy level.
Even the factor 2 loss of non-parity redundancy would still be a lot better than not using th espace at all.
He have a few compute nodes around here. Each of them has an HD, and as those are so cheap we gave them 500Gbyte ones.
They dont really need lots of space (maybe 30Gbyte for OS and temp-files), otoh without redundancy the other 450Gbyte are worthless.
As the task is emberassingly parallel, Network traffic wouldnt be a problem. If there was a solution to compine all this storage (doesnt even have to be transparent) into a distributed, redundant storage network, i could surely make use of those Tbytes
Well, your point might not have been expressed very well. Otoh, what you are misstaking as "fanboyism" is a thing thats a little more complex.
To sum it up: I am just fed up about hearing the same stupid fud every single day for nearly two years now. If people here had any kind of confidence, they would feel thats this childishness was beneath them.
Isnt it the typical Linux distribution (i.e. kitchen-sink style) that creates the image that everything from kwrite over amorak to to gnumerik somehow belongs to the Linux-"OS"?
It doesnt seem changed at all to me. The "window" you can click seems to be at least 16 pixels wide, so there is no way in hell how anybody not suffering from parkinson could miss it. Especially as there is direct visual feedback in form of the cursor-change.
Well, if you count posting comments and modding, i am a regular contributor. And i bought Vista64 two weeks ago. Like in paying money for it. To upgrade from XP-Pro. I dont really care what you think about that, but i am sastified with my experience.
I wasted a lot more time getting stupid shit in linux to work than it took me to earn the money i paid for vista, so i dont feel in any way bad about my purchase.
I know you can use it for data partitions (or whole drives). But you cannot convert full data drives into encrypted data drives. You first have to copy everything off, create the volume, and then move everything back.
My personal experience with TC 4.0 (and, obviously, not my boot disk):
Random accesses arent slowed down noticable, but large STR (like copying 50Gbyte to another HD) are. For me, the limit was about 30Mbyte/s. But as this is driver-level CPU load, and not interupt driven, the system responsitivity was not negatively affected.
Memory usage is neglectable, and CPU load scales linearly with bytes/s. So in most scenarios, or multicores, its not the limiting factor.
But you would NOT want to capture video or stuff like that onto a truecrypt volume
Guess what you would get if you were to use an ipod as flash HD? They can use the slowest available without any problem, plus dont have to care about compatibility.
Spot market Flash is $5 per Gbyte. And Apple sure can get very good conditions for their purchases (contract security and all).
I doubt they pay significantly more than $100 for ALL flash in this toy.
Slashdot Mirror
You shouldnt argue in terms of planck units. They simply dont fit well into the physics (being on the border of the laws).
Its a much easier picture if you just think about the particle / wave aspect of photons:
Photoeffect is, basically, strictly particle. But considering the wave nature of photons, you have a wavepacket that has a physical size. This allows for many photons to have a probability of existing in the _same_ spot, at the _same_ time. Now all you need is fermis golden rule, and some matrix elements to calculate the probabilties.
Because focussed correctly, the extremely high field strenght in the focal point can create effects that at first seem physically implausible.
:)
For example there is one effect that seems to "break" quantum phyiscs (or more exactly, the photo-effect): You can excite electrons out of energy levels that are bound stronger than the photon energy. Even if they are bound _a_ lot stronger. The electric fields can be strong enough to strip atoms from everything down to and including the k-shell (I have one seen a presenter show a silde mentioning 37-photon effects...)
This can be used to create hard x-rays, or, of course, as a particle accelerator: You can GeV on ion energyies from them with a relatively simple setup.
This is of course for "normal" FS-Lasers, wich fill not much more than a large optical bank. But something tells me that _this_ one can make even more intersting stuff happen
americans seem to have.
While visiting the hoover dam, there also was talk about "cheap electricity" for people in the vincinity.
isnt it uneconomical to sell it cheap if its more worth somewhere else?
With 320 kV lines, you could transmit electricity across the united states with losing 20%, at most. And to reach states with much higher electricity prices, you could stay within single digit percentages of loss.
So why sell it for cheap? its not like the capacities are unlimited...
Well, if it really hurts you that much that people point out the truth to groupthinkers, than its sad.
otherwise, just to give you a hint "record quarter".
(Sorry, this kind of fud just doesnt work against microsoft. you really have to actually _do_ something if you want to change the status quo)
I was driving around there last fall.
Its not a nice terrain to spot things.
If the plane went down and burned out, you wouldnt see the remains from 100 meters away.
Trying to spot it from a plane is just grasping for straws.
The worst theory i heard about this accident was that its not too unlikely he crashed his plance to either freeze or die of thirst down in the desert.
Well, basically that was all i wanted to say. I wasnt claiming that they are MUCH larger than hubble.
Its just that in the public eye hubble is often presented as a unique archivement.
Thats why a spysat "better than hubble" seems so unbelievable to them.
I just wanted to put that fact in relation.
That doesnt changa a thing for the lumens. Thats integrated per definition
And they are not _extremely_ directional. Or have you never seen a led besides those 5mm ones?
Nice nearly lambertian 180 degree leds are easily available, and that helps total efficiency a lot, because you dont need a reflector.
a) Hubble was mothballed for many years because of the challanger disaster. It was perfectly finished in the 80s
b) They made 5meter mirrors before that.
c) They had bigger lauch vehicles available (anybody know what a saturn 2, or even 5, could lift to a polar LEO?)
d) They could use film. Earth is plenty bright to that low quantum efficiency doesnt hurt, and they would have a person up there to handle it. Hubble is using a decade-old ccd technology (the original before the retrofit operation was a technology now a quarter century out of date). Because they had to (observing dim objects, need for fully electonic path even though the tech was still immature).
There are spysats around that are bigger than hubble, today, too. Just because we dont hear about them doesnt mean they dont exist. Hell, even the shuttle as we know was made to be as big as it is in order to lauch those spysats.
Knee Brace makes walking harder - Segway sees potential market opening
The way i understand those kind of claims, they showed him the thing for 10 minutes, and pressured him "Explain Exactly How This Works!".
If he gives an evading answer, like "i cannot say anything from this, i need to examin it closer", the wonders of press will make a "Professor cannot explain what happens!!!1" out of it.
To add to this:
What i am imagine doesnt need to be low-level.
Just a userland-application with container-files would be fine:
They can listen to each other, and each file gets replicated on every node. If the filling level gets higher, copies are purged up to a minimal redundancy level.
Even the factor 2 loss of non-parity redundancy would still be a lot better than not using th espace at all.
Acutally, this sounds nothing like that thing you link to.
More like your post being a slashvertisement.
He have a few compute nodes around here. Each of them has an HD, and as those are so cheap we gave them 500Gbyte ones.
They dont really need lots of space (maybe 30Gbyte for OS and temp-files), otoh without redundancy the other 450Gbyte are worthless.
As the task is emberassingly parallel, Network traffic wouldnt be a problem.
If there was a solution to compine all this storage (doesnt even have to be transparent) into a distributed, redundant storage network, i could surely make use of those Tbytes
Wake up, Mr. McCarthy
Its not the 50s anymore and you cannot any longer herd people like sheep just dropping words like "communism".
In fact, i applaud to your very capitalistic point of view and seriously hope you die because you cannot pay your hospital bills with your own money.
Well, your point might not have been expressed very well.
Otoh, what you are misstaking as "fanboyism" is a thing thats a little more complex.
To sum it up:
I am just fed up about hearing the same stupid fud every single day for nearly two years now. If people here had any kind of confidence, they would feel thats this childishness was beneath them.
Actually, i think you got it backwards:
Isnt it the typical Linux distribution (i.e. kitchen-sink style) that creates the image that everything from kwrite over amorak to to gnumerik somehow belongs to the Linux-"OS"?
About column resizing:
I just opened an exporer window to check that.
It doesnt seem changed at all to me.
The "window" you can click seems to be at least 16 pixels wide, so there is no way in hell how anybody not suffering from parkinson could miss it.
Especially as there is direct visual feedback in form of the cursor-change.
Well, if you count posting comments and modding, i am a regular contributor.
And i bought Vista64 two weeks ago. Like in paying money for it. To upgrade from XP-Pro.
I dont really care what you think about that, but i am sastified with my experience.
I wasted a lot more time getting stupid shit in linux to work than it took me to earn the money i paid for vista, so i dont feel in any way bad about my purchase.
Thats exactly my point:
I installed it, and tried it, but i _cannot_ encrypt my E drive without completely emptying it first.
Yeah, its also a dupe on slashdot.
But yeah, even that digg story mentioned thats its a dupe, and no news.
But nowadays slashdot has to copy digg dupes. sad.
I know you can use it for data partitions (or whole drives).
But you cannot convert full data drives into encrypted data drives. You first have to copy everything off, create the volume, and then move everything back.
My personal experience with TC 4.0 (and, obviously, not my boot disk):
Random accesses arent slowed down noticable, but large STR (like copying 50Gbyte to another HD) are. For me, the limit was about 30Mbyte/s.
But as this is driver-level CPU load, and not interupt driven, the system responsitivity was not negatively affected.
Memory usage is neglectable, and CPU load scales linearly with bytes/s. So in most scenarios, or multicores, its not the limiting factor.
But you would NOT want to capture video or stuff like that onto a truecrypt volume
Well, i could test it yet, because i discovered _another_ annoying problem:
I have 2 HDs, and a Raid.
HD1 has XP
HD2 has Vista
RAID has... well, raid
It cannot encrypt the vista partition, because the bootloader is on the first HD.
They have to option to convert boot drives to encrypted drives... even while the system is running.
Thats nice.
But how about converting non-boot drives?
Doesnt seem to be possible.
Not everybody starts with a blank sheet, or has double the needed capacity to empty first one HD and then another...
Guess what you would get if you were to use an ipod as flash HD?
They can use the slowest available without any problem, plus dont have to care about compatibility.
Spot market Flash is $5 per Gbyte. And Apple sure can get very good conditions for their purchases (contract security and all).
I doubt they pay significantly more than $100 for ALL flash in this toy.