They're not really accurate representations of 4D or 5D cubes. A 4D Rubik's cube would be made up of little 4D cubes, not 3D cubes like in the games. As the cubes rotate in and out of our 3 dimensional space, they would all look like blobs constantly changing shape, just as a 3D cube rotating through a 2D surface will leave an ever-changing cross-section in the 2D world. These programs simply give you the numerous access points for each of the "cubies", and their 4 or 5 axes of rotation to choose from.
"The staff of a Canadian political candidate bragged today that he had managed to shut down a website critical of his involvement in a fundraising scandal.."
Hey, if you want your precious freedom, move to another country, like Cuba or Pakistan. In America, we do the patriotic thing and give up our freedoms to save our own asses.
Does anyone else feel like we're all being forced to jump through hoops? Everyone (in the US) these days is talking about immigration. Why, exactly? Has something sudden and new changed about the number or rate of illegal immigrants between 2005 and 2006?
I'll tell you why: because it's an election year, and the members of Congress need something to polarize the nation to get the public to vote. It's all one big game they're playing to get themselves reelected. It seems rather irresponsible to me. What was the topic for 2004? Gay marriage. And 2002? Well, nobody in the US can remember back that far... I'm sure abortion was used one of the election years, of course.
"This inculcation of curiosity and resourcefulness is what makes studying at MIT truly unique. No wonder it is one of the premier educational institutions in the world."
I read "inculcation" as "inoculation", and was hoping you could provide me with information on the curative properties of binge drinking and pot smoking...
"Much of that unauthorized software is being used to make firms much more productive than they would be otherwise -- probably benefiting the overall economy quite a bit"
What is this software, and why isn't it available for Windows?
While the things that you list are true, there is one crucial difference between scientists and 99% of the rest of the working class: they love their work. They enjoy exploring new concepts and testing predictions. Unlike the guy working drive-thru at McDonald's, scientists get a real sense of joy and accomplishment out of their work, which in large part diverts their attention from mere financial gain. If scientists hated their jobs half as much as most people, they could be making as much money as the puppets in their universities' administrations.
"As usual, with groundbreaking theories and inventions, we will deny it's possibility even after (if) we see it's work.
Do I need to give any examples?"
No, we all remember what it was like before color was invented. Imagine Judy Garland's chagrin in realizing she spent 6 months skipping along a red brick road. Of course, with the wonders of technicolor, they were able to disguise that fatal flaw.
And don't even get me started reminiscing about the time before gravity was invented.
I remember hearing about these lenses at least a few months ago, probably last year even. There was talk that they could someday be implemented into cell phones, letting them zoom to magnifications you normally get with $1000 lenses on professional cameras, simply by altering the voltage applied across the lens.
"There is no perfect simulation, it may just be good enough for the job at hand."
Well, obviously. Nobody is trying to simulate things perfectly--that would be a huge waste of resources, but the summary claimed that we couldn't clock the time for nanosecond-scale interactions, which is completely wrong.
"Physically seeing the atoms can help verify or improve the simulations."
And how would these simulations need improving? Here is the code I was using. Sure, it's only approximating reality, but the degree to which it is an approximation can be increased or decreased.
Maybe we couldn't physically see how atoms are moving over short time intervals, but we've been able to simulate it for quite a while. I used to run simulations at Sandia National Labs in New Mexico that looked at the interactions of a couple dozen atoms on a femtosecond scale.
"And btw, in that infamous "last supper" picture, there is more than one character that looks like a woman..."
Now, if only one of them actually had the facial structure and skin tone of an ancient Israelite, rather than a cracka ass Anglo-Saxon, then you might have a case.
"Actually, if you read the article, it becomes instantly apparent that these planets are *not* inhabitable by earthlife as they stand, and probably not even with significant terraforming."
If they were Jupiter-sized planets, and they were located far enough away from their star to allow terrestrial planets to form, then it would be significant, because it would tell us that not only could there be terrestrial planets there, but the Jupiter-sized planets would likely have protected them from the massive amount of debris in the solar nebula. The closer a solar system is to ours, the better (in other words, little is understood about planet formation).
Slashdot Mirror
They're not really accurate representations of 4D or 5D cubes. A 4D Rubik's cube would be made up of little 4D cubes, not 3D cubes like in the games. As the cubes rotate in and out of our 3 dimensional space, they would all look like blobs constantly changing shape, just as a 3D cube rotating through a 2D surface will leave an ever-changing cross-section in the 2D world. These programs simply give you the numerous access points for each of the "cubies", and their 4 or 5 axes of rotation to choose from.
"The staff of a Canadian political candidate bragged today that he had managed to shut down a website critical of his involvement in a fundraising scandal.."
Shouldn't that read, "The former staff..."
Hey, if you want your precious freedom, move to another country, like Cuba or Pakistan. In America, we do the patriotic thing and give up our freedoms to save our own asses.
Does anyone else feel like we're all being forced to jump through hoops? Everyone (in the US) these days is talking about immigration. Why, exactly? Has something sudden and new changed about the number or rate of illegal immigrants between 2005 and 2006?
I'll tell you why: because it's an election year, and the members of Congress need something to polarize the nation to get the public to vote. It's all one big game they're playing to get themselves reelected. It seems rather irresponsible to me. What was the topic for 2004? Gay marriage. And 2002? Well, nobody in the US can remember back that far... I'm sure abortion was used one of the election years, of course.
Let's just say that Linda Turner wasn't the fastest bit in the cache...
"don't you ever watch the movies? every nerdy chick becomes hot when you take off the glasses and let their hair down!"
:D
It's just the opposite in reality--the only thing keeping them hot is the glasses
Of course they made it a red button... that's always the button you're never supposed to press.
"Try a library or a coffee shop."
But they've all got those damned stupid-looking glasses on!!!
"This inculcation of curiosity and resourcefulness is what makes studying at MIT truly unique. No wonder it is one of the premier educational institutions in the world."
I read "inculcation" as "inoculation", and was hoping you could provide me with information on the curative properties of binge drinking and pot smoking...
"Much of that unauthorized software is being used to make firms much more productive than they would be otherwise -- probably benefiting the overall economy quite a bit"
What is this software, and why isn't it available for Windows?
While the things that you list are true, there is one crucial difference between scientists and 99% of the rest of the working class: they love their work. They enjoy exploring new concepts and testing predictions. Unlike the guy working drive-thru at McDonald's, scientists get a real sense of joy and accomplishment out of their work, which in large part diverts their attention from mere financial gain. If scientists hated their jobs half as much as most people, they could be making as much money as the puppets in their universities' administrations.
"As usual, with groundbreaking theories and inventions, we will deny it's possibility even after (if) we see it's work.
Do I need to give any examples?"
No, we all remember what it was like before color was invented. Imagine Judy Garland's chagrin in realizing she spent 6 months skipping along a red brick road. Of course, with the wonders of technicolor, they were able to disguise that fatal flaw.
And don't even get me started reminiscing about the time before gravity was invented.
IMHO, a Terrestrial Planet Finder is an inevitability, whatever form it finally takes.
Where's the news? NASA's had the Terrestrial Planet Finder in the works for years now. Is it a slow news day at BBC?
"Have they tried feeding them Taco Bell?"
It would be cannibalism! Taco Bell's meat is already a lower grade than dog food, and full of bugs (cockroach eggs, anyone?)
This looks like a dupe from a story from last December, I think.
I remember hearing about these lenses at least a few months ago, probably last year even. There was talk that they could someday be implemented into cell phones, letting them zoom to magnifications you normally get with $1000 lenses on professional cameras, simply by altering the voltage applied across the lens.
"There is no perfect simulation, it may just be good enough for the job at hand."
Well, obviously. Nobody is trying to simulate things perfectly--that would be a huge waste of resources, but the summary claimed that we couldn't clock the time for nanosecond-scale interactions, which is completely wrong.
"Physically seeing the atoms can help verify or improve the simulations."
And how would these simulations need improving? Here is the code I was using. Sure, it's only approximating reality, but the degree to which it is an approximation can be increased or decreased.
"sweet, another way that I'm not the average slashdotter."
Cybersex doesn't count.
Maybe we couldn't physically see how atoms are moving over short time intervals, but we've been able to simulate it for quite a while. I used to run simulations at Sandia National Labs in New Mexico that looked at the interactions of a couple dozen atoms on a femtosecond scale.
The last good thing to come out of MIT happened in 1980.
Perfect! This is just what we need to get the general public even more convinced that they have a damn clue what they're talking about.
"And btw, in that infamous "last supper" picture, there is more than one character that looks like a woman..."
Now, if only one of them actually had the facial structure and skin tone of an ancient Israelite, rather than a cracka ass Anglo-Saxon, then you might have a case.
"Actually, if you read the article, it becomes instantly apparent that these planets are *not* inhabitable by earthlife as they stand, and probably not even with significant terraforming."
If they were Jupiter-sized planets, and they were located far enough away from their star to allow terrestrial planets to form, then it would be significant, because it would tell us that not only could there be terrestrial planets there, but the Jupiter-sized planets would likely have protected them from the massive amount of debris in the solar nebula. The closer a solar system is to ours, the better (in other words, little is understood about planet formation).