I'm driving along a 40 limit road, at a cautious 30 when someone cluelessly drives into my path from a blind junction where they have no right of way. *I REACT* to this by slowing down and avoiding said stupid driver, thus making a non-situation of it. As I reacted, according to you, I had done something wrong or I wouldn't have had to. What bad decisions had I made previously? Except driving on the public roads in the first place, that is.
Likewise, I react to someone cutting into my lane too close by backing off a bit. What did I do wrong in this instance?
And thanks. The concept of mass is different down at this level anyway so I can't me using my built in concepts of mass being an intrinsic part of matter. It's just a force between particles.
That helps things, but old brain here still can't help wanting to think things have an intrinsic mass. Mass, as my brain knows it, does not exist. Arrgghh
ILTBAPPBFIAWTPI (I'd like to be a particle physicist, but feel I am way too past it)
Yeah I had read that before, but that aspect must have skipped past my mind last time. I feel I am still held back by the physics I was taught in school in the 80's. Lots of concepts taught in school back then make it harder to visualise the currently accepted concepts. I need to start with a blanker canvas in my mind. I'm still stuck on spherical valence shells and other such simplicities, as it's what I was taught. Trying to get there though.
What are they teaching in schools now? I should be having a littlun next year and want them to be learning proper science.
OK, the binding energy is where it's at then. Just mentioning the concept of that, and the discrepancies between atomic mass and the mass of the fermions, suddenly makes the "magical" bit of fusion/fission much more clear to me.
OK, so I have been reading a lot about particle physics lately and find the whole subject fascinating, but there is one thing (amongst many things) that I am not quite understanding. I have looked it up and my understanding of particle physics is not "there" yet, or at least not enough to grasp this particular concept. Maybe I have just not read the right explanation.
Can someone in here put it in a simple lamen explanation?
The question is this:
This Omega-sub-b particle contains two strange quarks and a bottom quark and weighs about six times the mass of a proton. A proton contains 2 up quarks and one down quark.
Strange quarks have a mass of 95MeV, bottom has 4.2GeV so the total mass of the Omega-sub-b would be 4.39GeV Up quarks have a mass of 3MeV, down has 6MeV so the total mass of a Proton would be 0.012GeV
This would put the Omega-sub-b at 365.8 times the mass of a Proton.
So I am obviously not understanding how the masses of the quarks correlate to the masses of the fermions. What am I missing here?
Well apparently it works on Linux as well (As long as it has the right KERNAL)
From Argos.co.uk.
2GB storage. Plug and play. Compatible with Windows ME, 2008, XP, Mac OS, 8.6 and Higher, Linux, Kernal 2.4X and any operating system with a USB port. Compatible with USB 1.1 and 2.0. Size (H)2 (W)6.3 (D) 0.8cm. Black USB pendrive. Full length movie and link to argos website included. Full installation guide included.
When the scale was conceived, 96 was the average body temp of a healthy person. Later on, the scale was revised and unsurprisingly, we did not change our actual body temp to match this revision of the Fahrenheit scale. A result of this minor adjustment to the scale ended up with the body temperature of 96 on the old scale being 98.6 on the 'new' Fahrenheit scale.
When the scale was conceived, 96 was the average body temp of a healthy person. Later on, the scale was revised and unsurprisingly, we did not change our body temp to match this revision of the Fahrenheit scale. A result of this minor adjustment to the scale ended up with the body temperature being 96 on the 'new' Fahrenheit scale.
Do notice that in my original post, I said that it was 'originally' based on that.. Not 'currently' based on that.
I would download/watch any show online for a "reasonable" subscription fee, and I don't feel I am alone in this.
I would also pay a nominal fee to be able to download my shows rather then watch them on advert-riddled CATV.
I was discussing this the other day with a work colleague and was wondering if anyone knows of the sort of per-person advertising revenue the broadcasters get on a typical prime time show (Obviously not including BBC broadcasts). Could it be more than $1 per person? My gut feeling (with no data to back it up) is that it is likely not that much. I would gladly pay a dollar to get my show and they would still get their revenue stream, maybe even moreso!
This should definately have been on the list. The opportunities for improvement that this would open up (once matured, obviously) are countless. Off-world mining for rare/helpful materials, amongst many things.
How about the multi-touch display? I have seen demos of it before but as far as I am aware, the iPhone is the first commercially available product with this technology.
I am no apple fan boy, I just genuinely don't know of anyone that beat them to the post with this. Am I mistaken?
And yeah, all the other stuff you say is spot on though.
Nevermind the 4 seats, what about the fact that it's monstrously big according to tfa...
measuring twelve metres (39 feet) long, seven metres high by five wide. I think someone left their brain off when they wrote that article.
Slashdot Mirror
moose!
I'm driving along a 40 limit road, at a cautious 30 when someone cluelessly drives into my path from a blind junction where they have no right of way. *I REACT* to this by slowing down and avoiding said stupid driver, thus making a non-situation of it. As I reacted, according to you, I had done something wrong or I wouldn't have had to. What bad decisions had I made previously? Except driving on the public roads in the first place, that is.
Likewise, I react to someone cutting into my lane too close by backing off a bit. What did I do wrong in this instance?
Just hypothetical questions :)
Tom...
lol. I hear it's gonna hurt.
Ouch.
And thanks. The concept of mass is different down at this level anyway so I can't me using my built in concepts of mass being an intrinsic part of matter. It's just a force between particles.
That helps things, but old brain here still can't help wanting to think things have an intrinsic mass. Mass, as my brain knows it, does not exist. Arrgghh
ILTBAPPBFIAWTPI (I'd like to be a particle physicist, but feel I am way too past it)
Yeah I had read that before, but that aspect must have skipped past my mind last time. I feel I am still held back by the physics I was taught in school in the 80's. Lots of concepts taught in school back then make it harder to visualise the currently accepted concepts. I need to start with a blanker canvas in my mind. I'm still stuck on spherical valence shells and other such simplicities, as it's what I was taught. Trying to get there though.
What are they teaching in schools now? I should be having a littlun next year and want them to be learning proper science.
Tom...
OK, the binding energy is where it's at then. Just mentioning the concept of that, and the discrepancies between atomic mass and the mass of the fermions, suddenly makes the "magical" bit of fusion/fission much more clear to me.
I now know where to commence my reading. Thanks!
Tom...
Just like the mass of an atomic nucleus isn't equal to the sum of the masses of the protons and neutrons in it.
it isn't? (approximately).
I need to go back to basics...
Tom...
OK, so I have been reading a lot about particle physics lately and find the whole subject fascinating, but there is one thing (amongst many things) that I am not quite understanding. I have looked it up and my understanding of particle physics is not "there" yet, or at least not enough to grasp this particular concept. Maybe I have just not read the right explanation.
Can someone in here put it in a simple lamen explanation?
The question is this:
This Omega-sub-b particle contains two strange quarks and a bottom quark and weighs about six times the mass of a proton.
A proton contains 2 up quarks and one down quark.
Strange quarks have a mass of 95MeV, bottom has 4.2GeV so the total mass of the Omega-sub-b would be 4.39GeV
Up quarks have a mass of 3MeV, down has 6MeV so the total mass of a Proton would be 0.012GeV
This would put the Omega-sub-b at 365.8 times the mass of a Proton.
So I am obviously not understanding how the masses of the quarks correlate to the masses of the fermions. What am I missing here?
Thanks,
Tom...
Bet you anything you like that compatibility guide refers to the USB mass storage functionality and not the data on it.
Bet you anything you like that's what i meant when I said
Although I guess that is wrong for the DRM stuff.
Admittedly, though, I am having a bad English day :)
Tom...
Then they are lying on the Argos web page...
http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=952461&cid=24862147
Well apparently it works on Linux as well (As long as it has the right KERNAL)
From Argos.co.uk.
2GB storage.
Plug and play.
Compatible with Windows ME, 2008, XP, Mac OS, 8.6 and Higher, Linux, Kernal 2.4X and any operating system with a USB port.
Compatible with USB 1.1 and 2.0.
Size (H)2 (W)6.3 (D) 0.8cm.
Black USB pendrive.
Full length movie and link to argos website included.
Full installation guide included.
Although I guess that is wrong for the DRM stuff.
Tom...
All we need is edible RFID! Problem solved.
1. It could get much worse
2. It could get worse
3. It could stay the same
4. It could get better
5. It could get much better
Ahh yes, that's better. Thanks!
It doesn't look very 3D in the video to me!
I should proof read more... Too early...
When the scale was conceived, 96 was the average body temp of a healthy person. Later on, the scale was revised and unsurprisingly, we did not change our actual body temp to match this revision of the Fahrenheit scale. A result of this minor adjustment to the scale ended up with the body temperature of 96 on the old scale being 98.6 on the 'new' Fahrenheit scale.
When the scale was conceived, 96 was the average body temp of a healthy person. Later on, the scale was revised and unsurprisingly, we did not change our body temp to match this revision of the Fahrenheit scale. A result of this minor adjustment to the scale ended up with the body temperature being 96 on the 'new' Fahrenheit scale.
Do notice that in my original post, I said that it was 'originally' based on that.. Not 'currently' based on that.
Tom...
No it is not, it was originally based on an ice & salt water mixture for the low end (0) and the body temperature for the high end (96).
Tom...
Absolutely!
I would download/watch any show online for a "reasonable" subscription fee, and I don't feel I am alone in this.
I would also pay a nominal fee to be able to download my shows rather then watch them on advert-riddled CATV.
I was discussing this the other day with a work colleague and was wondering if anyone knows of the sort of per-person advertising revenue the broadcasters get on a typical prime time show (Obviously not including BBC broadcasts). Could it be more than $1 per person?
My gut feeling (with no data to back it up) is that it is likely not that much. I would gladly pay a dollar to get my show and they would still get their revenue stream, maybe even moreso!
Tom...
I leave gmail open constantly.. for weeks at a time. Still no problem there.
Why don't I see these problems? I leave FF2 running for weeks on end and it stays snappy.
Also, you don't need a plugin to prevent losing tabs on a restart, it's built in!
They used a monkey controlling prosthetic human limbs before.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YB08leFMRnM
This should definately have been on the list. The opportunities for improvement that this would open up (once matured, obviously) are countless. Off-world mining for rare/helpful materials, amongst many things.
How about the multi-touch display? I have seen demos of it before but as far as I am aware, the iPhone is the first commercially available product with this technology.
I am no apple fan boy, I just genuinely don't know of anyone that beat them to the post with this. Am I mistaken?
And yeah, all the other stuff you say is spot on though.