Regarding the submitter's premises about the inherent handicap of public education as a given: have you ever wondered why many countries do much better than the US with their own public education systems? Why is it that the US is the only country in which the many of the elite are opposed to public education?
Also, why should a person have to go to college to be able to get out of the working poor bracket, not to mention raise a family? The US has one of the highest percentages of college degrees per capita, yet also the highest disparity between the upper and lower income deciles and lowest class mobility (upwards) in the industrialized world.
"seeing" something requires the object visualized to be larger than 480nm (480*10^-9 meters) the wavlength of the shortest visible lightwave. Atoms are some 10,000 times smaller than that. So you need a shorter wavlength radiation, and some form of detection mechanism which is not the human retina.
X-rays have a wavelength approaching 10^-10 of a meter. SO that should work to see small molecules and atoms. But we do not have lens to focus X-rays. What scientists do, is use a diffraction pattern to reconstruct the shape of a molecule bombarded with X-rays. What they reconstruct is an "atom density map": those bits of the molecule which diffract X-rays, and thus have something denser than vaccum in them: at atom. This can be a long and arduous process, especially when dealing with larger molecules like proteins or DNA, but it is done quite routinely nowadays, with the shapes of some 30,000 protein molecules already determined in this fashion, and many many smaller molecules. The process is called X-ray crystallography, and I bet wikipedia has something good about it.
HTH:)
This is the submitter... and I agree with phaze that I should have least put quotes around "IP". Yes, intellectual property is a deliberately confusing term which goes contrary to everything open source stands for. My redeeming point, if any, is that I wanted to show how even the staunchest suppporters of the "IP" term are using open source tools.
As a grad student, for financial reasons I'd given up on the idea of publishing in open-access journals until I get my Ph.D and hopefully a position at a university that would pay the publication fees
I don't know what field you are Ph.D.-ing in, but in most science fields it is extremely rare that a grad student publishes anything on her own. Research takes place in a lab, and the principal investigator who runs the lab and is often the student's advisor is a co-author. The PI also springs for publication funds, which normally run upwards of 500$ in many high impact journals, regardless of copyright license. Oh, and that money comes out of the PIs research grant, universities normally only pay researcher's salary, lab space, and common equipment.
There is usually a non-payment period of 1 year. Also, some countries have a treaty with the US. So if she is paying in her home country, she's exempt here until she gets her Green Card, or until a certain number of years pass, YMMV.
Many J-1s pay social security after 2 calendar years in the. Also, those which are not lucky enough to be under a tax treaty pay full Federal taxes, and they are not eligible to file for dependents, low income, or anything else on the W-2.
Don't forget that most H1-B's were educated overseas, so they enter the US labor pool qualified at the expense of taxpayers from another country. When calculating whethter H1-Bs hurt or help the US economy, this should be factored in as well.
Biology really isn't anything more than the summation of a very large number of chemical processes. It's nothing more than applied chemistry.
Maybe molecular biology & biochemistry are. How does your statement apply to: * Systematics & Taxonomy * Population biology / Pop. genetics * Developmental biology . . and it goes on.
Certain techniques involving chemical tools are used in Biology. But to say that biology is "applied chemistry" is like saying that physics is applied mathematics.
Here
Ciechanover & Herhsko got the Lasker prize for ubiquitination a few years back. Getting the Lasker prize is a pretty good indicator for receiving the Noble as well.
I am the poster, and you are right, it's over a month old. However, I only got wind of this now, and it seemed still relevant & interesting. As far as I know, this was not covered previously on/.
Both of you are wrong. In Hebrew and in Arabic, letters & words are right->left, numbers left->right. That is, the 10^0 position is rightmost, to its left the 10^1, etc.
However, dates in Arabic are commonly right->left, (yyyy/mm/dd) but time notation is left->right (hh:mm).
Does this not imply that all other gods are false?
Yes, the other gods are false.
If they are false doesn't that make them inferior and yours superior?
No, it makes mine true and the others fictitious.
As for not prosletyzing and reference for the distain that some Jews had for other groups of people you have only to see the story of Jonah and the big fish
The book of Jonah does not say Jonah was not attempting to convert the Ninvehites to Judaism.
It only says that he was ordered to preach morality to them. (Ostensibly, to uphold them to the seven Noachite edicts --those which according to Judaism are incumbent upon all people-- but that's an interpretation).
Regardless, you do not adress the other points I made
Actually, it's because I pretty much agree with the major points you argue. I was only going through a few errors I found along the way to you making your main argument.
[if] the books are full of hyperbolie and nationalistic propaganda as you profess they are
I never did. You're confusing me with the original poster on this thread.
You have got to be kidding me! Triumpahlist means that you believe your religion to be superior to all others.
False. Judaic credo in that respect is that there is a single God, and that that he provided a set of edicts, which should be followed. Abiding by these edicts is Jewish belief. It is a burden, not a right. It does not entail superiority.
The Jews not only believed this, but believed that they as a race were superior as well (and in many ways are)
Again wrong. Anyone can convert to Judaism, so the racial issue you are putting here is bogus. Judaism is a nation and a religion, which can be joined. The best example is the sory of the mass conversion of the "Erev-rav" -- non Hebrews the joined the Hebrews in the Exodus.
Read the Old Testament closely and you will realize that the Jews were punished for NOT proselytizing, and the history you speak of is rife with examples of the failings of the Jews and their leaders.
Nope. According to the canonical prophets, the Kingdom of Israel (the 10 tribes) were exiled by Assyria and vanished for heresies. The population of the Kingdom of Judea was placed in the Babylonian exile because of their sins against God and fellow man. I urge you to quote a single verse which supports that Judea or Israel were punished for not prosletyzing.
In many Mediterranian countries, water is heated using solar panels which utilize the greenhouse effect. The idea is that blackened water pipes are running through a glass panel installed on the roof, facing south. Hot water is stored in a tank. In summer, and in many winter months, this removes the need for heating water electrically. Coming to a sunny part of the US, I was pretty astonished not to find that. Well, at least not in Cali. Makes you wonder why how much this new development will be implemented.
gacp obviously has an axe to grind. A few comments:
You are caught up in the semantics of the word "review", which is in American. In English, the term is "refereeing". And yes, it is for quality control purposes, as you pointed out. Inundation is a problem, and even now it is tough to keep abreast of all literature in most fields.
You are right: anti-dogmatic theses do suffer, the prion theory being a good case in point. But Stanley Prusiner did get the Nobel in the long run, did he not?
Peer review is not performed by editors, as you pointed out, but by actual peers: scientists from the same field. Anonymizing reviews is the only way for the reviewers to speak their minds without fear of possible retribution from the authors. The converse is that reviewers with an axe to grind with the author (or her theory) can abuse this privilege. There are some checks and balances for that: authors get to pre-remove certain reviewers, normally papers are reviewed by no less than three peers. Authors may rebut decisions.
Papers are commented upon post-publication. There is even a website for that in the Life Sciences
Faculty of 1000. This mechanism enables to publicize "hidded jewels"
To paraphrase Winston Chuchill: Peer review is the worst form of scientific publication, except for all those others that have been tried.
Quite true. I came to the US for two years for postdoctoral training. One of the reasons was the number of international conferences held here. Now all people talk about in my institute is moving well-established US conferences to Canada, and in some cases to Europe. Keynote speakers are reluctant to come since they do not want to spend the time and energy required to obtain a visa from a US consulate. This usually involves loss of 1-2 workdays, sitting all day in a consulate building, and being treated rudely by consular officers. If those scientists want to bring their families, they have to subject their spouses, and sometimes their children to the same ordeal. Among the younger scientific generation, many non-American students and postdcos are denied entry visas. Conferences are moved out of the US simply for failing to achive "critical mass".
Slashdot Mirror
BTW, My original headline was "Norwegian UV, lovely plumage"
Also, why should a person have to go to college to be able to get out of the working poor bracket, not to mention raise a family? The US has one of the highest percentages of college degrees per capita, yet also the highest disparity between the upper and lower income deciles and lowest class mobility (upwards) in the industrialized world.
PLoS Biology has an impact factor of 13.9. What else do you need?
"seeing" something requires the object visualized to be larger than 480nm (480*10^-9 meters) the wavlength of the shortest visible lightwave. Atoms are some 10,000 times smaller than that. So you need a shorter wavlength radiation, and some form of detection mechanism which is not the human retina. X-rays have a wavelength approaching 10^-10 of a meter. SO that should work to see small molecules and atoms. But we do not have lens to focus X-rays. What scientists do, is use a diffraction pattern to reconstruct the shape of a molecule bombarded with X-rays. What they reconstruct is an "atom density map": those bits of the molecule which diffract X-rays, and thus have something denser than vaccum in them: at atom. This can be a long and arduous process, especially when dealing with larger molecules like proteins or DNA, but it is done quite routinely nowadays, with the shapes of some 30,000 protein molecules already determined in this fashion, and many many smaller molecules. The process is called X-ray crystallography, and I bet wikipedia has something good about it. HTH :)
This is the submitter... and I agree with phaze that I should have least put quotes around "IP". Yes, intellectual property is a deliberately confusing term which goes contrary to everything open source stands for. My redeeming point, if any, is that I wanted to show how even the staunchest suppporters of the "IP" term are using open source tools.
I don't know what field you are Ph.D.-ing in, but in most science fields it is extremely rare that a grad student publishes anything on her own. Research takes place in a lab, and the principal investigator who runs the lab and is often the student's advisor is a co-author. The PI also springs for publication funds, which normally run upwards of 500$ in many high impact journals, regardless of copyright license. Oh, and that money comes out of the PIs research grant, universities normally only pay researcher's salary, lab space, and common equipment.
There is usually a non-payment period of 1 year. Also, some countries have a treaty with the US. So if she is paying in her home country, she's exempt here until she gets her Green Card, or until a certain number of years pass, YMMV.
Many J-1s pay social security after 2 calendar years in the. Also, those which are not lucky enough to be under a tax treaty pay full Federal taxes, and they are not eligible to file for dependents, low income, or anything else on the W-2.
Don't forget that most H1-B's were educated overseas, so they enter the US labor pool qualified at the expense of taxpayers from another country. When calculating whethter H1-Bs hurt or help the US economy, this should be factored in as well.
Biology really isn't anything more than the summation of a very large number of chemical processes. It's nothing more than applied chemistry.
Maybe molecular biology & biochemistry are. How does your statement apply to:
* Systematics & Taxonomy
* Population biology / Pop. genetics
* Developmental biology
.
.
and it goes on.
Certain techniques involving chemical tools are used in Biology. But to say that biology is "applied chemistry" is like saying that physics is applied mathematics.
Actually, 2/3 of the prize go to Technion researchers.
Here Ciechanover & Herhsko got the Lasker prize for ubiquitination a few years back. Getting the Lasker prize is a pretty good indicator for receiving the Noble as well.
I am surprised that no metion was made yet of the obvious Richard Daley
RTFA'd, saw the movies. Where does it say Linux?
I am the poster, and you are right, it's over a month old. However, I only got wind of this now, and it seemed still relevant & interesting. As far as I know, this was not covered previously on /.
Both of you are wrong. In Hebrew and in Arabic, letters & words are right->left, numbers left->right. That is, the 10^0 position is rightmost, to its left the 10^1, etc. However, dates in Arabic are commonly right->left, (yyyy/mm/dd) but time notation is left->right (hh:mm).
How much cornstarch do you need for the Red Sea anyway?
Yes, the other gods are false.
If they are false doesn't that make them inferior and yours superior?
No, it makes mine true and the others fictitious.
As for not prosletyzing and reference for the distain that some Jews had for other groups of people you have only to see the story of Jonah and the big fish
The book of Jonah does not say Jonah was not attempting to convert the Ninvehites to Judaism. It only says that he was ordered to preach morality to them. (Ostensibly, to uphold them to the seven Noachite edicts --those which according to Judaism are incumbent upon all people-- but that's an interpretation).
Regardless, you do not adress the other points I made
Actually, it's because I pretty much agree with the major points you argue. I was only going through a few errors I found along the way to you making your main argument.
[if] the books are full of hyperbolie and nationalistic propaganda as you profess they are
I never did. You're confusing me with the original poster on this thread.
False. Judaic credo in that respect is that there is a single God, and that that he provided a set of edicts, which should be followed. Abiding by these edicts is Jewish belief. It is a burden, not a right. It does not entail superiority.
The Jews not only believed this, but believed that they as a race were superior as well (and in many ways are)
Again wrong. Anyone can convert to Judaism, so the racial issue you are putting here is bogus. Judaism is a nation and a religion, which can be joined. The best example is the sory of the mass conversion of the "Erev-rav" -- non Hebrews the joined the Hebrews in the Exodus.
Read the Old Testament closely and you will realize that the Jews were punished for NOT proselytizing, and the history you speak of is rife with examples of the failings of the Jews and their leaders.
Nope. According to the canonical prophets, the Kingdom of Israel (the 10 tribes) were exiled by Assyria and vanished for heresies. The population of the Kingdom of Judea was placed in the Babylonian exile because of their sins against God and fellow man. I urge you to quote a single verse which supports that Judea or Israel were punished for not prosletyzing.
In many Mediterranian countries, water is heated using solar panels which utilize the greenhouse effect. The idea is that blackened water pipes are running through a glass panel installed on the roof, facing south. Hot water is stored in a tank. In summer, and in many winter months, this removes the need for heating water electrically. Coming to a sunny part of the US, I was pretty astonished not to find that. Well, at least not in Cali. Makes you wonder why how much this new development will be implemented.
Strike W from Windows and you get INDOS, which is an accurate description of the product.
- You are caught up in the semantics of the word "review", which is in American. In English, the term is "refereeing". And yes, it is for quality control purposes, as you pointed out. Inundation is a problem, and even now it is tough to keep abreast of all literature in most fields.
- You are right: anti-dogmatic theses do suffer, the prion theory being a good case in point. But Stanley Prusiner did get the Nobel in the long run, did he not?
- Peer review is not performed by editors, as you pointed out, but by actual peers: scientists from the same field. Anonymizing reviews is the only way for the reviewers to speak their minds without fear of possible retribution from the authors. The converse is that reviewers with an axe to grind with the author (or her theory) can abuse this privilege. There are some checks and balances for that: authors get to pre-remove certain reviewers, normally papers are reviewed by no less than three peers. Authors may rebut decisions.
- Papers are commented upon post-publication. There is even a website for that in the Life Sciences
Faculty of 1000. This mechanism enables to publicize "hidded jewels"
To paraphrase Winston Chuchill: Peer review is the worst form of scientific publication, except for all those others that have been tried.Quite true. I came to the US for two years for postdoctoral training. One of the reasons was the number of international conferences held here. Now all people talk about in my institute is moving well-established US conferences to Canada, and in some cases to Europe. Keynote speakers are reluctant to come since they do not want to spend the time and energy required to obtain a visa from a US consulate. This usually involves loss of 1-2 workdays, sitting all day in a consulate building, and being treated rudely by consular officers. If those scientists want to bring their families, they have to subject their spouses, and sometimes their children to the same ordeal. Among the younger scientific generation, many non-American students and postdcos are denied entry visas. Conferences are moved out of the US simply for failing to achive "critical mass".
I just hope they rememebr to use the USB2.0 for their new keychain disk; access time might be horrible otherwise...
"Tomorrow never comes" Vitalstatistix
"After all... tomorrow is another day" Scarlett O'Hara