"Another advantage it has, compared to other sports, is that it need little to none infrastructure, so poor kids can play it everywhere."
I have heard that excuse given many times, and I still have to disagree. Soccer needs a ball, and optionally some goal area (only if you want to keep score). Likewise, baseball needs a ball, and a stick. Bases are optional, or can be landmarks (why does second base keep crawling away?) Mitts are very good for hard balls, but not needed (early american baseball didn't use mitts, and catching the ball on a single hop counted as an out). Football doesn't need line markers. Kids play it with 4 downs per side all the time, with no first downs. So Football requites a ball, and two lines, or equivalent. Basketball? a ball and a wastebasket or a tree or a building.
All of these require an open space of some sort.
So I do not see how soccer is any easier for poor kids, really.
"You think all that routing, networking and software you use was invented in the US? Oh, ok."
Routing and networking... goes back to the packet switched networks in ARPANET, ALOHANET in the 70's. Or perhaps you are refering to the TCP/IP stack we use today. Oops, you lose there again - Windows makes use (at least when it was first becoming network aware) largely of the Berkeley IP stack from over there in California. *BSD obviously uses this stack. Other operatin g systems do as well, directly, or in translation. What has come around since then has been similar to the advances in automobile engines in the past 50 years... bolt-ons that may offer some improvement, are nice to have, but not necessary in the least. Who needs anything more than telnet ftp, usenet and gopher? The intarweb addition by CERN was nice, but "has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move".
"Other nations that carry it to where it is today."
I agree that the useful stuff comes from places other than the US. Who can deny the catchiness of the Yatta craze? SSH is awesome. Countless other things as well.
The UN did not make the internet, it was a project of US military, handed over to private industry. The US has not abused its ability to manage the internet namespace to date. Given its track record, I cannot say the same would have happened had it been in the hands of the UN. I am not saying the UN would not be reliable - that is the topic of a whole different discussion. I am saying that up until now, there has been no reason to change. If it is not broken, do not go give it to someone else to frell.
Depending on the fragmentation of the data in the cache, it is not necessarily impossible to write it out. I am not sure whether it is done any longer, but at one point the rotational energy stored in the spinning platters was used to park the heads and perform final housekeeping, flywheel-energy-storage style. I do not believe this was used for any disk writes, as the platters would become a non-standard target for writes as they slow down, and angular timing would be an issue.
However, it would be conceivable and a drive-firmware only fix/hack for manufacturers to designate a track or two specifically for cache dump area. Given that controller -> platter speed is > 20MB, it would be possible upon power loss, to seek to track -1, dump contents of write cache, and park in under half a second (assuming worst case 16MB buffer, half used as write cache), long before the platters are rotating too slow for the heads to float in the ground effects. Since there would be nothing valuable on the track other than the equivalent of a cache core dump, there would be no risk of corrupting other data due to timing issues, and no compensation would have to be done upon write.
Upon re-application of power, the drive would read this track (more difficult than normal, due to the predictable but irregular angular spacing of the bits) and complete the drive internal writes before becoming 'ready'.
Then again the assumption that flywheel-storage energy is sufficient for operation for an unknown time, especially when the device was not intended to be a flywheel in the first place, can produce problems, Chornobyl case in point. (Yeah, disable the backup generators, disable the automatic SCRAM, disable everything else, cut steam to the turbines and see how long they can power everything using stored rotational energy before things go boom. Oops! I guess not long enough!)
Doublespace, if I recall, infringed on Stacker, and was not removed from the OS because it was 'bad' per se, but because a lawsuit was brought against MS by Stacker.
Doublespace was in MSDOS 6 and 6.1,but was removed from 6.2. It was replaced by Drivespace in 6.22, which was different enough (I assume) that it no longer violated Stacker's patent.
The reason for removal was not for increased instability as much as is was required by the Stacker lawsuit.
Alternatively interesting for history buffs was the inclusion of the (terribly ineffective) MSAV anti-virus in version MSDOS 6, which was a stripped down version of Symantec's AV, which did not support updates... Gotta love that! Yep, we made this nice new OS version... and we know it is vulnerable to these ~1000 viruses, and for its useful life, no more viruses will be written. yup yup!
I realize that comics and comic book movies are horribly inclined to mangle plotlines worse than a B soap opera, but wouldn't it be more logical if Kingpin was actually Michael Clark Duncan (the guy who played it in Daredevil).
Also, it might be fun to include someone like Daredevil in the Spidey flick, as a cameo. You know, Ben Affleck with dark shades and civilian clothes tapping his way around with a cane in the background of some scene...
While galactic bass is nothing to sneeze at, at least we can all take comfort knowing that ricers do not particularly care for the music of Hotblack Desiato of Disaster Area.
My brains, your beowulf cluster, and his codebase for 15 days, and you think a little build script is supposed to make me happy? Hmmmm? I mean, if we only had some Wine, that would be something.
Just 2 countries? Then why are pin headers and chip leads spaced on.1" centers? and sometimes 2mm centers?
The metric/imperial debate is often stated as 'well everyone else switched - it should be easy for us/uk to switch as well'. Everyone else did not switch. Officially, perhaps, and in some markets, but there are numerous standards based on Imperial that will not change any time soon.
The problem is that there are too many international goods sold that conform to the imperial standard to get rid of it.
I am all for the adoption of metrics here in the US, but imperial tooling pervades all countries, and without a country to champion the lesser standard, everyone would suffer. Currently you have to have 2 sets of wrenches, which is bad enough. But if the entire world switched to metric, where would you find tools to work on older equipment? ebay? museums? I need a 6.35mm wrench to work on this 1/4" bolt.
P.S. I hear Vista is supposed to be LSB3 certified:-P
I have used Project Gutenberg multiple times in the past to save on costs or trips to a book store for a short reference to an older book. Oddly, I have not seen any reference to this great resource in the discussion on the Google library.
Are there any plans on importing these works?
Is Google going to waste time re-scanning and proofreading the etexts that are already available and free-as-in-beer-and-speech?
I realize that PG is generally only for copyright expired, or works that are explicitly released to the Public Domain, but it has a quite extensive selection of texts already.
Personally, I would like to see Google maintain an index of PG's texts, but refer the user to the PG archives if they wish to download the full texts, or perhaps make a local official mirror to take a load of the PG's current servers. Perhaps Google Library could maintain the non-PD works, and make contributions to PG for PD works.
For those who have no knowledge of PG, here's a snippet from their site:
"Project Gutenberg is the first and largest single collection of free electronic books, or eBooks. Michael Hart, founder of Project Gutenberg, invented eBooks in 1971 and continues to inspire the creation of eBooks and related technologies today.
Project Gutenberg Mission Statement: To encourage the creation and distribution of eBooks."
Are you talking about ATSC DTV and HDTV? If so, that has been broadcast for a few years already, free for all who have a tuner. The "broadcast flag", last I heard, was repealed, until it is again passed:-P
Gust of wind, or not, it survived, and probably chipped the pavement as well.
The laptops do not stand up to hollowpoints, though reportedly they have limited casualties from stray rounds fired in Iraq from some lower energy rounds and ricochets. (Doh! there's that word again!)
Working in the field, Toughbooks fare better than Fieldworks (who have seemingly bad keyboard designs) and some other 'ruggedized' laptops/luggables.
For some manufactured... ruggedized seems to mean adding some rubber pads to the corners of a traditional laptop, with screws that snap clean off at the first sign of shock. For others, it means a bolt together frame of steel that makes the thing heavy enough to do itself damage just from the immense forces of coming to a sudden stop after brisk acceleration. Panasonic seems to balance the two extremes and produce a nice truly rugged package.
The 'law' of gravity is not superceded. The "General Law of Universal Gravitation" of Newton is an empirical non-relativistic law, just as the laws of motion, which also fail relativistically.
f=G(m1*m2/r) is valid in non-relativistic scenarios, which is nearly all situations. The "General Law of Universal Gravitation" never proposed a reason/means for gravity. Actually, general relativity does not fill in this gap of knowledge either, but only adds to the equation that energy and momentum have gravitic effects.
My thoughts are that we can call the non-relativistic explanation of gravity a Law for non-relativistic usage. The explanation for relativistic gravity, as it pertains to general relativity, can not become a law without further modification, because there are testable values that through experimentation disprove the theory. (Such as the nearly constant angular velocity of star systems in galaxies).
Finally, some notes from the big WP: "It's important to understand that while Newton was able to formulate his law of gravity in his monumental work, he was deeply uncomfortable with the notion of "action at a distance" which his equations implied. He never, in his words, "assigned the cause of this power". In all other cases, he used the phenomenon of motion to explain the origin of various forces acting on bodies, but in the case of gravity, he was unable to experimentally identify the motion that produces the force of gravity. Moreover, he refused to even offer a hypothesis as to the cause of this force on grounds that to do so was contrary to sound science."
I always thought the world, was conceived in the mind of Ilúvatar and given shape and fullness through the song of the Ainur, the Holy Ones, created by Ilúvatar...
With the exception of conjecture, hypothesis, and laws, of course...
Seems odd that scientific folk who talk against absolutes are so reliant on them:-)
The following dis-proofs of your absolute conjecture are all that I can remember off-hand, but are sufficient (oh, and notice that 'gravity' is a Law, not a Theory:-P )
Boyle's Law (pressure and volume of ideal gas) Ideal Gas Law [PV=nRT] Kepler's Laws (planetary motion) Newton's laws of motion (inertia, F = ma, action and reaction) Law of heat conduction General Law of Universal Gravitation Coulomb's Law Ohm's Law: V = IR Kirchhoff's circuit laws (current and voltage laws) Maxwell's equations (electromagnetic fields)(not laws, by name, but treated as such. Gauss's Law Faraday's Law Ampere's Law Planck's Law of black body radiation Boltzmann's Laws Laws of thermodynamics
So you speak on Satan's behalf? Interesting in its own regard.
Notice however, that I made no mention of God as the ID. There is no reason that God, or any other ID has to be named or referred to in a scientific creation theory discussion, nor do any religious texts have to be referred to, for that matter. From a scientific standpoint, God, hackers-in-the-sky, aliens, coyboyneal, and super-intelligent shades of the colour blue are all possible IDs.
> Can we teach that there is no need for God in religious class?
I do not understand the context or intent of this fully, but it seems that 'we' is Satanists and 'religious class' refers to a Christian faith study class. In that case, no, you cannot teach that unless asked to, since freedom of religion is a first amendment right, and the 'right to peaceably assemble' does not apply to private property. Though, as I said, I may have misunderstood your comment.
My former chemistry instructor as part of his standard course material, explains the proper use of a liquour still. I see nothing wrong with that. Gin production is a small step from there, only adding some berries to the slurry I believe.
What are kids learning these days... gravity as "only a theory"?
Newton's law of universal gravitation states the following:
Every object in the Universe attracts every other object with a force directed along the line of centers of mass for the two objects that is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the separation between the two objects.
Gravity is just as much a law as the laws of thermodynamics are laws. Just as thermodynamics breaks down in relativistic scenarios, gravity may as well. The laws of Gravity and Thermodynamics are non-relativistic empirically obtained laws.
There are various theories on how gravity actually WORKS, such as graviton exchange, warped space-time, etc.
Though I have no retort about astrology, geography deals almost exclusively in flat earth teachings. Ever notice how maps are rather flat and 2d? Cartography deals with the many ways of representing the spherical earth in a 2d plane, be it the orange slice, projection, or perhaps the disco ball mgrs/utm methods.
To continue the analogy, teaching ONLY creationism is like teaching geography/cartography ONLY with globes, and no flat maps or charts.
I personally do not see why staunch evolutionists are so opposed to the idea of 'intelligent design'. The two ideas are definitely not mutually exclusive. I do not see a need for equal time in the classroom, but I do see a need to express greater evolutionism as the theory it is. I cannot prove 'intelligent design', but neither can I prove that all life came from random sudge and a super-intelligent shade of the colour blue.
You also are quite incorrect... Just in the VHS market, there was the original, then the silver digitally remastered edition, then the gold new versions of the old movies... thats 3 versions right there...
Then of course the laser disc version was remastered with different a slightly modified sound track, making that 4...
and DVD makes 5 - unless im missing something as well... (did it come out on betamax?)
so the HD release will be the re-re-re-re-re-release
In my experience, this is correct. I actually competed at the FIRA World Cup in Vienna in 2003.
It started as a simple, week-long assignment in a graduate robotics course, to have a half-popcan sized robot play soccer with a tennis ball. It ended up with the school partly sponsoring me to go to the competition.
Of the five entrants in my category, two were from Germany, one from Thailand, and one from Brazil. The two German competitors (based on the movements of the robots) had extremely similar, if not identical code. But then, of the two, one was a PhD, and the other was his student, writing a thesis on the AI.
I ended up in 4'th place of 5. I had spent a total of about a week and a half on the code, using nearly the same AI that I had developed for my class, with some modifications. The other teams had been competing for several years in this category, and had a more mature battle strategy, and more experience in competing with others. Also, the other teams had a certain advantage, since they were using a newer version of the khepera robot with proximity sensors that worked about twice as far.
In my case, the German, Thailand, and Brazilian team all put much more effort into the programming - but mostly because of differing backgrounds. For me it was a small assignment, for them it was a thesis, or a full semester's effort.
Strangely enough, I was the only person competing from the USA, even though there were a dozen or so categories, and about 20 other countries represented.
But then I have a laptop with a Geforce 4 440MX Go card with 32MB RAM...
No disrespect... but why would you purchase a 6800u to run at such a dismal resolution?
I realize that your 800x600 looks less chunky than mine, since you can dedicate GPU power to do uber-mega-96xAntialiasing whereas I am forced to run bareback... but if you can run at a higher res, while maintaining the same framerate, why aren't you? Perhaps just an attempt to reduce money spent on the electric bill?
Slashdot Mirror
"Another advantage it has, compared to other sports, is that it need little to none infrastructure, so poor kids can play it everywhere."
I have heard that excuse given many times, and I still have to disagree. Soccer needs a ball, and optionally some goal area (only if you want to keep score). Likewise, baseball needs a ball, and a stick. Bases are optional, or can be landmarks (why does second base keep crawling away?) Mitts are very good for hard balls, but not needed (early american baseball didn't use mitts, and catching the ball on a single hop counted as an out). Football doesn't need line markers. Kids play it with 4 downs per side all the time, with no first downs. So Football requites a ball, and two lines, or equivalent. Basketball? a ball and a wastebasket or a tree or a building.
All of these require an open space of some sort.
So I do not see how soccer is any easier for poor kids, really.
I hate to feed flamebait... but
"You think all that routing, networking and software you use was invented in the US? Oh, ok."
Routing and networking... goes back to the packet switched networks in ARPANET, ALOHANET in the 70's. Or perhaps you are refering to the TCP/IP stack we use today. Oops, you lose there again - Windows makes use (at least when it was first becoming network aware) largely of the Berkeley IP stack from over there in California. *BSD obviously uses this stack. Other operatin g systems do as well, directly, or in translation. What has come around since then has been similar to the advances in automobile engines in the past 50 years... bolt-ons that may offer some improvement, are nice to have, but not necessary in the least. Who needs anything more than telnet ftp, usenet and gopher? The intarweb addition by CERN was nice, but "has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move".
"Other nations that carry it to where it is today."
I agree that the useful stuff comes from places other than the US. Who can deny the catchiness of the Yatta craze? SSH is awesome. Countless other things as well.
The UN did not make the internet, it was a project of US military, handed over to private industry. The US has not abused its ability to manage the internet namespace to date. Given its track record, I cannot say the same would have happened had it been in the hands of the UN. I am not saying the UN would not be reliable - that is the topic of a whole different discussion. I am saying that up until now, there has been no reason to change. If it is not broken, do not go give it to someone else to frell.
Depending on the fragmentation of the data in the cache, it is not necessarily impossible to write it out. I am not sure whether it is done any longer, but at one point the rotational energy stored in the spinning platters was used to park the heads and perform final housekeeping, flywheel-energy-storage style. I do not believe this was used for any disk writes, as the platters would become a non-standard target for writes as they slow down, and angular timing would be an issue.
However, it would be conceivable and a drive-firmware only fix/hack for manufacturers to designate a track or two specifically for cache dump area. Given that controller -> platter speed is > 20MB, it would be possible upon power loss, to seek to track -1, dump contents of write cache, and park in under half a second (assuming worst case 16MB buffer, half used as write cache), long before the platters are rotating too slow for the heads to float in the ground effects. Since there would be nothing valuable on the track other than the equivalent of a cache core dump, there would be no risk of corrupting other data due to timing issues, and no compensation would have to be done upon write.
Upon re-application of power, the drive would read this track (more difficult than normal, due to the predictable but irregular angular spacing of the bits) and complete the drive internal writes before becoming 'ready'.
Then again the assumption that flywheel-storage energy is sufficient for operation for an unknown time, especially when the device was not intended to be a flywheel in the first place, can produce problems, Chornobyl case in point. (Yeah, disable the backup generators, disable the automatic SCRAM, disable everything else, cut steam to the turbines and see how long they can power everything using stored rotational energy before things go boom. Oops! I guess not long enough!)
Doublespace, if I recall, infringed on Stacker, and was not removed from the OS because it was 'bad' per se, but because a lawsuit was brought against MS by Stacker.
Doublespace was in MSDOS 6 and 6.1,but was removed from 6.2. It was replaced by Drivespace in 6.22, which was different enough (I assume) that it no longer violated Stacker's patent.
The reason for removal was not for increased instability as much as is was required by the Stacker lawsuit.
Alternatively interesting for history buffs was the inclusion of the (terribly ineffective) MSAV anti-virus in version MSDOS 6, which was a stripped down version of Symantec's AV, which did not support updates... Gotta love that! Yep, we made this nice new OS version... and we know it is vulnerable to these ~1000 viruses, and for its useful life, no more viruses will be written. yup yup!
I realize that comics and comic book movies are horribly inclined to mangle plotlines worse than a B soap opera, but wouldn't it be more logical if Kingpin was actually Michael Clark Duncan (the guy who played it in Daredevil).
Also, it might be fun to include someone like Daredevil in the Spidey flick, as a cameo. You know, Ben Affleck with dark shades and civilian clothes tapping his way around with a cane in the background of some scene...
While galactic bass is nothing to sneeze at, at least we can all take comfort knowing that ricers do not particularly care for the music of Hotblack Desiato of Disaster Area.
Where did we put that Wine the penguin had?
With the penguin, I think.
Why didn't you list that among our assets in the first place? What I wouldn't give for a licensing agreement.
There we cannot help you.
Would this do?
Where did you get that?
At Silly Stallman's. It fit so nice, he said I could use it.
My brains, your beowulf cluster, and his codebase for 15 days, and you think a little build script is supposed to make me happy? Hmmmm? I mean, if we only had some Wine, that would be something.
Just 2 countries? Then why are pin headers and chip leads spaced on .1" centers? and sometimes 2mm centers?
:-P
The metric/imperial debate is often stated as 'well everyone else switched - it should be easy for us/uk to switch as well'. Everyone else did not switch. Officially, perhaps, and in some markets, but there are numerous standards based on Imperial that will not change any time soon.
The problem is that there are too many international goods sold that conform to the imperial standard to get rid of it.
I am all for the adoption of metrics here in the US, but imperial tooling pervades all countries, and without a country to champion the lesser standard, everyone would suffer. Currently you have to have 2 sets of wrenches, which is bad enough. But if the entire world switched to metric, where would you find tools to work on older equipment? ebay? museums? I need a 6.35mm wrench to work on this 1/4" bolt.
P.S. I hear Vista is supposed to be LSB3 certified
I have used Project Gutenberg multiple times in the past to save on costs or trips to a book store for a short reference to an older book. Oddly, I have not seen any reference to this great resource in the discussion on the Google library.
Are there any plans on importing these works?
Is Google going to waste time re-scanning and proofreading the etexts that are already available and free-as-in-beer-and-speech?
I realize that PG is generally only for copyright expired, or works that are explicitly released to the Public Domain, but it has a quite extensive selection of texts already.
Personally, I would like to see Google maintain an index of PG's texts, but refer the user to the PG archives if they wish to download the full texts, or perhaps make a local official mirror to take a load of the PG's current servers. Perhaps Google Library could maintain the non-PD works, and make contributions to PG for PD works.
For those who have no knowledge of PG, here's a snippet from their site:
"Project Gutenberg is the first and largest single collection of free electronic books, or eBooks. Michael Hart, founder of Project Gutenberg, invented eBooks in 1971 and continues to inspire the creation of eBooks and related technologies today.
Project Gutenberg Mission Statement:
To encourage the creation and distribution of eBooks."
Are you talking about ATSC DTV and HDTV? If so, that has been broadcast for a few years already, free for all who have a tuner. The "broadcast flag", last I heard, was repealed, until it is again passed :-P
Avast!
Gust of wind, or not, it survived, and probably chipped the pavement as well.
The laptops do not stand up to hollowpoints, though reportedly they have limited casualties from stray rounds fired in Iraq from some lower energy rounds and ricochets. (Doh! there's that word again!)
Working in the field, Toughbooks fare better than Fieldworks (who have seemingly bad keyboard designs) and some other 'ruggedized' laptops/luggables.
For some manufactured... ruggedized seems to mean adding some rubber pads to the corners of a traditional laptop, with screws that snap clean off at the first sign of shock. For others, it means a bolt together frame of steel that makes the thing heavy enough to do itself damage just from the immense forces of coming to a sudden stop after brisk acceleration. Panasonic seems to balance the two extremes and produce a nice truly rugged package.
Wow! voice of reason in a cloud of FUD.
Too bad it was posted by Anon i mouse, or else you would have been modded +1 Sane
The 'law' of gravity is not superceded. The "General Law of Universal Gravitation" of Newton is an empirical non-relativistic law, just as the laws of motion, which also fail relativistically.
f=G(m1*m2/r) is valid in non-relativistic scenarios, which is nearly all situations. The "General Law of Universal Gravitation" never proposed a reason/means for gravity. Actually, general relativity does not fill in this gap of knowledge either, but only adds to the equation that energy and momentum have gravitic effects.
My thoughts are that we can call the non-relativistic explanation of gravity a Law for non-relativistic usage. The explanation for relativistic gravity, as it pertains to general relativity, can not become a law without further modification, because there are testable values that through experimentation disprove the theory. (Such as the nearly constant angular velocity of star systems in galaxies).
Finally, some notes from the big WP:
"It's important to understand that while Newton was able to formulate his law of gravity in his monumental work, he was deeply uncomfortable with the notion of "action at a distance" which his equations implied. He never, in his words, "assigned the cause of this power". In all other cases, he used the phenomenon of motion to explain the origin of various forces acting on bodies, but in the case of gravity, he was unable to experimentally identify the motion that produces the force of gravity. Moreover, he refused to even offer a hypothesis as to the cause of this force on grounds that to do so was contrary to sound science."
I always thought the world, was conceived in the mind of Ilúvatar and given shape and fullness through the song of the Ainur, the Holy Ones, created by Ilúvatar...
> EVERYTHING in science is considered a theory.
:-)
:-P )
With the exception of conjecture, hypothesis, and laws, of course...
Seems odd that scientific folk who talk against absolutes are so reliant on them
The following dis-proofs of your absolute conjecture are all that I can remember off-hand, but are sufficient (oh, and notice that 'gravity' is a Law, not a Theory
Boyle's Law (pressure and volume of ideal gas)
Ideal Gas Law [PV=nRT]
Kepler's Laws (planetary motion)
Newton's laws of motion (inertia, F = ma, action and reaction)
Law of heat conduction
General Law of Universal Gravitation
Coulomb's Law
Ohm's Law: V = IR
Kirchhoff's circuit laws (current and voltage laws)
Maxwell's equations (electromagnetic fields)(not laws, by name, but treated as such.
Gauss's Law
Faraday's Law
Ampere's Law
Planck's Law of black body radiation
Boltzmann's Laws
Laws of thermodynamics
So you speak on Satan's behalf? Interesting in its own regard.
Notice however, that I made no mention of God as the ID. There is no reason that God, or any other ID has to be named or referred to in a scientific creation theory discussion, nor do any religious texts have to be referred to, for that matter. From a scientific standpoint, God, hackers-in-the-sky, aliens, coyboyneal, and super-intelligent shades of the colour blue are all possible IDs.
> Can we teach that there is no need for God in religious class?
I do not understand the context or intent of this fully, but it seems that 'we' is Satanists and 'religious class' refers to a Christian faith study class. In that case, no, you cannot teach that unless asked to, since freedom of religion is a first amendment right, and the 'right to peaceably assemble' does not apply to private property. Though, as I said, I may have misunderstood your comment.
My former chemistry instructor as part of his standard course material, explains the proper use of a liquour still. I see nothing wrong with that. Gin production is a small step from there, only adding some berries to the slurry I believe.
What are kids learning these days... gravity as "only a theory"?
Newton's law of universal gravitation states the following:
Every object in the Universe attracts every other object with a force directed along the line of centers of mass for the two objects that is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the separation between the two objects.
Gravity is just as much a law as the laws of thermodynamics are laws. Just as thermodynamics breaks down in relativistic scenarios, gravity may as well. The laws of Gravity and Thermodynamics are non-relativistic empirically obtained laws.
There are various theories on how gravity actually WORKS, such as graviton exchange, warped space-time, etc.
just an added 2c
Though I have no retort about astrology, geography deals almost exclusively in flat earth teachings. Ever notice how maps are rather flat and 2d? Cartography deals with the many ways of representing the spherical earth in a 2d plane, be it the orange slice, projection, or perhaps the disco ball mgrs/utm methods.
To continue the analogy, teaching ONLY creationism is like teaching geography/cartography ONLY with globes, and no flat maps or charts.
I personally do not see why staunch evolutionists are so opposed to the idea of 'intelligent design'. The two ideas are definitely not mutually exclusive. I do not see a need for equal time in the classroom, but I do see a need to express greater evolutionism as the theory it is. I cannot prove 'intelligent design', but neither can I prove that all life came from random sudge and a super-intelligent shade of the colour blue.
Mod parent -1 "too presumptuous".
I'm sitting you insensitive clod.
I, for one, welcome our new bioengineered Pikachu Overlords!
You also are quite incorrect... Just in the VHS market, there was the original, then the silver digitally remastered edition, then the gold new versions of the old movies... thats 3 versions right there... Then of course the laser disc version was remastered with different a slightly modified sound track, making that 4... and DVD makes 5 - unless im missing something as well... (did it come out on betamax?) so the HD release will be the re-re-re-re-re-release
In my experience, this is correct. I actually competed at the FIRA World Cup in Vienna in 2003.
It started as a simple, week-long assignment in a graduate robotics course, to have a half-popcan sized robot play soccer with a tennis ball. It ended up with the school partly sponsoring me to go to the competition.
Of the five entrants in my category, two were from Germany, one from Thailand, and one from Brazil. The two German competitors (based on the movements of the robots) had extremely similar, if not identical code. But then, of the two, one was a PhD, and the other was his student, writing a thesis on the AI.
I ended up in 4'th place of 5. I had spent a total of about a week and a half on the code, using nearly the same AI that I had developed for my class, with some modifications. The other teams had been competing for several years in this category, and had a more mature battle strategy, and more experience in competing with others. Also, the other teams had a certain advantage, since they were using a newer version of the khepera robot with proximity sensors that worked about twice as far.
In my case, the German, Thailand, and Brazilian team all put much more effort into the programming - but mostly because of differing backgrounds. For me it was a small assignment, for them it was a thesis, or a full semester's effort.
Strangely enough, I was the only person competing from the USA, even though there were a dozen or so categories, and about 20 other countries represented.
http://www.k-team.com/robots/khepera/base.html for more information on the robots.
http://www.fira.net/ for information on the competition.
Hmm, you run HL2 at the same resolution I do....
But then I have a laptop with a Geforce 4 440MX Go card with 32MB RAM...
No disrespect... but why would you purchase a 6800u to run at such a dismal resolution?
I realize that your 800x600 looks less chunky than mine, since you can dedicate GPU power to do uber-mega-96xAntialiasing whereas I am forced to run bareback... but if you can run at a higher res, while maintaining the same framerate, why aren't you? Perhaps just an attempt to reduce money spent on the electric bill?