How(ie) Long is a former football player for the Raiders and current commentator for Fox Sports. He doesn't look Chinese at all. In fact, his Wikipedia entry says he was born in Massachusetts.
Actually, based on demand for the story, she has no moral right to leave it unwritten. The courts should compel her to write the next sequel!
I think there was such a contract (not moral, but contractual) on The Artist Formerly Known as Prince, between his stints as Prince and as Prince. Seems his albums started sucking around that time...
So it doesn't sound like it's going to solve our energy crisis by giving us a lot of kinetic energy that we don't have already. Er, I mean 'end' our energy crisis.
Seriously, though, it intuitively seems like the danger from rogue asteroids comes from an intersecting orbit, with a high closure velocity prior to impact. This one may cause problems if it enters our atmosphere, but if it's already in a similar orbit, the energy dissipated would be mainly that associated with falling into our gravity well. How much energy is needed to cause Armageddon in this manner? (As distinct from the LHC manner of Armageddon, which seems more efficient, in theory...)
A recent episode of SVU had them determine that a Jane Doe had been to Ukraine 6 months ago because of the levels and proportions of some isotope in her hair. You see, the water in Ukraine has a particular isotope signature, so by analyzing the hair the cops could determine that she'd been there. That led to a Ukrainian pimp, who, for a deportation in lieu of US prison, gave them the identity of the girl. Isotopes. Huh...
Often when I get into intractable arguments like this, it turns out in the end that the disagreement boils down to differing definitions of a specific word. In this case, I suspect it is 'philosophy'. Merriam Webster has a few definitions, of which 'pursuit of wisdom' would probably satisfy those lumping science in with philosophy. On the other hand, 'a search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational means' would tend to exclude science.
It probably doesn't matter in this forum which definition you use; what matters most on the internet is that the other guy is wrong. (And if you think I'm talking about you, I'm not. It's the other guy who's actually wrong. We are right-on here. Yes sir! Go us. we rock.
It's a measurement of a property of some (yet unknown) material whose thermal insulation properties are somehow linked to it's inductance: "Crank up the insulator coils; there's a cold front coming soon."
The recovered energy would partly come from the wasted energy of people slapping their feet against the floor. Currently, there is a lot of energy being dissipated in shoe soles and the lower leg. The widespread use of padded shoe soles (i.e. running shoes) demonstrates that there is some extra energy that needs to be dissipated somewhere, for the comfort of the pedestrian.
I heard* that there was a complicated series of key-presses required to turn the feature off if the phone were moving, so that anyone driving would be unable to do it**, but a passenger would be able to focus the necessary attention on the task.
Perhaps it should be mentioned that autopilot is used to maintain precise altitude control so planes can be stacked into more altitude slices (every 1000 feet). Back in the days of B-29's, and until recently, altitude measurement in the upper altitudes of flight was only good enough for 2000 foot slices.
So the autopilot is an ATC system requirement, not an aircraft requirement. A plane without autopilot would require special handling if they did not meet the RVSM requirements. More of a "supposed to have" than a "need", you might say.
It's mostly a stargazer's website. It tracks satellites for the purposes of visually observing their passes. You can see in the graphic of the satellite track where the satellite will be illuminated by the sun above a nighttime surface. For this one, though, being sun-synchronous, one would have to be near one of the poles to see it.
The real strength of this website is predicting visually detectable satellite passes for a user-defined point on Earth. Tell it where you are, and it will tell you when to look up to see something orbit overhead.
It will tell you when the satellite will be most directly overhead within the next few days. Look up "All passes" and find the one that has the highest maximum altitude (in degrees). That one may be photographing you.
You have both described a case where photos can be taken without shadows. The "satellite shadow" case is a region where the shadows exist, but aren't observable by the satellite and therefore don't appear in the photos.The "zenith" case is where shadows aren't formed at all (for vertical objects), and thus aren't photographed.
By the way, imaging satellites are closer to the subject for photos directly downward, so they end up being more common in practice than oblique angles. However, taking pictures of the same place from two different angles can yield a good stereoscopic image, so some satellites will angle their lenses a bit (one looking slightly forward, one aft). Also, the distance between consecutive satellite passes is generally more than can be captured with the high-resolution cameras, so the camera may be aimed side-to-side to target a specific area. These variations from vertical are likely less than the sun angle at higher latitudes.
1. Choose an overcast day. A flat layer of clouds will not have perceptible shadows.
2. Take the pictures at night. There won't be any local shadows from the sun, but there will, of course, be the shadow of the Earth itself. Remember to adjust accordingly for moon-induced shadows.
I always like to consider such problems by looking at the inputs, in this case the AC power input. Usually, the lights are on a circuit breaker which gives a nice upper limit for current spikes of arbitrary duration. Multiplying the voltage by the circuit breaker rating and the duration of the supposed current spike will give us a round number for the energy wasted during startup.
So, 110V times 20A times 100ms is 220J. That's well short of 24MJ mentioned earlier, and 100ms is probably pretty high.
I'm sure replacement cost versus operating cost could be analyzed, too, and would show that operating cost dwarfs replacement cost for fluorescent tubes.
I don't have radar. Gliders don't have radar. ATC radar is very dependent on transponders, because they provide better information than raw ("primary") radar returns. If your radar is designed to track cooperative targets that are using transponders, it probably won't work as well without them.
So it sounds like "10 times the efficiency" means 1/10 the power. I read the article specifically to see how they defined a tenfold increase in efficiency. I imagined that an increase from, say, 9% to 90% was not reasonable to expect. Maybe it was energy converted to waste heat that was reduced.
Anyway, I didn't find an explanation in the article. So what is a theoretical 100% efficiency with respect to logic circuits? Every electron turned into a bit of information? Every pair of electrons? It seems impractical to define efficiency in this case. For instance, I don't think coulombs per megaflop could be construed as efficiency, per se. If there was a standard out there, maybe a theoretical minimum number of electrons to perform a logical operation on a standard circuit, we could compare other circuits with that...
On the other hand, I could just cut journalists some slack when they use technical terms in a mass-media context. Now where did I leave my soapbox?
Slashdot Mirror
I forgot my combo wall/car charger in a hotel, you insensitive clod!
Are you referring to someone else?
I think there was such a contract (not moral, but contractual) on The Artist Formerly Known as Prince, between his stints as Prince and as Prince. Seems his albums started sucking around that time...
Yes. If you are interested, this book has more info on the concept.
I once had a friend who evaded the cops by extinguishing his lights during night pursuits. I -- uh, he(!) -- has yet to die from a shootout, though.
Seriously, though, it intuitively seems like the danger from rogue asteroids comes from an intersecting orbit, with a high closure velocity prior to impact. This one may cause problems if it enters our atmosphere, but if it's already in a similar orbit, the energy dissipated would be mainly that associated with falling into our gravity well. How much energy is needed to cause Armageddon in this manner? (As distinct from the LHC manner of Armageddon, which seems more efficient, in theory...)
If you are interested, there's also information about elephant-eating snakes...
A recent episode of SVU had them determine that a Jane Doe had been to Ukraine 6 months ago because of the levels and proportions of some isotope in her hair. You see, the water in Ukraine has a particular isotope signature, so by analyzing the hair the cops could determine that she'd been there. That led to a Ukrainian pimp, who, for a deportation in lieu of US prison, gave them the identity of the girl. Isotopes. Huh...
It probably doesn't matter in this forum which definition you use; what matters most on the internet is that the other guy is wrong. (And if you think I'm talking about you, I'm not. It's the other guy who's actually wrong. We are right-on here. Yes sir! Go us. we rock.
It's a measurement of a property of some (yet unknown) material whose thermal insulation properties are somehow linked to it's inductance: "Crank up the insulator coils; there's a cold front coming soon."
The recovered energy would partly come from the wasted energy of people slapping their feet against the floor. Currently, there is a lot of energy being dissipated in shoe soles and the lower leg. The widespread use of padded shoe soles (i.e. running shoes) demonstrates that there is some extra energy that needs to be dissipated somewhere, for the comfort of the pedestrian.
...maybe something along the lines of "the children wouldn't want this," but it still needs more bite.
.
* By "I heard" I mean I just made it up.
** (Without crashing)
That's argot, not lemon.
So the autopilot is an ATC system requirement, not an aircraft requirement. A plane without autopilot would require special handling if they did not meet the RVSM requirements. More of a "supposed to have" than a "need", you might say.
How about a HUD that displays closure rate of the other traffic. Of course, radar would be required.
The real strength of this website is predicting visually detectable satellite passes for a user-defined point on Earth. Tell it where you are, and it will tell you when to look up to see something orbit overhead.
It will tell you when the satellite will be most directly overhead within the next few days. Look up "All passes" and find the one that has the highest maximum altitude (in degrees). That one may be photographing you.
Check out heavens-above.com for all your satellite tracking needs. Here's GeoEye 1: http://www.heavens-above.com/satinfo.aspx?lat=0&lng=0&alt=0&loc=Unspecified&TZ=CET&SatID=33331
By the way, imaging satellites are closer to the subject for photos directly downward, so they end up being more common in practice than oblique angles. However, taking pictures of the same place from two different angles can yield a good stereoscopic image, so some satellites will angle their lenses a bit (one looking slightly forward, one aft). Also, the distance between consecutive satellite passes is generally more than can be captured with the high-resolution cameras, so the camera may be aimed side-to-side to target a specific area. These variations from vertical are likely less than the sun angle at higher latitudes.
1. Choose an overcast day. A flat layer of clouds will not have perceptible shadows.
2. Take the pictures at night. There won't be any local shadows from the sun, but there will, of course, be the shadow of the Earth itself. Remember to adjust accordingly for moon-induced shadows.
So, 110V times 20A times 100ms is 220J. That's well short of 24MJ mentioned earlier, and 100ms is probably pretty high.
I'm sure replacement cost versus operating cost could be analyzed, too, and would show that operating cost dwarfs replacement cost for fluorescent tubes.
(It's 5,050, right?)
Or was I supposed to solve the formula... 1/2 n^2 + 1/2 n
Whatever. Do I get a cookie or not?
I don't have radar. Gliders don't have radar. ATC radar is very dependent on transponders, because they provide better information than raw ("primary") radar returns. If your radar is designed to track cooperative targets that are using transponders, it probably won't work as well without them.
10E15 watts?
9090909 libraries of congress?
One Pinatubo?
Anyway, I didn't find an explanation in the article. So what is a theoretical 100% efficiency with respect to logic circuits? Every electron turned into a bit of information? Every pair of electrons? It seems impractical to define efficiency in this case. For instance, I don't think coulombs per megaflop could be construed as efficiency, per se. If there was a standard out there, maybe a theoretical minimum number of electrons to perform a logical operation on a standard circuit, we could compare other circuits with that...
On the other hand, I could just cut journalists some slack when they use technical terms in a mass-media context. Now where did I leave my soapbox?