Or is this more of the overly simplistic logic that starts by assuming the Bible is false and then proceeds to construct some alternative scenario?
How do we know anything is true, we must and do on a daily basis make assumptions about the world around us from what we observe. I see a table, i walk up to it, touch it, i know it's a table. We use simple logic to assume things are right or wrong, true or false. If i am told something is true i do not believe it unless i can verify it for myself.
As such, i believe there is a book called the bible with many secular variations. Having read some of it, I know it contains some fascinating insights into human nature and accounts of historic events. But my wider knowledge allows me to put it in picture with the history of the roman occupation of the area, simultaneous Chinese philosophy, Mayan empires, etc. And my knowledge of human nature, culture, behaviour; to come to the simple logical conclusion that it is most likely that Jesus existed and was immensely insightful into human nature and further evolved a system of living by which humanity and all it's individuals could prosper. However i see no good evidence for divine intervention.
What your parents tell you to believe in... isn't always right
(conveniently ignoring the far worse effects of European imperialism)?
As the only Brit working a PhD group of very wide ranging ethnisity, i have on a number of occasions had the oportunity to argue the pros and cons of european (especially British) imperialism.
Overall the general conclusion that is generally reached is that although we did some pretty naughty things (slavery, cultural clensing, resourse stealing, etc). The beneficial effects conveyed to the countries, in the long run, allowed the countries to develop at an otherwise unimaginable rate. Laying the infrastructure of transport, democracy and law allowing countries, such as India, Australia, South Africa and dare i say America, to become world powers. Much as the Romans did in europe some 1500 years earlier.
On the whole my collegues (from India, Mauritias, Sudan, Malaysia, New Zealand, etc) have to agree that thier countries would still be in the dark ages if it hadn't been for european colonalism.
The Americans have got to get it out of there heads that they are some kind of neo-roman empire. Who can go around doing what they want, trying to proove how much better than everyone else they are. It is why the worlds opinion of America is so low.
I know you americans are taking on a good proportion of the ISS cost. But it is an INTERNATIONAL Space Station. I'm sure Russia, Canada, Japan, Europe (minus Britian) are all sick of the americans claiming it as there own.
Re:For how long?
on
Mastering Light
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The magic filter is exactly what the article suggests, but I can't see how it works.
It seems to suggest that "Because the shock wave is moving through the crystal, the light gets Doppler shifted each time it bounces off it" But surely it gets shifted up when it hits the approaching wave and down again when it hits the retreating one. It would have to continously bounce off approaching or retreating waves in order to get shifted up or down. Maybe they use some kind of concentric shockwaves, but even then it would have to pass through retreating waves unaffected in order to hit another approaching one.
I also can't get my head round how you would shift the frequency without moving the source at near to the speed of light. Anyone got any ideas?
There's no need to argue about it, really, although it can be fun.
The thing I find interesting is that there isn't really an argument going on, most people are just using the topic as a method to vent there personal religious beliefs (me included)
I may be extrapolating a little far...but I think this reflects well the discontentment with the big organised religions, especially within the well-educated middle-class population (which I'm taking it the/. crowd are)
There is no official reference to any particular religion because that way, you might be dumb enough to think that they are talking about YOUR religion
As the article points out the whole film is loaded with religious symbolism, a lot of it nonspecific or at least able to be interpreted differently by different religions (where have I heard that before)
As a devout aetheist I can see many parallels to my own beliefs. With everyone in the matrix living a lie in the comfort blanket of religion in blissful ignorance, while those on the outside live in the harsh reality of an existentialist world with no hope of salvation.
As with most things, you only see what you want to see
...oh and be fair, the dumb ones who watched the film went home and talked about that time freeze effect for the rest of the year.
If the origional 'story' had been a post, it would have been modded flamebait in seconds, no one would have replied and everyone would have congratulated themselves on having been 1337 enough not to get drawn in to a blatent flamer.
But at over 500 posts in 12hrs looks like not that many people spotted it...,
either that or/. just loves a 'my language is better than your language' slanging match every couple of weeks no matter how childish.
The projects that the grid is best at are pretty much the areas that already have 'grid' projects, biochemistry, genetics, SETI and some maths problems. In which I include one of the most appropriate maths problems for the grid, is brute force password attack. How long before the US Gov. starts a Patriot@home grid to brute force any encrypted files it wants to see, in the name of homeland security...of course.
I agree, the people that need massive computing power now and in the near future are pretty much all running finite element analyses or similar (aero/hydrodynamics,nuclear explosion,climate, quantum physics,galaxy models). This method doesn't scale too badly on a supercomputer,but it relys on rapid and regular communication between processors in order to work efficiently, something which the grid (in a global sense) is unlikely to provide in the near future
It may well be better to see all of a movie widescreen on 4:3 screen so you don't loose anything...
but the point of movies at the cinema being in widescreen is that they fill your whole field of vision. Which is significantly biased to the horizontal ~220deg horiz and ~80deg vertical (presumably because cavemen did'nt worry about being attacked from the sky). But as far as i can tell there is little bias to the horizontal in field of view (the small area that is properly in focus ~30deg).So if i'm watching tv which usually only fills your field of view (unless you sit eye strainingly close to the screen)then i would rather have it fill that whole field rather than just a stip across the middle of it. The obvious example is the monitor that you are staring at, do you think it would be better in widescreen? i don't. It fills my field of view nicely
This is especially the case in the UK were you can buy the same amount of widescreen area on a 4:3 screen for less than the equivalent widescreen(which then plays 4:3 pictures in a tiny area).
I agree that the painter analogy is a bit forced, The architect one however is a lot neater. They work in a constrained environment using a medium that they need a good knowledge of (but don't need to understand fully, thats what an engineer is for) to create a product that is ergonomic and sometimes 'beautiful'.
Sometimes what the hackers do is called "software engineering," but this term is just as misleading. Good software designers are no more engineers than architects are. The border between architecture and engineering is not sharply defined, but it's there. It falls between what and how: architects decide what to do, and engineers figure out how to do it.
Microwave ovens operate at about 2.45 GHz, at which the water in food absorbs the energy well.
wavelength=c/freq c=3x10^8 m/s so wavelength~=122mm
If i remember correctly the rule of thumb for having holes in a surface and it still being reflective to that wavelength is that the holes shouldn't be bigger than 1/20th the wavelegth. So, so long as the wholes in the microwave cover aren't bigger than ~122/20=6mm you should be ok
On mine they're about 5mm which fits nicely. The fact that surfaces with holes in reflect as well as solid ones is also used in satalite dishes and radiotelescopes and probably other things
Don't forget that it is also the most efficient use of the materials in the cover. All points at the same radius from the centre will be equally stressed (assuming a uniform load)
Over millions of load cycles this will reduce the predisposition to cracking along heavly loaded areas, that could occur in an equilateral triangular cover (these would probably be along the 3 shortest lines from the centre to the edge, or possibly on lines between these side centrepoints, at a guess)
Incidently, I'm not sure if there designed like that, but the most efficient use of material would be to have a parabolic cross section rotated about the vertical axis, like an arch bridge spun round its midspan point
<pedants disclaimer>Ye, I know this is probably not strictly true as it applies to a weightless string in 2d but it gives the visual impression to those who don't have degrees in civil engineering </pedants disclaimer>
Slashdot Mirror
They probbly use water that can't be drank.(is that a correct sentence?)
I knw a lot of waer used to water plants is unpottable.
Well, the first sentence was ok, but...... ;o)
I'd like to attach this machine to my CPU
Not sure that little metal clip thing on the sink would stand up to the force of 1 gallon/sec of water flowing past it :o)
Or is this more of the overly simplistic logic that starts by assuming the Bible is false and then proceeds to construct some alternative scenario?
How do we know anything is true, we must and do on a daily basis make assumptions about the world around us from what we observe. I see a table, i walk up to it, touch it, i know it's a table. We use simple logic to assume things are right or wrong, true or false. If i am told something is true i do not believe it unless i can verify it for myself.
As such, i believe there is a book called the bible with many secular variations. Having read some of it, I know it contains some fascinating insights into human nature and accounts of historic events. But my wider knowledge allows me to put it in picture with the history of the roman occupation of the area, simultaneous Chinese philosophy, Mayan empires, etc. And my knowledge of human nature, culture, behaviour; to come to the simple logical conclusion that it is most likely that Jesus existed and was immensely insightful into human nature and further evolved a system of living by which humanity and all it's individuals could prosper. However i see no good evidence for divine intervention.
What your parents tell you to believe in ... isn't always right
I've tried this trick a couple of times, it makes a great sparking effect.
My worry though was always the pungent chemical odour that was left afterward. It certainly smelt highly toxic, anyone know if it is?
FYI the Beagle2 probe is named after the HMS Beagle that carried Darwin on his world travels, whence he galvanised his ideas on the origin of species
The HMS Beagle though, was named after a dog
As the only Brit working a PhD group of very wide ranging ethnisity, i have on a number of occasions had the oportunity to argue the pros and cons of european (especially British) imperialism.
Overall the general conclusion that is generally reached is that although we did some pretty naughty things (slavery, cultural clensing, resourse stealing, etc). The beneficial effects conveyed to the countries, in the long run, allowed the countries to develop at an otherwise unimaginable rate. Laying the infrastructure of transport, democracy and law allowing countries, such as India, Australia, South Africa and dare i say America, to become world powers. Much as the Romans did in europe some 1500 years earlier.
On the whole my collegues (from India, Mauritias, Sudan, Malaysia, New Zealand, etc) have to agree that thier countries would still be in the dark ages if it hadn't been for european colonalism.
The Americans have got to get it out of there heads that they are some kind of neo-roman empire. Who can go around doing what they want, trying to proove how much better than everyone else they are. It is why the worlds opinion of America is so low.
I know you americans are taking on a good proportion of the ISS cost. But it is an INTERNATIONAL Space Station. I'm sure Russia, Canada, Japan, Europe (minus Britian) are all sick of the americans claiming it as there own.
The magic filter is exactly what the article suggests, but I can't see how it works.
It seems to suggest that "Because the shock wave is moving through the crystal, the light gets Doppler shifted each time it bounces off it" But surely it gets shifted up when it hits the approaching wave and down again when it hits the retreating one. It would have to continously bounce off approaching or retreating waves in order to get shifted up or down. Maybe they use some kind of concentric shockwaves, but even then it would have to pass through retreating waves unaffected in order to hit another approaching one.
I also can't get my head round how you would shift the frequency without moving the source at near to the speed of light. Anyone got any ideas?
Even if you do learn to speak correct English, whom are you going to speak it to?
Even if one does learn to speak English correctly, to whom is one going to speak?
P.S. I ain't a student of English, but I am and English student
There's no need to argue about it, really, although it can be fun.
The thing I find interesting is that there isn't really an argument going on, most people are just using the topic as a method to vent there personal religious beliefs (me included)
I may be extrapolating a little far...but I think this reflects well the discontentment with the big organised religions, especially within the well-educated middle-class population (which I'm taking it the /. crowd are)
Well IMHO at least
There is no official reference to any particular religion because that way, you might be dumb enough to think that they are talking about YOUR religion
As the article points out the whole film is loaded with religious symbolism, a lot of it nonspecific or at least able to be interpreted differently by different religions (where have I heard that before)
As a devout aetheist I can see many parallels to my own beliefs. With everyone in the matrix living a lie in the comfort blanket of religion in blissful ignorance, while those on the outside live in the harsh reality of an existentialist world with no hope of salvation.
As with most things, you only see what you want to see
...oh and be fair, the dumb ones who watched the film went home and talked about that time freeze effect for the rest of the year.
If the origional 'story' had been a post, it would have been modded flamebait in seconds, no one would have replied and everyone would have congratulated themselves on having been 1337 enough not to get drawn in to a blatent flamer.
But at over 500 posts in 12hrs looks like not that many people spotted it...,
either that or /. just loves a 'my language is better than your language' slanging match every couple of weeks no matter how childish.
El Reg has the story that MS USA got it wrong ... MS UK is building an Iloo
An analysis of the situation and a letter from MS USA
Especially in North Florida
With an average of around 30 strikes km^-2 year^-1, it isn't going to be long before you get a hit on one of them.
Not as bad as central africa though
The projects that the grid is best at are pretty much the areas that already have 'grid' projects, biochemistry, genetics, SETI and some maths problems. In which I include one of the most appropriate maths problems for the grid, is brute force password attack. How long before the US Gov. starts a Patriot@home grid to brute force any encrypted files it wants to see, in the name of homeland security...of course.
I agree, the people that need massive computing power now and in the near future are pretty much all running finite element analyses or similar (aero/hydrodynamics,nuclear explosion,climate, quantum physics,galaxy models). This method doesn't scale too badly on a supercomputer,but it relys on rapid and regular communication between processors in order to work efficiently, something which the grid (in a global sense) is unlikely to provide in the near future
It may well be better to see all of a movie widescreen on 4:3 screen so you don't loose anything...
but the point of movies at the cinema being in widescreen is that they fill your whole field of vision. Which is significantly biased to the horizontal ~220deg horiz and ~80deg vertical (presumably because cavemen did'nt worry about being attacked from the sky). But as far as i can tell there is little bias to the horizontal in field of view (the small area that is properly in focus ~30deg).So if i'm watching tv which usually only fills your field of view (unless you sit eye strainingly close to the screen)then i would rather have it fill that whole field rather than just a stip across the middle of it. The obvious example is the monitor that you are staring at, do you think it would be better in widescreen? i don't. It fills my field of view nicely
This is especially the case in the UK were you can buy the same amount of widescreen area on a 4:3 screen for less than the equivalent widescreen(which then plays 4:3 pictures in a tiny area).
No
I agree that the painter analogy is a bit forced, The architect one however is a lot neater. They work in a constrained environment using a medium that they need a good knowledge of (but don't need to understand fully, thats what an engineer is for) to create a product that is ergonomic and sometimes 'beautiful'.
Sometimes what the hackers do is called "software engineering," but this term is just as misleading. Good software designers are no more engineers than architects are. The border between architecture and engineering is not sharply defined, but it's there. It falls between what and how: architects decide what to do, and engineers figure out how to do it.
The above would have done nicely in the Are Programmers Engineers?topic.
And supported my point of view nicely.
If they already had IP's some L33t h4x0r would have already DDoS'd Jupiter and caused it to crash
El Reg wouldn't be the same without the pomopus, dry, sarcasm of british humour.
Microwave ovens operate at about 2.45 GHz, at which the water in food absorbs the energy well.
wavelength=c/freq c=3x10^8 m/s so wavelength~=122mm
If i remember correctly the rule of thumb for having holes in a surface and it still being reflective to that wavelength is that the holes shouldn't be bigger than 1/20th the wavelegth. So, so long as the wholes in the microwave cover aren't bigger than ~122/20=6mm you should be ok
On mine they're about 5mm which fits nicely. The fact that surfaces with holes in reflect as well as solid ones is also used in satalite dishes and radiotelescopes and probably other things
Don't forget that it is also the most efficient use of the materials in the cover. All points at the same radius from the centre will be equally stressed (assuming a uniform load)
Over millions of load cycles this will reduce the predisposition to cracking along heavly loaded areas, that could occur in an equilateral triangular cover (these would probably be along the 3 shortest lines from the centre to the edge, or possibly on lines between these side centrepoints, at a guess)
Incidently, I'm not sure if there designed like that, but the most efficient use of material would be to have a parabolic cross section rotated about the vertical axis, like an arch bridge spun round its midspan point