Well, the total running it may be much smaller, particularly on wintel boxes.
In an attempt to secure a friends machine about 3 weeks ago, I grabbed the windows version over her cable modem and installed it.
Unforch, the only clues I could get from that windows box seemed to indicate it was offline, while the presence of the cable modem, and the fact that IE worked, said it was online.
I screwed around with it for about an hour, and never was able to ping the server, or get a functioning dns for firefox.
Thinking about it later, there may be been an online/offline function built into IE and OE, hopefully with an eye toward making it a bit more secure when they weren't running. Although thats just a SWAG on my part based on the clues, and the fact that I don't have a windows box on the premises so I'm a windows newbie. It may have been very simple for a windows tech to fix.
The whole point of that being that firefox didn't attempt to really tell me what was wrong at any point. I'll submit that if firefox really wants the windows market share they would like to have, it should be capable of doing the same online/offline functions as its windows competitor. Basicly, I walked away from a machine I'd just installed firefox on, hopeing to show its superiority, and instead reinforced the perception in the mind of that M$ user that this thing called linux was as yet, a very amatureish attempt. Just another wannabe.
Well, I've worked around tv transmitters with leakage fields that probably have exceeded fcc specs by a factor of 100x when in test config as opposed to on air config. Never lost a credit cards data yet.
But, this rfid thing, with its capability to read this crap while its still in my pocket, without my knowledge, strikes me as a serious invasion of privacy I would druther not have.
The possibility that someone with a portable reader could walk down a busy street and get all the data that would allow an identity theft to be done to hundreds of people in a single 10 minute walk just plain scares the crap out of me.
I had enough of a row with bill collectors in past years, who thought I was my worthless alky son (I was dumb enough to name him Jr.) and he convieniently leaves that off his signature when he signs up for a charge account. I've had to use my SS number to prove they had the wrong person as the target of their collection efforts on 3 occasions now because of that.
Haveing that data effectively posted for the whole world to read at their command should scare the hell out of everybody. It would certainly be poetic justice if the first 600 people to suffer the pain of that were our combined congressional houses congresscritters & the shrubs in the white house. And any SCOTUS judges who think its ok when it comes up for the 'is it constitutional' test when that case comes up. It will you know. The question is not IF, but WHEN.
We might note that there are already several RF-shielded wallets for sale in the US.
I'm in that same boat and therefore actively shopping. Are you at liberty to quote a src or brand name? Prefereably for a truckers style wallet, one big enough to hold not only a rack of card windows, but your checkbook complete with the anti-carbon sheet you place between the check you are writing and the next one down so that you don't write 2 checks when they are NCR (no carbon required) checks.
I've been using a ladies style clutch purse for several years now. The only problem with that is when someone insists on telling you your wallet is falling out because its longer than a blue jean hip pocket is deep. That gets old after a while even if it is handier than a cold 6 pack of bottled beer.
You know, if there wasn't an overpoweringly huge dollop of the truth in the above post, I'd be the first to start a fire to melt the tar, and send somebody back to the house for a feather tick we're not using in the summertime.
Unfortunately, the only truth missing in the parent post is the real names and states of the perps of such shennanigans. Sure, we can vote the perps out, but guess what, I guarantee that very copius notes will be passed to the newbies less than 20 minutes after the results are in if not before, describing exactly how things are done here, and if you don't want run out of office on some trumped up scandal, this is how it will be done.
I'm still in favor of a bumper sticker I first saw 50+ years ago, it said "Clean house, senate too". 50+ years later, it still seems like a heck of a good idea to me. Seriously, we need a clean slate of sane people.
What do you mean by..."To measure it, one must have a method of controlling it...". Why do we have to control it to measure it? We measure gravity all the time, don't we?
Ahh, yes, we measure its effect at the instant we weight something. What we don't know, because there is no way to turn it off, thereby creating a difference in the measured weight, and giving us the ability to measure the lag from the instant of turning it off to the instant our distant devices measures the difference in the weight. This has never been done because we puny humans do not have that sort of energies at our disposal.
So we are forced to wait for an event such as a distant star merger, hopefully of objects large enough to create a black hole. As a considerable amount of the masses so merged will be ejected at near C speeds at the instant of the merger (or at least our observations have tended to disclose these beams ejected from the objects polar rotation axis in what we think are old mergers), which will in turn create a gravity wave we should be able to measure at a considerable distance. In the case of this event, if gravity's propagation velocity=C speed, we should have recorded a gravity wave that coincides rather nicely with both the GRB and any remnant xray afterglow once the xray scopes got slewed around to look there, in this present case 50 seconds later, an eon in black hole creation merger time.
However, if all we are recording is noise that cannot be correlated with these GRB's (and possibly from the neutrino detectors too, I haven't heard anyone noting that Kamiokandi(sp) recorded anything yet) then we either need to go back to the theory's drawing board, or refine our math to search the entire range of time from the start of the gravity wave detectors recorded archives. If indeed its instantainous over intergalactic distances, we will be seriously constained by the fact that we've just started these recordings in the past year or 2.
We WILL be in the dark as to gravities pv until such time as a valid correlation can be done.
Also, I have read several times that we are going to need to wait for a supernova event, or something like this, in order to use our "gravity detectors" to help us determine the speed of gravity. Why does it need to be something so large? Why can't this be done with other bodies of mass?
Because basicly, at non-relativistic speeds, mass is mass. Even the triggering of an atomic weapon consumes so little mass that at a distance great enough to survive the blast, any change in the net mass of the area of the bomb going off is probably 70+ digits to the right of the decimal point.
Also, hasn't there already been several expiriments which show quite clearly that the speed of gravity is within 1% of the speed of light?
If there have been, I'm not aware of them. That doesn't mean there haven't been successfull attempts. Just that I haven't heard or read of them in the last 60 years. I would assume that if its been confirmed to the level of accuracy for the Hubble Constant, itself still fuzzy to the right of the decimal point a wee bit, that it would get more ink than it has. I don't recall reading about that in Hawkings work, at least not in terms that say "this is gravities speed" to the unwashed masses such as this old fart.
However, if I'm wrong, please supply some url's because I'd really like to see what the state of the art really is.
Good grief. Is there no end to the slashdot effect and its apparent ability to subtract 100 points from the posters IQ?
To me, this is one of the reasons I'm running Einstein@home in parallel with seti@home.
Now we have a known point in time that hopefully we also have data from the gravity detectors for, because one of the things the gravity detectors are looking for is the waves that would be created by the merger of a couple of heavy bodies (neutron stars leftover from previous supernovas would be good candidates) that would create a black hole.
All this of course depends on the pv* of a gravity wave, and assumes its C speed. If its not (some have conjectured gravity could be much faster than C speed), then our chances of finding a valid correlation between the GRB and the data from the gravity detectors becomes many times more difficult, say about 10ee+61 or thereabouts. So until we have a detected gravity wave event we can correlate to a visible event, I'm not betting either way on the speed of gravity since we've not yet come up with a method of turning it off and on. To measure it, one must have a method of controlling it...
Give that some thought, because the first lifeform in the universe to master that will truely rule the universe it can see because it removes in one swell foop, all impediments to achieveing near C speed transportation for that lifeform.
Like crap. It would be so nice if adobe would actually hire a web designer that knew what he was doing. I bounced in and out of tehre 4 times with mozzila, but got an instant done when I clicked on the download the first 3 times, then on the 4th pass, it hung forever waiting for the server to respond.
I though to myself, good grief, are there enough linux folks to cause their server to meltdown? Nah, not this year, in '07 maybe.
So I looked at the page src, found the link, pasted it into wget, and it came running in here at 190kb/sec.
So whats with their crippled server act, its unbecoming to say the least.
Now, to install it, and see if I decide to quit using ggv.
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Re:Space telescopes are obsolete
on
Hope for Hubble
·
· Score: 1
Humm, I could have sworn I heard Jeff doing a takeoff on that skit on the comedy channel a few years ago. Middle of the night, half asleep situation. For all I know, It could very easily have been Bill Engvall doing his own stuff & I missed the announcers intro. Stuff happens.
Generally, my credibility is pretty good, but at 70, there may be a missed attribution from time to time. I can recall the saying, but not always the sayer that said it.
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Re:Space telescopes are obsolete
on
Hope for Hubble
·
· Score: 1
Damn the automatic logout slashdot is doing now, there is no way to click on an email from/. with the link, answer the message, discover you're not logged in, go log in and come back AND preserve the message you already composed. Thats pure BS!
Anyway, my answer is that if these ground based scopes are so good in the infrared, then their images can be false colored to impress the frogs like me just as easily as those from the hubble are being color enhanced to impress us. But I don't see that happening. The stuff we're being fed here in the public hog trough has so far been graphics compositions based on (supposedly) what these modern IR behemoths have taken of the region around Sag A. Thats admittedly an impressive movie they've composed, but I want to see the real thing even if the colors have to be enhanced by making your 'ditch water' IR data into visible data.
Anyone who wants to convince me that the hubble is obsolete, is doing a damned poor job of it as I won't be swayed until such time as they justify the taxpayer dollars spent on them by paying us taxpayers in impressive images produced. Yes, some were financed by private grants, such as the Keck twins, but I'd expect that even for the Kecks, operating expenses are taxpayer dollars.
So show me Hubble is obsolete. I've sure not seen any 'proof' of that.
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Re:Better Served by a Large Telescope on the Moon?
on
Hope for Hubble
·
· Score: 1
Yes and no. You would still have the problem of maintainance, which might be multiplied quite a bit if any of the moon dust should get into the supporting bearings. That stuff, not haveing had a few million years to blow about in the wind and round off its fractured edges, is very very abrasive indeed.
Support structure flex as it moves about will be a constant calibration problem, and keeping the mirrors figure as it bends under that 1/6th moon gravity also need to be considered. None of these are a problem for the hubble as it truely is in a zero G environment. In fact, its quite strong, but that was only to support the mirror from the multigravity forces trying to rip it out of its mounts as it was being boosted to orbit when it was finally put up. Once there, a couple of strips of scotch tape could probably hold it together quite well unless the reaction wheels try to turn it to a GRB as its occurring, which has been done several times now. Then we're back to a row of 1/4" bolts to hold it.
Also, don't forget that the farther away it is, the more that service mission is going to cost. We can goto the hubbles NEO 100 times for what its going to cost to goto the James Webb out at L5, or to something on the moon.
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Re:Space telescopes are obsolete
on
Hope for Hubble
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Methinks your professor is full of it clear to the roots of his hairpiece.
Or, let me put it to you this way:
If these ground based scopes that have been brought online in the last 5 years are so friggin great, why are we not being treated to some of their output? With the exception of the twins on Mona Kea that Mr keck financed, the rest of them have been so far as I know, built with public money. So I'm actually surprised that we have all these people preaching at us as to just how much better these new toys are in comparison to the Hubble, but frankly, I've not seen a single image to back those statements up.
If the new ones are so much better in fact, then why are TPTB so afraid to let us look at some of their image data so that we, the taxpayer, can quite writing his congress-critters asking them to save what is not just a national treasure, but IMO a treasure to all humankind.
So as Jeff Foxworthy would say, "here's your sign", you proponents of pulling the feeding tube from hubble, either put up images that prove what you're saying, or STFU. The ball is in your court.
How about some movies of the last 90 days of eta carinae for instance, its right handy even, or maybe a movie of the last 6 months of the orbital goings on around Sag A? Maybe we could prove that Sag A is indeed a black hole of 6 million suns mass. And I'd love to see you attempt to duplicate the pair of really really deep space images, showing stuff over 10 billion light years away, that I'm using for 2 of my screen backgrounds here. But of course, being inside the atmosphere, thats simply impossible for ground based scopes.
Maybe the hubble is obsolete, but as yet, I've seen nothing that can touch what its done. The JW scope works at different wavelenghts, so it won't be able to replace the hubble. Supplant it, confirm each others findings maybe, but not "replace" it, they simply do 2 different jobs.
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Humm, just whoinhell is the deccan herald? Frankly, I don't need a tinfoil hat to think that any publication with deccan in its name is anything but medieval hogwash.
As for evidence that black holes exist, we need look no farther than toward the center of this galaxy, where something with an estimated mass of some 6 million copies of our sun exists, and causes other nearby stars, some of which aren't exactly fleaweights themselves to orbit around it, at substantial fractions of C speed. One star in particular, is in a quite ecentric orbit, taking a mere 17 days (IIRC) to complete one orbit.
No, we cannot 'see' what it is thats so heavy there, and that doesn't mean it couldn't be one of those non-black holes, but our prime chance to view that merger event and document it draws nearer all the time.
But I'd think that if the bounce theory these people are proposing actually works, we would have seem by now, some evidence of output from this otherwise very good facsimily of a black hole. We've been monitoring the location of 'Sag A' now for quite a while without ever seeing any evidence of the effects predicted for such a non-black hole.
Frankly, I don't know as I care whats inside the event horizon of such an object, because in order for a bounce to come back out of the event horizon to be seen by an outside observer, means first that we do not have a very good idea of the physics involved, because to do so would require bounce velocities to exceed C speeds by many orders of magnitude for an object that heavy as 6 million of our suns.
All of our theories, backed by experimental proofs, have tended to confirm that C speed, relative to the local environment (this 'local' could be an important loophole though) is only achieveable by a mass gain that translates to an object traveling at C speed, will have a mass that is infinite, the added energy being converted to mass. This is why, when we design ever newer accellerators for nuclear research, the holy grail is the highest fraction of C speed.
I think everyone in the field understands that it would take the combined energy of all the observable universe to accellerate one electron to 99.9999999999999(add another 1000 lines of 9's here folks) at which point that electron would then represent the mass of the universe. We're presently at some point slightly above 99.9% of C speed I think for lighter objects such as electrons. Perhaps someone involved in such research can clarify the exact figure.
Actually, in terms of radiation released, the what if scenarios tend to indicate that even at our range out here in the fringes, the merger of that short orbit star and the object we call Sag A, the hard radiation pulse will be quite detectable. Project einstein will also have no trouble picking that event out of the noise.
For project einstein, another very very interesting bit of data might be extracted because we still do not know the propagation velocity of gravity! Like the neutrino detectors, the results could be, depending on the camp you're in either prove that neutrinos have mass, in which case they cannot move at C speed, or they don't, in which case they can. SN1897A wasn't seen in visible light until it was picked up by the naked eye, some hours later, so we don't have a very good timebase for that measurement, and only 19 neutrinos were recorded at the time.
I doubt if either event it will trigger a major extinction from this range.
As for the person who is worried about eta-carinae(sp), they should think it through, and reduce the worry level considerably since our view of it indicates its a long way from having its barrel aimed at us. We have a nearly broadside view. None the less, its a very interesting event playing out before our eyes, not in real time since its quite a distance off, but our view of it is progressing in real time. Major changes have been seen in that event as it works its way toward the 'grande finale', in as little as 90 days, some of which, because of the an
IMO, the only reason to have added this story again, was so it would steer you to that site, and the site proceeds to do a pop-under add.
I don't see any great advantage to that. And I do see a great disadvantage to/. when they insult our intel with such a stunt.
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
What is wrong with letting friction do it's work and bring Hubble down to a safer altitude where it is safer to work on?
Because when it gets that low, its orbital lifetime is measured in weeks so you would have to work at a much higher speed than the glacier known as NASA normally works at.
Not mentioned very prominently in the press is that once the repairs have been done, the shuttles engines have been fired up to give it a 10-20 mile boost, so in the end when you have re-established a circular orbit (you have to boost up, then boost to circularize once up, half an orbit later), you still have to figure out if the shuttle has enough fuel to do a retroburn and get back down in a timely manner before the crews expandables are used up. That, as I understand it, is the real limit of how much of an orbital boost the shuttle can give it. I've heard rumors that the last successfull mission hit the runway with less than 2 gallons of fuel left. Thats close, too close.
The attachment of a de-orbital device OTOH, will have to be done before the 2nd gyroscope fails as I doubt very seriously their ability to do a manual grab as they did to get it under control on one service mission, can be duplicated with robotics when its lost a 2nd gyro and is slowly tumbling about in its orbit. That ISTR was the situation the men faced on one trip because of gyro failures, so they had to strap onto the arm and grab it by hand.
Personally, I'd like very much to see it serviced, at least 1 more time, but thats not going to happen with W at the helm. That would be over his quiet (you'll never hear about it in the "press") but very forcefull objections.
Thats what you get when you let a couple of MBA's run things. The only way they know how to run things is downhill, because that helps the end of the month statement, to hell with the end of the decade, they won't be there, or care after they've got theirs and run for the hills.
The Apollo 1 pad fire was not due to problems with the Saturn V booster.
No, it sure as hell wasn't if you are talking about the fire in the test facility in Houston. It was some twit who somehow managed to get into a position of command, and decreed that the test in question be carried out with approximately 5 psi of pure oxygen in it, bringing the partial pressure of the oxygen in the atmosphere in it to nearly 20 psi. I've cut steel with a smith wrench on less pressure. Not a clean cut, but a cut nonetheless.
Any spark, from anything would be enough to convert the interior into a 2000+ degree blowtorch of extremely toxic flame byproducts. Not that it mattered as their lungs were fatally damaged with the next breath they took. The hatch, for reasons of simple pressure containment, opened inward, meaning it was being held shut by a ton or so worth of square inches holding that 5 pounds of pressure in. In other words, there was no way in hell those guys could have opened the hatch against that pressure, and it was probably rising another 5 psi a second from the combustion products.
And there was a spark from some frayed wiring under one of the seats in that well worn and exersized test module. A spark, that in space, at 5 psia & no gravity to make "heat rises" convection currents to carry new oxygen into the flame, so that fire would have been smothered in its own combustion products before it had spread more than an inch if that far. In space it would have been a non-event that may have tripped a circuit breaker, the reason for the breaker trip not being found until it was fished out of the ocean later. Someone may have commented on the odor, maybe.
Had I been in an even higher position of authority, I would have insisted that twit do the first such test by himself, then nominated him for a Darwin Award. But of course I wasn't, so what's the use of playing the "had I" scenario?
I still burn everytime I think about their last 20 to 30 seconds of consiousness. It was stupid, and should have been prosecuted, because it was nothing short of negligent manslaughter of 3 good men. For what benefit was such a test? Damnedifiknow.
My comment stands. The so-called press release is nothing more than advertising to me. Yes, potentially important data to those who are or may be so afflicted.
As advertising is a gamble on the future sales achievable by the product, I'll be damned if I'll pay to read what is nothing but advertizing and future conjecture.
And now I see that I'm not logged in, WTCF?
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Dammit, is there no sense of trying to do a public service without charging an arm and a leg just to be able to read that maybe, 10 years down the road after they and the FDA have seen to it that all the money they can milk out of the test proof has been spent, there maybe might be a test for it thats quick, simple and no more invasive than me checking my sugar?
I have no argument with paying for the product, and/or test materials, ever. The people who do the research really should be able to recoup the salaries and such for the people who actually develop this stuff.
But thats when they actually have a product, and not a second before.
To charge me 40 dollars + tax just to read the paper once, is IMO just plain greedier than Boss Hog ever thought on being.
If they want money thrown their way to finance the rest of the proof to the FDA, all those blind tests etc, then they should make the publicity they are trying to generate easy to get by making it freely readable so the victims can go lobby their congress critters while they still can for a bag of support money to facilitate the proof, or dis-proof as the case may be. To charge these folks $40 for a word of hope is IMO, downright criminal and I hope St. Peter keeps the gates tightly locked when its their turn.
Where am I coming from?
Easy, I watched a first cousin lay in a bed living on a IV drip for the last 20 years of her life. First diagnosed when she was about 22, lived to be 66 IIRC. Yes, she had a careing mother who, when she could no longer physically care for her as she neared her own 75th birthday, had the means to see to it she was properly cared for for the next 15 years until she finally passed, having spoken maybe 3 words in the last 20 years of her life and those with extreme amounts of effort. Trapped with an apparently sound mind in a body she couldn't control. For her it was not living, it was a living hell.
No one should profit from anothers misery before they have a product that has the potential of being helpfull.
-- No Cheers offered on this one, its too too maddening for words. "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Locally, he doesn't have an aisle to duck into unless he can teleport himself 15-20 feet from a position at the registers. He is a wide open, virtually sitting duck target with only one place to go & thats over the counter, which has a low overhead he'll knock himself silly on. That improves my odds a bit. Still not 100% odds, but close enough for me to try them.
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
No, not a badass, but realisticly, can he swing to cover me and deliver a shot in the 3/4 second of my aged reaction times? Remember, I'm already at the ready & all I have to do is pull. To beat me, he would have to be awfull fast and a good shot to boot. I'm a fair shot with that piece, and I doubt I would miss from 10-15 feet. As far as partners, I have sense enough to scan that before mine comes out.
They are admittedly not very good odds for either of us, but I'd think my chances are better than his if he has to swing 90 degress or more to my location. He would have to swing at least that much in my local gomart store.
Tough guy? Not really. I only bet on sure things. Thats why I don't play the lottery.
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
this isn't something that any sensible lawyer would want to take to court.
And thats what I was trying to say, but I got lost in trying to be a smartass. Its a bit of a character flaw I've had for 70 years now.:)
-Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly-
First I've seen of that ficticious story. It makes a nice read, but ignored the gravity wells that must be climbed in and out of. That lack makes it totally undoable in the real world, and anybody with common sense can figure that out.
What I read was maybe a 5 years after the moonwalks in one of the science fact articles in Analog magazine, and I think it may even have been discussed in Sci. Am. a time or 2 over the years. It gets a bit of ink from time to time, but TPTB see the word nuclear and toss it in the fireplace for fuel.
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Don't I wish, don't I wish. But with a little sugar, it takes what would be a serious overdose for most to see any effect. But, the missus till appreciates what I can do occasionally without that stuff.:-)
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
No my friend, I don't fantasize over it. The difference is really a good solid understanding of whats right, and whats wrong. Some I suppose, might have bad dreams about it because they hope it never happens but their imagination keeps playing "what if". I sincerely hope it never happens to me. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't do what needs doing if it did happen.
I look at it this way. Somebody has to do it, and I put my pants on one leg at a time just like the cop who is probably busy scrapeing some drunk off a guard rail at the time. In pieces. With 5 to 20 priors on his still revocked license. His rig punched a van with a family of 5 in it, maybe 2 survivers, so 3 people died and 2 more spent a lot of time in the shop because some judge didn't have the balls to take him off the road by giving him lots of time in the states crossbar hotel to think about it.
Whats right and whats wrong is something you have to cultivate. Too many think its right as long as they don't get caught.
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Slashdot Mirror
Lies, damn lies, and statistics redux
Well, the total running it may be much smaller, particularly on wintel boxes.
In an attempt to secure a friends machine about 3 weeks ago, I grabbed the windows version over her cable modem and installed it.
Unforch, the only clues I could get from that windows box seemed to indicate it was offline, while the presence of the cable modem, and the fact that IE worked, said it was online.
I screwed around with it for about an hour, and never was able to ping the server, or get a functioning dns for firefox.
Thinking about it later, there may be been an online/offline function built into IE and OE, hopefully with an eye toward making it a bit more secure when they weren't running. Although thats just a SWAG on my part based on the clues, and the fact that I don't have a windows box on the premises so I'm a windows newbie. It may have been very simple for a windows tech to fix.
The whole point of that being that firefox didn't attempt to really tell me what was wrong at any point. I'll submit that if firefox really wants the windows market share they would like to have, it should be capable of doing the same online/offline functions as its windows competitor. Basicly, I walked away from a machine I'd just installed firefox on, hopeing to show its superiority, and instead reinforced the perception in the mind of that M$ user that this thing called linux was as yet, a very amatureish attempt. Just another wannabe.
--
Cheers, Gene
Well, I've worked around tv transmitters with leakage fields that probably have exceeded fcc specs by a factor of 100x when in test config as opposed to on air config. Never lost a credit cards data yet.
But, this rfid thing, with its capability to read this crap while its still in my pocket, without my knowledge, strikes me as a serious invasion of privacy I would druther not have.
The possibility that someone with a portable reader could walk down a busy street and get all the data that would allow an identity theft to be done to hundreds of people in a single 10 minute walk just plain scares the crap out of me.
I had enough of a row with bill collectors in past years, who thought I was my worthless alky son (I was dumb enough to name him Jr.) and he convieniently leaves that off his signature when he signs up for a charge account. I've had to use my SS number to prove they had the wrong person as the target of their collection efforts on 3 occasions now because of that.
Haveing that data effectively posted for the whole world to read at their command should scare the hell out of everybody. It would certainly be poetic justice if the first 600 people to suffer the pain of that were our combined congressional houses congresscritters & the shrubs in the white house. And any SCOTUS judges who think its ok when it comes up for the 'is it constitutional' test when that case comes up. It will you know. The question is not IF, but WHEN.
--
No Cheers on this one, Gene
We might note that there are already several RF-shielded wallets for sale in the US.
I'm in that same boat and therefore actively shopping. Are you at liberty to quote a src or brand name? Prefereably for a truckers style wallet, one big enough to hold not only a rack of card windows, but your checkbook complete with the anti-carbon sheet you place between the check you are writing and the next one down so that you don't write 2 checks when they are NCR (no carbon required) checks.
I've been using a ladies style clutch purse for several years now. The only problem with that is when someone insists on telling you your wallet is falling out because its longer than a blue jean hip pocket is deep. That gets old after a while even if it is handier than a cold 6 pack of bottled beer.
--
Cheers, Gene
You know, if there wasn't an overpoweringly huge dollop of the truth in the above post, I'd be the first to start a fire to melt the tar, and send somebody back to the house for a feather tick we're not using in the summertime.
Unfortunately, the only truth missing in the parent post is the real names and states of the perps of such shennanigans. Sure, we can vote the perps out, but guess what, I guarantee that very copius notes will be passed to the newbies less than 20 minutes after the results are in if not before, describing exactly how things are done here, and if you don't want run out of office on some trumped up scandal, this is how it will be done.
I'm still in favor of a bumper sticker I first saw 50+ years ago, it said "Clean house, senate too". 50+ years later, it still seems like a heck of a good idea to me. Seriously, we need a clean slate of sane people.
--
Cheers, Gene
What do you mean by..."To measure it, one must have a method of controlling it...". Why do we have to control it to measure it? We measure gravity all the time, don't we?
Ahh, yes, we measure its effect at the instant we weight something. What we don't know, because there is no way to turn it off, thereby creating a difference in the measured weight, and giving us the ability to measure the lag from the instant of turning it off to the instant our distant devices measures the difference in the weight. This has never been done because we puny humans do not have that sort of energies at our disposal.
So we are forced to wait for an event such as a distant star merger, hopefully of objects large enough to create a black hole. As a considerable amount of the masses so merged will be ejected at near C speeds at the instant of the merger (or at least our observations have tended to disclose these beams ejected from the objects polar rotation axis in what we think are old mergers), which will in turn create a gravity wave we should be able to measure at a considerable distance. In the case of this event, if gravity's propagation velocity=C speed, we should have recorded a gravity wave that coincides rather nicely with both the GRB and any remnant xray afterglow once the xray scopes got slewed around to look there, in this present case 50 seconds later, an eon in black hole creation merger time.
However, if all we are recording is noise that cannot be correlated with these GRB's (and possibly from the neutrino detectors too, I haven't heard anyone noting that Kamiokandi(sp) recorded anything yet) then we either need to go back to the theory's drawing board, or refine our math to search the entire range of time from the start of the gravity wave detectors recorded archives. If indeed its instantainous over intergalactic distances, we will be seriously constained by the fact that we've just started these recordings in the past year or 2.
We WILL be in the dark as to gravities pv until such time as a valid correlation can be done.
Also, I have read several times that we are going to need to wait for a supernova event, or something like this, in order to use our "gravity detectors" to help us determine the speed of gravity. Why does it need to be something so large? Why can't this be done with other bodies of mass?
Because basicly, at non-relativistic speeds, mass is mass. Even the triggering of an atomic weapon consumes so little mass that at a distance great enough to survive the blast, any change in the net mass of the area of the bomb going off is probably 70+ digits to the right of the decimal point.
Also, hasn't there already been several expiriments which show quite clearly that the speed of gravity is within 1% of the speed of light?
If there have been, I'm not aware of them. That doesn't mean there haven't been successfull attempts. Just that I haven't heard or read of them in the last 60 years. I would assume that if its been confirmed to the level of accuracy for the Hubble Constant, itself still fuzzy to the right of the decimal point a wee bit, that it would get more ink than it has. I don't recall reading about that in Hawkings work, at least not in terms that say "this is gravities speed" to the unwashed masses such as this old fart.
However, if I'm wrong, please supply some url's because I'd really like to see what the state of the art really is.
--
Cheers, Gene
Good grief. Is there no end to the slashdot effect and its apparent ability to subtract 100 points from the posters IQ?
To me, this is one of the reasons I'm running Einstein@home in parallel with seti@home.
Now we have a known point in time that hopefully we also have data from the gravity detectors for, because one of the things the gravity detectors are looking for is the waves that would be created by the merger of a couple of heavy bodies (neutron stars leftover from previous supernovas would be good candidates) that would create a black hole.
All this of course depends on the pv* of a gravity wave, and assumes its C speed. If its not (some have conjectured gravity could be much faster than C speed), then our chances of finding a valid correlation between the GRB and the data from the gravity detectors becomes many times more difficult, say about 10ee+61 or thereabouts. So until we have a detected gravity wave event we can correlate to a visible event, I'm not betting either way on the speed of gravity since we've not yet come up with a method of turning it off and on. To measure it, one must have a method of controlling it...
Give that some thought, because the first lifeform in the universe to master that will truely rule the universe it can see because it removes in one swell foop, all impediments to achieveing near C speed transportation for that lifeform.
pv=propagation velocity.
--
Cheers, Gene
Like crap. It would be so nice if adobe would actually hire a web designer that knew what he was doing. I bounced in and out of tehre 4 times with mozzila, but got an instant done when I clicked on the download the first 3 times, then on the 4th pass, it hung forever waiting for the server to respond.
I though to myself, good grief, are there enough linux folks to cause their server to meltdown? Nah, not this year, in '07 maybe.
So I looked at the page src, found the link, pasted it into wget, and it came running in here at 190kb/sec.
So whats with their crippled server act, its unbecoming to say the least.
Now, to install it, and see if I decide to quit using ggv.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Humm, I could have sworn I heard Jeff doing a takeoff on that skit on the comedy channel a few years ago. Middle of the night, half asleep situation. For all I know, It could very easily have been Bill Engvall doing his own stuff & I missed the announcers intro. Stuff happens.
Generally, my credibility is pretty good, but at 70, there may be a missed attribution from time to time. I can recall the saying, but not always the sayer that said it.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Damn the automatic logout slashdot is doing now, there is no way to click on an email from /. with the link, answer the message, discover you're not logged in, go log in and come back AND preserve the message you already composed. Thats pure BS!
Anyway, my answer is that if these ground based scopes are so good in the infrared, then their images can be false colored to impress the frogs like me just as easily as those from the hubble are being color enhanced to impress us. But I don't see that happening. The stuff we're being fed here in the public hog trough has so far been graphics compositions based on (supposedly) what these modern IR behemoths have taken of the region around Sag A. Thats admittedly an impressive movie they've composed, but I want to see the real thing even if the colors have to be enhanced by making your 'ditch water' IR data into visible data.
Anyone who wants to convince me that the hubble is obsolete, is doing a damned poor job of it as I won't be swayed until such time as they justify the taxpayer dollars spent on them by paying us taxpayers in impressive images produced. Yes, some were financed by private grants, such as the Keck twins, but I'd expect that even for the Kecks, operating expenses are taxpayer dollars.
So show me Hubble is obsolete. I've sure not seen any 'proof' of that.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yes and no. You would still have the problem of maintainance, which might be multiplied quite a bit if any of the moon dust should get into the supporting bearings. That stuff, not haveing had a few million years to blow about in the wind and round off its fractured edges, is very very abrasive indeed.
Support structure flex as it moves about will be a constant calibration problem, and keeping the mirrors figure as it bends under that 1/6th moon gravity also need to be considered. None of these are a problem for the hubble as it truely is in a zero G environment. In fact, its quite strong, but that was only to support the mirror from the multigravity forces trying to rip it out of its mounts as it was being boosted to orbit when it was finally put up. Once there, a couple of strips of scotch tape could probably hold it together quite well unless the reaction wheels try to turn it to a GRB as its occurring, which has been done several times now. Then we're back to a row of 1/4" bolts to hold it.
Also, don't forget that the farther away it is, the more that service mission is going to cost. We can goto the hubbles NEO 100 times for what its going to cost to goto the James Webb out at L5, or to something on the moon.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Methinks your professor is full of it clear to the roots of his hairpiece.
Or, let me put it to you this way:
If these ground based scopes that have been brought online in the last 5 years are so friggin great, why are we not being treated to some of their output? With the exception of the twins on Mona Kea that Mr keck financed, the rest of them have been so far as I know, built with public money. So I'm actually surprised that we have all these people preaching at us as to just how much better these new toys are in comparison to the Hubble, but frankly, I've not seen a single image to back those statements up.
If the new ones are so much better in fact, then why are TPTB so afraid to let us look at some of their image data so that we, the taxpayer, can quite writing his congress-critters asking them to save what is not just a national treasure, but IMO a treasure to all humankind.
So as Jeff Foxworthy would say, "here's your sign", you proponents of pulling the feeding tube from hubble, either put up images that prove what you're saying, or STFU. The ball is in your court.
How about some movies of the last 90 days of eta carinae for instance, its right handy even, or maybe a movie of the last 6 months of the orbital goings on around Sag A? Maybe we could prove that Sag A is indeed a black hole of 6 million suns mass. And I'd love to see you attempt to duplicate the pair of really really deep space images, showing stuff over 10 billion light years away, that I'm using for 2 of my screen backgrounds here. But of course, being inside the atmosphere, thats simply impossible for ground based scopes.
Maybe the hubble is obsolete, but as yet, I've seen nothing that can touch what its done. The JW scope works at different wavelenghts, so it won't be able to replace the hubble. Supplant it, confirm each others findings maybe, but not "replace" it, they simply do 2 different jobs.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Humm, just whoinhell is the deccan herald? Frankly, I don't need a tinfoil hat to think that any publication with deccan in its name is anything but medieval hogwash.
As for evidence that black holes exist, we need look no farther than toward the center of this galaxy, where something with an estimated mass of some 6 million copies of our sun exists, and causes other nearby stars, some of which aren't exactly fleaweights themselves to orbit around it, at substantial fractions of C speed. One star in particular, is in a quite ecentric orbit, taking a mere 17 days (IIRC) to complete one orbit.
No, we cannot 'see' what it is thats so heavy there, and that doesn't mean it couldn't be one of those non-black holes, but our prime chance to view that merger event and document it draws nearer all the time.
But I'd think that if the bounce theory these people are proposing actually works, we would have seem by now, some evidence of output from this otherwise very good facsimily of a black hole. We've been monitoring the location of 'Sag A' now for quite a while without ever seeing any evidence of the effects predicted for such a non-black hole.
Frankly, I don't know as I care whats inside the event horizon of such an object, because in order for a bounce to come back out of the event horizon to be seen by an outside observer, means first that we do not have a very good idea of the physics involved, because to do so would require bounce velocities to exceed C speeds by many orders of magnitude for an object that heavy as 6 million of our suns.
All of our theories, backed by experimental proofs, have tended to confirm that C speed, relative to the local environment (this 'local' could be an important loophole though) is only achieveable by a mass gain that translates to an object traveling at C speed, will have a mass that is infinite, the added energy being converted to mass. This is why, when we design ever newer accellerators for nuclear research, the holy grail is the highest fraction of C speed.
I think everyone in the field understands that it would take the combined energy of all the observable universe to accellerate one electron to 99.9999999999999(add another 1000 lines of 9's here folks) at which point that electron would then represent the mass of the universe. We're presently at some point slightly above 99.9% of C speed I think for lighter objects such as electrons. Perhaps someone involved in such research can clarify the exact figure.
Actually, in terms of radiation released, the what if scenarios tend to indicate that even at our range out here in the fringes, the merger of that short orbit star and the object we call Sag A, the hard radiation pulse will be quite detectable. Project einstein will also have no trouble picking that event out of the noise.
For project einstein, another very very interesting bit of data might be extracted because we still do not know the propagation velocity of gravity! Like the neutrino detectors, the results could be, depending on the camp you're in either prove that neutrinos have mass, in which case they cannot move at C speed, or they don't, in which case they can.
SN1897A wasn't seen in visible light until it was picked up by the naked eye, some hours later, so we don't have a very good timebase for that measurement, and only 19 neutrinos were recorded at the time.
I doubt if either event it will trigger a major extinction from this range.
As for the person who is worried about eta-carinae(sp), they should think it through, and reduce the worry level considerably since our view of it indicates its a long way from having its barrel aimed at us. We have a nearly broadside view. None the less, its a very interesting event playing out before our eyes, not in real time since its quite a distance off, but our view of it is progressing in real time. Major changes have been seen in that event as it works its way toward the 'grande finale', in as little as 90 days, some of which, because of the an
2 years old, I recall seeing it back then.
/. when they insult our intel with such a stunt.
IMO, the only reason to have added this story again, was so it would steer you to that site, and the site proceeds to do a pop-under add.
I don't see any great advantage to that. And I do see a great disadvantage to
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Of course... if interests counter to the US were to succeed they'd end up with one heck of a spy satallite :)
Nice idea, but it won't focus that close.
--
Cheers, gene
What is wrong with letting friction do it's work and bring Hubble down to a safer altitude where it is safer to work on?
Because when it gets that low, its orbital lifetime is measured in weeks so you would have to work at a much higher speed than the glacier known as NASA normally works at.
Not mentioned very prominently in the press is that once the repairs have been done, the shuttles engines have been fired up to give it a 10-20 mile boost, so in the end when you have re-established a circular orbit (you have to boost up, then boost to circularize once up, half an orbit later), you still have to figure out if the shuttle has enough fuel to do a retroburn and get back down in a timely manner before the crews expandables are used up. That, as I understand it, is the real limit of how much of an orbital boost the shuttle can give it. I've heard rumors that the last successfull mission hit the runway with less than 2 gallons of fuel left. Thats close, too close.
The attachment of a de-orbital device OTOH, will have to be done before the 2nd gyroscope fails as I doubt very seriously their ability to do a manual grab as they did to get it under control on one service mission, can be duplicated with robotics when its lost a 2nd gyro and is slowly tumbling about in its orbit. That ISTR was the situation the men faced on one trip because of gyro failures, so they had to strap onto the arm and grab it by hand.
Personally, I'd like very much to see it serviced, at least 1 more time, but thats not going to happen with W at the helm. That would be over his quiet (you'll never hear about it in the "press") but very forcefull objections.
Thats what you get when you let a couple of MBA's run things. The only way they know how to run things is downhill, because that helps the end of the month statement, to hell with the end of the decade, they won't be there, or care after they've got theirs and run for the hills.
--
Cheers, Gene
The Apollo 1 pad fire was not due to problems with the Saturn V booster.
No, it sure as hell wasn't if you are talking about the fire in the test facility in Houston. It was some twit who somehow managed to get into a position of command, and decreed that the test in question be carried out with approximately 5 psi of pure oxygen in it, bringing the partial pressure of the oxygen in the atmosphere in it to nearly 20 psi. I've cut steel with a smith wrench on less pressure. Not a clean cut, but a cut nonetheless.
Any spark, from anything would be enough to convert the interior into a 2000+ degree blowtorch of extremely toxic flame byproducts. Not that it mattered as their lungs were fatally damaged with the next breath they took. The hatch, for reasons of simple pressure containment, opened inward, meaning it was being held shut by a ton or so worth of square inches holding that 5 pounds of pressure in. In other words, there was no way in hell those guys could have opened the hatch against that pressure, and it was probably rising another 5 psi a second from the combustion products.
And there was a spark from some frayed wiring under one of the seats in that well worn and exersized test module. A spark, that in space, at 5 psia & no gravity to make "heat rises" convection currents to carry new oxygen into the flame, so that fire would have been smothered in its own combustion products before it had spread more than an inch if that far. In space it would have been a non-event that may have tripped a circuit breaker, the reason for the breaker trip not being found until it was fished out of the ocean later. Someone may have commented on the odor, maybe.
Had I been in an even higher position of authority, I would have insisted that twit do the first such test by himself, then nominated him for a Darwin Award. But of course I wasn't, so what's the use of playing the "had I" scenario?
I still burn everytime I think about their last 20 to 30 seconds of consiousness. It was stupid, and should have been prosecuted, because it was nothing short of negligent manslaughter of 3 good men. For what benefit was such a test? Damnedifiknow.
--
No cheers, but some tears on this one, Gene
My comment stands. The so-called press release is nothing more than advertising to me. Yes, potentially important data to those who are or may be so afflicted.
As advertising is a gamble on the future sales achievable by the product, I'll be damned if I'll pay to read what is nothing but advertizing and future conjecture.
And now I see that I'm not logged in, WTCF?
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
'Scuse me while I puke.
Dammit, is there no sense of trying to do a public service without charging an arm and a leg just to be able to read that maybe, 10 years down the road after they and the FDA have seen to it that all the money they can milk out of the test proof has been spent, there maybe might be a test for it thats quick, simple and no more invasive than me checking my sugar?
I have no argument with paying for the product, and/or test materials, ever. The people who do the research really should be able to recoup the salaries and such for the people who actually develop this stuff.
But thats when they actually have a product, and not a second before.
To charge me 40 dollars + tax just to read the paper once, is IMO just plain greedier than Boss Hog ever thought on being.
If they want money thrown their way to finance the rest of the proof to the FDA, all those blind tests etc, then they should make the publicity they are trying to generate easy to get by making it freely readable so the victims can go lobby their congress critters while they still can for a bag of support money to facilitate the proof, or dis-proof as the case may be. To charge these folks $40 for a word of hope is IMO, downright criminal and I hope St. Peter keeps the gates tightly locked when its their turn.
Where am I coming from?
Easy, I watched a first cousin lay in a bed living on a IV drip for the last 20 years of her life. First diagnosed when she was about 22, lived to be 66 IIRC. Yes, she had a careing mother who, when she could no longer physically care for her as she neared her own 75th birthday, had the means to see to it she was properly cared for for the next 15 years until she finally passed, having spoken maybe 3 words in the last 20 years of her life and those with extreme amounts of effort. Trapped with an apparently sound mind in a body she couldn't control. For her it was not living, it was a living hell.
No one should profit from anothers misery before they have a product that has the potential of being helpfull.
--
No Cheers offered on this one, its too too maddening for words.
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Locally, he doesn't have an aisle to duck into unless he can teleport himself 15-20 feet from a position at the registers. He is a wide open, virtually sitting duck target with only one place to go & thats over the counter, which has a low overhead he'll knock himself silly on. That improves my odds a bit. Still not 100% odds, but close enough for me to try them.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
No, not a badass, but realisticly, can he swing to cover me and deliver a shot in the 3/4 second of my aged reaction times? Remember, I'm already at the ready & all I have to do is pull. To beat me, he would have to be awfull fast and a good shot to boot. I'm a fair shot with that piece, and I doubt I would miss from 10-15 feet. As far as partners, I have sense enough to scan that before mine comes out.
They are admittedly not very good odds for either of us, but I'd think my chances are better than his if he has to swing 90 degress or more to my location. He would have to swing at least that much in my local gomart store.
Tough guy? Not really. I only bet on sure things. Thats why I don't play the lottery.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
this isn't something that any sensible lawyer would want to take to court.
:)
And thats what I was trying to say, but I got lost in trying to be a smartass. Its a bit of a character flaw I've had for 70 years now.
-Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly-
First I've seen of that ficticious story. It makes a nice read, but ignored the gravity wells that must be climbed in and out of. That lack makes it totally undoable in the real world, and anybody with common sense can figure that out.
What I read was maybe a 5 years after the moonwalks in one of the science fact articles in Analog magazine, and I think it may even have been discussed in Sci. Am. a time or 2 over the years. It gets a bit of ink from time to time, but TPTB see the word nuclear and toss it in the fireplace for fuel.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Just useing language he will understand is all.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Don't I wish, don't I wish. But with a little sugar, it takes what would be a serious overdose for most to see any effect. But, the missus till appreciates what I can do occasionally without that stuff. :-)
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
No my friend, I don't fantasize over it. The difference is really a good solid understanding of whats right, and whats wrong. Some I suppose, might have bad dreams about it because they hope it never happens but their imagination keeps playing "what if". I sincerely hope it never happens to me. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't do what needs doing if it did happen.
I look at it this way. Somebody has to do it, and I put my pants on one leg at a time just like the cop who is probably busy scrapeing some drunk off a guard rail at the time. In pieces. With 5 to 20 priors on his still revocked license. His rig punched a van with a family of 5 in it, maybe 2 survivers, so 3 people died and 2 more spent a lot of time in the shop because some judge didn't have the balls to take him off the road by giving him lots of time in the states crossbar hotel to think about it.
Whats right and whats wrong is something you have to cultivate. Too many think its right as long as they don't get caught.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly