I'm not an astro physicist, but I'd say that the neutrino flux from stars (including oscillations) pretty much vindicates the thermonuclear model. Rest in peace, John Bahcall.
I guess 1000 years of marriying cousins to keep power concentrated is a bad thing. For those who don't know history, you would be suprised at how many cousins married cousins in british royal family history.
Well, there's always electioneering! After all, when one is an extraterrestrial blood-sucking shape-shifting lizard, one can be hard pushed to find a suitable breeding partner. It's not like you can go on Blind Date.
I am sure the people of Nagasaki would have a very different anwser than the people of smalltown, USA. To some, it gave the world a horrible wepon.
All this business of E = mc^2 "giving us the nuclear bomb" is another example of newspaper pap-science. There's far more to a nuke than computing the mass defect.
I don't know if I fully believe that energy equals mass.
The whole idea is a staple of Relativistic kinematics which has been verified in collider experiments, etc., etc.
The only way that makes sense if something like SuperString theory is true, that we have more than the 4 dimensions (X, Y, Z, and time). To take mass, and BANG, the mass is gone and there is enegery, does not ring true to me.
You can define relativistic stuff in less than four dimensions (e.g., one of space and one of time). Take an electron-positron annihilation into two photons. A proper treatment requires quantum field theory, where mass can be understood (in one way) as a parameter constraining the dynamically allowed momentum-energy configurations of the physical ("on-shell") fields. It's [probably] not right to think of electrons as little dots of mass.
Something more happened than we do not understand. It is like the uncertanty principle. The electron is still there. Or is it? If it is not there, where is it? How many examples are there of the opposite happening. Taking just energy, with no starting mass, and making mass?
Again, you need to consider quantum field theory to [begin to] answer these questions.
...if m is the invariant mass, m / sqrt(1 -- v^2) gives the total dynamical energy. E = m (c = 1) is a statement of unit conversion --- the energy "worth" of mass in Relativistic kinematics.
Well if the wheel is on the left of that car, the driver must be riding the door. To my eyes, the steering wheel is on the right and the dash is curving in on the left.
OK, OK, calm down. Let me just say that there are many good pieces of software on other platforms. In my line of work, the selection of technical software available for Linux can't be beaten. But there are also a lot of folks out there who like Windows, and its software satisfies their needs. And that's all good.
Now:
the best available solution is a good firewall, good spyware cleaner, good antivirus, and a bit of common sense that, no, you really shouldn't install every neat little gadget without knowing what you're putting in your box.
That's good, but some of these cost money on top of the base operating system. Common sense is a very good defense too, but what's required is computer common sense. A lot of people aren't experienced enough to know all the ins and outs of a system. Furthermore you missed the biggest, most effective shield of all, one that is sorely overlooked by anti-malware forums:
For the love of... whatever,
use a limited access account.
And no, I'm sorry but "such-and-such program doesn't work with this" is no excuse. There are nearly always routes around it. If not, drop the program. Write to the author and tell them to produce decent code that doesn't require admin privileges for non-administrative tasks.
Couple that with an alternative browser for that extra layer, and the Windows XP firewall blocking all incoming ports, and you should do fine. The worse that could happen is something attempts to infect your user profile (and very few malware, if any, do this because compromised systems are of more use); in which case, just take off your work and nuke the account. It's not impossible to secure Windows XP, but I think it does require more than common sense.
Have you seen the competition to Office? It's rubbish!
What's wrong with OpenOffice.org?
Seriously, what has MS Office got (aside from Assistants) that this project hasn't, apart from a privileged position in the IT psyche? Quite frankly, if you need some obscure feature in Word that's not in OOo Writer, you shouldn't be using a word processor. Personally, I don't think Word's got anything on LaTeX anyway (the former encourages poor typesetting and poor document structure). And Excel? If you need its features you shouldn't be using a spreadsheet. Use Matlab or Octave or something.
On the original topic, I'm glad you posted it because it seems that in the furore over whether or not Linux is ready for the desktop, the scientific community always seems to be overlooked. I think many Slashdotters don't appreciate that physicists (in particular in high energy) have been using it on the desktop for years before the likes of GNOME and KDE came along. Here, Linux isn't some geek hobby: it's a tool of a professional standard that comes with everything we need; I hope our needs are not overlooked in some desktop jihad against Windows.
I'm actually at the end of my first year as a theory postgrad, so my brain still hurts from a year of having field theory pumped into it. In about a week and a half, I get shipped off (along with all my UK peers) to a summer school in the Lake District, which is on the other end of the country (yes, don't laugh, I know this is little more than a shopping trip in the U.S.). I wish you the best of luck with your studies!
If Slashdot had a private messaging subsystem of which I was aware, I'd tell you exactly. But in the interest of preserving the Shroud of ettlz, let's just say it's a department somewhere in the south of England that's part of the UKQCD collaboration.
Linux (and a few other Unices like Solaris and IRIX) seem to be the de facto standard in both theoertical and experimental high-energy. The only Windows machines in my office are three of the notebooks brought in by some of my fellow students. Some of the staff have Win32-based stations, but they mostly run X servers for our unicine mainframes.
I don't believe you lot. Yet it doesn't surprise me. Someone develops an android, and all you can think of is, "Ooh! A MIPS R3000 based sex-machine! She can run on my firmware any day of the week, if you know what I'm saying... woo-hey!"
Slashdot Mirror
Good thing they don't keep thermonuclear weapons in the office!
I'd much rather they simply released complete documentation so that people who know what they are doing can write proper drivers.
I'm not an astro physicist, but I'd say that the neutrino flux from stars (including oscillations) pretty much vindicates the thermonuclear model. Rest in peace, John Bahcall.
Well, there's always electioneering! After all, when one is an extraterrestrial blood-sucking shape-shifting lizard, one can be hard pushed to find a suitable breeding partner. It's not like you can go on Blind Date.
SHUUUUT UP! ...Er, lovely boy...
Imagine poor Mr. Data. With an "Intel Inside" decal stuck on his forehead.
That's dimensionally inconsistent.
All this business of E = mc^2 "giving us the nuclear bomb" is another example of newspaper pap-science. There's far more to a nuke than computing the mass defect.
The whole idea is a staple of Relativistic kinematics which has been verified in collider experiments, etc., etc.
You can define relativistic stuff in less than four dimensions (e.g., one of space and one of time). Take an electron-positron annihilation into two photons. A proper treatment requires quantum field theory, where mass can be understood (in one way) as a parameter constraining the dynamically allowed momentum-energy configurations of the physical ("on-shell") fields. It's [probably] not right to think of electrons as little dots of mass.
Again, you need to consider quantum field theory to [begin to] answer these questions.
...if m is the invariant mass, m / sqrt(1 -- v^2) gives the total dynamical energy. E = m (c = 1) is a statement of unit conversion --- the energy "worth" of mass in Relativistic kinematics.
Yeah, he's even done that posthumously. Remember Homer Simpson's electric hammer?
Well if the wheel is on the left of that car, the driver must be riding the door. To my eyes, the steering wheel is on the right and the dash is curving in on the left.
No, he's not. Look where the steering wheel is.
Ackbar. It's a (kernel) trap!
Now, if someone spammed me trying to sell that instead of Viagra or Cilialis or what have you...
Hey! Who modded that "Insightful"?! I want my hollaback girl!
OK, OK, calm down. Let me just say that there are many good pieces of software on other platforms. In my line of work, the selection of technical software available for Linux can't be beaten. But there are also a lot of folks out there who like Windows, and its software satisfies their needs. And that's all good.
Now:
That's good, but some of these cost money on top of the base operating system. Common sense is a very good defense too, but what's required is computer common sense. A lot of people aren't experienced enough to know all the ins and outs of a system. Furthermore you missed the biggest, most effective shield of all, one that is sorely overlooked by anti-malware forums:
And no, I'm sorry but "such-and-such program doesn't work with this" is no excuse. There are nearly always routes around it. If not, drop the program. Write to the author and tell them to produce decent code that doesn't require admin privileges for non-administrative tasks.
Couple that with an alternative browser for that extra layer, and the Windows XP firewall blocking all incoming ports, and you should do fine. The worse that could happen is something attempts to infect your user profile (and very few malware, if any, do this because compromised systems are of more use); in which case, just take off your work and nuke the account. It's not impossible to secure Windows XP, but I think it does require more than common sense.
Well that article told me everything I needed to know, except where to get one.
What's wrong with OpenOffice.org?
Seriously, what has MS Office got (aside from Assistants) that this project hasn't, apart from a privileged position in the IT psyche? Quite frankly, if you need some obscure feature in Word that's not in OOo Writer, you shouldn't be using a word processor. Personally, I don't think Word's got anything on LaTeX anyway (the former encourages poor typesetting and poor document structure). And Excel? If you need its features you shouldn't be using a spreadsheet. Use Matlab or Octave or something.
On the original topic, I'm glad you posted it because it seems that in the furore over whether or not Linux is ready for the desktop, the scientific community always seems to be overlooked. I think many Slashdotters don't appreciate that physicists (in particular in high energy) have been using it on the desktop for years before the likes of GNOME and KDE came along. Here, Linux isn't some geek hobby: it's a tool of a professional standard that comes with everything we need; I hope our needs are not overlooked in some desktop jihad against Windows.
I'm actually at the end of my first year as a theory postgrad, so my brain still hurts from a year of having field theory pumped into it. In about a week and a half, I get shipped off (along with all my UK peers) to a summer school in the Lake District, which is on the other end of the country (yes, don't laugh, I know this is little more than a shopping trip in the U.S.). I wish you the best of luck with your studies!
Great, backup copies. I've always wanted a redundant array of independent dogs.
If Slashdot had a private messaging subsystem of which I was aware, I'd tell you exactly. But in the interest of preserving the Shroud of ettlz, let's just say it's a department somewhere in the south of England that's part of the UKQCD collaboration.
Linux (and a few other Unices like Solaris and IRIX) seem to be the de facto standard in both theoertical and experimental high-energy. The only Windows machines in my office are three of the notebooks brought in by some of my fellow students. Some of the staff have Win32-based stations, but they mostly run X servers for our unicine mainframes.
Lap-dancer.
I don't believe you lot. Yet it doesn't surprise me. Someone develops an android, and all you can think of is, "Ooh! A MIPS R3000 based sex-machine! She can run on my firmware any day of the week, if you know what I'm saying... woo-hey!"