In other words, the problem is that everybody else is not like you, and too much like the majority of people.
You've told us that most people "don't care" as deeply as you do about how things work, that most influential people "are not scientifically inclined", and that most of your friends didn't find a math geek appealing as a friend. And in addition you had better-than-average teachers and an engineer as a father, neither of which most people have.
So yes, science is not considered important by society, at least to the degree wished by you and most people here. But which is the objectively correct/appropriate/real level of importance? Each is entirely correct for itself. The real value of science to society is precisely that which society derives from it. When global warming starts flooding major cities, you can bet that every school will be teaching climatology.
And when all the great strides in progress have been made and the value of science to society is equal to its value to you, you'll find that most people will know and care about science as much as you do. And there will be someone else ranting about how people like you are just ignorant products of an inadequate education system.
>>> the natural curiosity to find answers for the "how" questions, is what is lacking in society today in general. >>> If it's lacking in general, it's not "natural".
>>> The fact that people actually care about Paris Hilton is also a nice solid data point in my suggestion that people's perspective on what's interesting and important is just waaaay off the mark from reality. >>> Reality? Paris Hilton being considered more interesting and important by most people than hadron colliders IS the reality of the world. The reverse is the reality for yourself (and myself as well), but no more than your ideal for the world.
If you get outside of the urban core, suburban Japan (for example, large parts of Chiba and Saitama prefecture) has become, in the past decade or so, quite like suburban America, where you actually do need a car to get around, and amenities are being built with that assumption.
Sure, there's always a train station in the vicinity of such communities, but those are for commuting in to the city, and not very useful for getting around in the area -- the end of the line is a big urban hub, but most of the stations along the way are the same sort of residential areas, and there's no space within walking distance of the station to support the entertainment and shopping needs of the burgeoning residential populations. So they just do the obvious thing -- rip up the rice paddies and forests and build large shopping malls.
There are now Costcos, Ikeas, and supermalls in the suburban Tokyo area, complete with huge parking lots., multiplex theaters.. and Namco arcades. My girlfriend's family lives in one such area (in Chiba prefecture), and their typical weekend activity is to all get in the minivan and drive to the local Jusco mall for shopping, dining, and games.
As I understood it, the question was whether a paper airplane, if sent earthward from orbit, would manage to land without burning up, given that a paper airplane's aerodynamic characteristics are vastly different from a lump of iron or space shuttle, namely that its surface area relative to mass is much greater, and thus its terminal velocity in the atmosphere might be much lower than that at which friction would cause the paper to burn. (We all know paper burns at 451F at 1 atmosphere... what about at 0.0001 atm?...)
And in all your calculations, you've managed to completely NOT answer or even touch on that question.
Also, isn't distance = 1/2at^2, and thus t = sqrt(2 * 163 miles / 32f/s) ? Tell me if I'm mistaken. Understand, I'm no rocket scientist.
Japanese in fact does have a lot of French loan words; possibly more than English does. For example the French term "vacance" is used in Japanese much more than the English equivalent "vacation". And wine-tasting was big in the 1990s economic bubble, so most people know the term "somelleir".
But even if we were talking about an English-speaking country, somellier is the appropriate word, and one that most English-speakers are familiar with.
None of those other words signifies the act of making expert personal recommendations on a subjective matter, which is what a somellier does. Nor do they convey the snooty, haughty yet humble attitude and the image of a fellow in a tuxedo cradling a bottle (or phone as it may be) in his arms while describing it in a barely-audible whisper.
I don't want more poor people driving. Or more rich people. I would prefer it if MUCH fewer people needed to drive in the first place. And whatever else the parent post said.
I live in a major Asian city in a household of two (which is unlikely to increase in the near future). We don't own an automobile, and go everywhere by trains, whose electricity is generated by nuclear as well as fossil-fuel plants. And given the typical passenger loads, they are probably vastly more efficient per passenger/km than anything on the road. For anything under ~2km, we walk or bicycle.
So, I probably still burn more carbon than that Indian family, but I'm sure it's much less than the idealized American-style family of three, each with a mid-sized sedan, which is probably the dreamlike glint in the eye of every eager first-time Tata buyer.
Re:Any Aerodynamics Testing?
on
Flying Humans
·
· Score: 1
As the article states, the goal is *not* to set down on flat ground -- that's pretty much out of the question. He will be landing on a ski slope-like device.
As described in the article and accompanying video, in this case that challenge is very circumscribed: he will "land" in a $2 million "landing trap" that has a 20' x 20' entrance which funnels into a gradually decreasing slope, like a ski jump landing. He's not going to be "hitting the ground" in any meaningful way.
Of course, there are people who think its okay to break the law, just so long as no-one finds out about it. To those people I don't send email - I send it direct to the CEO.
In most companies such people typically are the CEO.
QR won't be supplanted by RFID and NFC because it can also be used in a broadcast content, which RFID and "near" (contactless) communication can't. QRs can be put placed in a TV commercial, or on a large billboard (imagine a video screen at a rock concert with a QR on it) which can reach hundreds of people simultaneously at any distance as long as it can be photographed. I could create and print a QR on a flyer and distribute a thousand copies but I think it'll be a long time before I can crank out a thousand RFIDs on my own.
Assuming you are not a Japanese citizen, yeesh, do you live in a cave? I thought pretty much every single foreigner living in Japan has heard lots and lots about this. (The answer is, yes, you will have to be fingerprinted and photographed every time you leave and enter the country.)
"The Inca suspension bridges achieved clear spans of at least 150 feet, probably much greater. This was a longer span than any European masonry bridges at the time. The longest Roman bridge in Spain had a maximum span between supports of 95 feet." (my emphasis)
Trajan's bridge was long destroyed by the time of the Spanish Empire, and it wasn't in Spain, thus the Inca bridges had longer spans than anything the Conquistadores had ever seen. They were duly impressed, as they certainly should have been.
Take off your rose-toned headphones. JASRAC, the Japanese equivalent of the RIAA, is pretty notorious for its own strongarm tactics, though they usually consist of extorting music-playing coffee-shops rather than suing individual listeners.
Human fighter pilots won't disappear, they just won't be physically sitting in the planes they're piloting. Many of the UAVs that the U.S. has flying over Iraq aren't autonomous, they're flown remotely in real-time by guys sitting in control rooms in the Nevada desert.
In the plane described in the article, the pilot receives all visual input from a virtual environment. If the physical environment (gravity, orientation) could also be simulated to a reasonable degree, there's no reason he has to sit in the cockpit and risk death (from excessive Gs as well as enemy fire).
The clock time during which a celestial object is in the sky on any day is essentially the same anywhere in the world. The angle of its path relative to the horizon, and thus rising and setting time, varies with latitude, but the time it reaches its highest point (zenith) in the sky will be at the same clock time. Just like the sun at noontime.
Depending on latitude, its path through the sky may be entirely below the horizon and thus invisible. For example, the Little Dipper "rises", "sets", and "reaches zenith" in the sky of the Southern Hemisphere, but it does so all below the horizon, so it's invisible.
The summary says it's in the constellation Perseus. If you can figure out where Perseus is, there are simple ways to figure out when and where you'll be able to see it from your location.
On the other hand if you don't know where Perseus is, no amount of additional information will help you find the comet.
The previous administration had recieved 36 terror convictions. The current? 1. Yes, read that number, 1. Our "new laws" have managed to actually decrease the number of convictions of terrorists.
In other words, under the previous administration (at least) 36 terrorists were able to commit their acts before being caught and convicted...
Slashdot Mirror
In other words, the problem is that everybody else is not like you, and too much like the majority of people.
You've told us that most people "don't care" as deeply as you do about how things work, that most influential people "are not scientifically inclined", and that most of your friends didn't find a math geek appealing as a friend. And in addition you had better-than-average teachers and an engineer as a father, neither of which most people have.
So yes, science is not considered important by society, at least to the degree wished by you and most people here. But which is the objectively correct/appropriate/real level of importance? Each is entirely correct for itself. The real value of science to society is precisely that which society derives from it. When global warming starts flooding major cities, you can bet that every school will be teaching climatology.
And when all the great strides in progress have been made and the value of science to society is equal to its value to you, you'll find that most people will know and care about science as much as you do. And there will be someone else ranting about how people like you are just ignorant products of an inadequate education system.
>>>
the natural curiosity to find answers for the "how" questions, is what is lacking in society today in general.
>>>
If it's lacking in general, it's not "natural".
>>>
The fact that people actually care about Paris Hilton is also a nice solid data point in my suggestion that people's perspective on what's interesting and important is just waaaay off the mark from reality.
>>>
Reality? Paris Hilton being considered more interesting and important by most people than hadron colliders IS the reality of the world. The reverse is the reality for yourself (and myself as well), but no more than your ideal for the world.
If you get outside of the urban core, suburban Japan (for example, large parts of Chiba and Saitama prefecture) has become, in the past decade or so, quite like suburban America, where you actually do need a car to get around, and amenities are being built with that assumption.
Sure, there's always a train station in the vicinity of such communities, but those are for commuting in to the city, and not very useful for getting around in the area -- the end of the line is a big urban hub, but most of the stations along the way are the same sort of residential areas, and there's no space within walking distance of the station to support the entertainment and shopping needs of the burgeoning residential populations. So they just do the obvious thing -- rip up the rice paddies and forests and build large shopping malls.
There are now Costcos, Ikeas, and supermalls in the suburban Tokyo area, complete with huge parking lots., multiplex theaters.. and Namco arcades. My girlfriend's family lives in one such area (in Chiba prefecture), and their typical weekend activity is to all get in the minivan and drive to the local Jusco mall for shopping, dining, and games.
That's Alan M. Dershowitz.
The author of the paper is one Adam M. Gershowitz. Not Alan as stated in the summary.
(Nor is it Adam Horovitz the Beastie Boy.)
Honestly, I never new that. I thought eukaryotes were like some sort of fossilized microorganisms, or something.
As I understood it, the question was whether a paper airplane, if sent earthward from orbit, would manage to land without burning up, given that a paper airplane's aerodynamic characteristics are vastly different from a lump of iron or space shuttle, namely that its surface area relative to mass is much greater, and thus its terminal velocity in the atmosphere might be much lower than that at which friction would cause the paper to burn. (We all know paper burns at 451F at 1 atmosphere... what about at 0.0001 atm?...)
And in all your calculations, you've managed to completely NOT answer or even touch on that question.
Also, isn't distance = 1/2at^2, and thus t = sqrt(2 * 163 miles / 32f/s) ? Tell me if I'm mistaken. Understand, I'm no rocket scientist.
Japanese in fact does have a lot of French loan words; possibly more than English does. For example the French term "vacance" is used in Japanese much more than the English equivalent "vacation". And wine-tasting was big in the 1990s economic bubble, so most people know the term "somelleir".
But even if we were talking about an English-speaking country, somellier is the appropriate word, and one that most English-speakers are familiar with.
None of those other words signifies the act of making expert personal recommendations on a subjective matter, which is what a somellier does. Nor do they convey the snooty, haughty yet humble attitude and the image of a fellow in a tuxedo cradling a bottle (or phone as it may be) in his arms while describing it in a barely-audible whisper.
I installed the new Ubuntu release... I think it's called "Wobbly Worm".
Fine then.
I don't want more poor people driving. Or more rich people. I would prefer it if MUCH fewer people needed to drive in the first place. And whatever else the parent post said.
I live in a major Asian city in a household of two (which is unlikely to increase in the near future). We don't own an automobile, and go everywhere by trains, whose electricity is generated by nuclear as well as fossil-fuel plants. And given the typical passenger loads, they are probably vastly more efficient per passenger/km than anything on the road. For anything under ~2km, we walk or bicycle.
So, I probably still burn more carbon than that Indian family, but I'm sure it's much less than the idealized American-style family of three, each with a mid-sized sedan, which is probably the dreamlike glint in the eye of every eager first-time Tata buyer.
It's like watching the Israelites wandering around in the desert without Moses.
You mean that angry guy with a flowing smelly beard who hasn't bathed in forty days and forty nights?
As the article states, the goal is *not* to set down on flat ground -- that's pretty much out of the question. He will be landing on a ski slope-like device.
As described in the article and accompanying video, in this case that challenge is very circumscribed: he will "land" in a $2 million "landing trap" that has a 20' x 20' entrance which funnels into a gradually decreasing slope, like a ski jump landing. He's not going to be "hitting the ground" in any meaningful way.
Of course, there are people who think its okay to break the law, just so long as no-one finds out about it. To those people I don't send email - I send it direct to the CEO.
In most companies such people typically are the CEO.
QR won't be supplanted by RFID and NFC because it can also be used in a broadcast content, which RFID and "near" (contactless) communication can't. QRs can be put placed in a TV commercial, or on a large billboard (imagine a video screen at a rock concert with a QR on it) which can reach hundreds of people simultaneously at any distance as long as it can be photographed. I could create and print a QR on a flyer and distribute a thousand copies but I think it'll be a long time before I can crank out a thousand RFIDs on my own.
Assuming you are not a Japanese citizen, yeesh, do you live in a cave? I thought pretty much every single foreigner living in Japan has heard lots and lots about this. (The answer is, yes, you will have to be fingerprinted and photographed every time you leave and enter the country.)
800 meters in total length, but the spans (distance between supports) were no more than 95 feet. The Inca bridges had spans over 150 feet.
What the article says is:
"The Inca suspension bridges achieved clear spans of at least 150 feet, probably much greater. This was a longer span than any European masonry bridges at the time. The longest Roman bridge in Spain had a maximum span between supports of 95 feet." (my emphasis)
Trajan's bridge was long destroyed by the time of the Spanish Empire, and it wasn't in Spain, thus the Inca bridges had longer spans than anything the Conquistadores had ever seen. They were duly impressed, as they certainly should have been.
Forget shooting rope-laden arrows across wide windy gaps. Just have another person down in the canyon to tie the ends thrown down by both sides.
Take off your rose-toned headphones. JASRAC, the Japanese equivalent of the RIAA, is pretty notorious for its own strongarm tactics, though they usually consist of extorting music-playing coffee-shops rather than suing individual listeners.
Human fighter pilots won't disappear, they just won't be physically sitting in the planes they're piloting. Many of the UAVs that the U.S. has flying over Iraq aren't autonomous, they're flown remotely in real-time by guys sitting in control rooms in the Nevada desert.
In the plane described in the article, the pilot receives all visual input from a virtual environment. If the physical environment (gravity, orientation) could also be simulated to a reasonable degree, there's no reason he has to sit in the cockpit and risk death (from excessive Gs as well as enemy fire).
BTW, talk about missiles replacing manned fighters dates to the 1950s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1957_Defence_White_Paper
If you can't see anything because you've lost your eyesight, you're obviously using it correctly... perhaps too much.
There are only a few things that almost all online viewers can find amusing or endearing, and one of them is babies doing cute things.
Speak for yourself, buddy.
The clock time during which a celestial object is in the sky on any day is essentially the same anywhere in the world. The angle of its path relative to the horizon, and thus rising and setting time, varies with latitude, but the time it reaches its highest point (zenith) in the sky will be at the same clock time. Just like the sun at noontime.
Depending on latitude, its path through the sky may be entirely below the horizon and thus invisible. For example, the Little Dipper "rises", "sets", and "reaches zenith" in the sky of the Southern Hemisphere, but it does so all below the horizon, so it's invisible.
Yes, but the sky will be in a different place above you depending on latitude.
The summary says it's in the constellation Perseus. If you can figure out where Perseus is, there are simple ways to figure out when and where you'll be able to see it from your location.
On the other hand if you don't know where Perseus is, no amount of additional information will help you find the comet.
The previous administration had recieved 36 terror convictions. The current? 1. Yes, read that number, 1. Our "new laws" have managed to actually decrease the number of convictions of terrorists.
In other words, under the previous administration (at least) 36 terrorists were able to commit their acts before being caught and convicted...