Re:Black hole collision - Can you explain this?
on
No Naked Black Holes
·
· Score: 0
According to TFA, the collision releases a massive shockwave of gravitational waves and x-rays equal in some simulations to 14% of the mass of the black hole(s).
Isn't this information from behind/beyond the event horizon?
I've never quite understood how x-rays could 'escape' the event horizon if there is such a thing as an event horizon. Or am I misunderstanding TFA and black holes/x-rays.
Cheers.
Gee, what a shock. The FTC could go after any one of the millions of herbal remedy supplements and late night fat reducer pill infomercials and they choose to go after --- carbon offset providers. Think there is any political calculation going on to try to discredit the environmental movement and anti-global warming science directly or by association?
You can already synch all of your bookmarks across all of your computers if you only used Macs and subscribe to.Mac.
I have 3 Macs linked. I can even access those bookmarks from my Windows computer at work via http
Cheers
You might have filed a motion to submit the transcript on CD rather than by paper copy and saved a few trees and $3,000. Many courts will now allow this, and the 2nd Circuit allowed us to do this recently. In fact, our brief was submitted on CD with hyperlinks to cases and exhibits.
The courts (and particulary young law clerks helping courts) are getting very smart about such things and have been very reasonable in my experience.
The summary states as follows: "Note that this case was decided by a 3-judge panel and thus isn't binding precedent."
Be wary what non-lawyers say. Hopefully noone in a position of authority at a tech company would rely on such a statement without asking a lawyer because this statement is incorrect.
The decision is marked as "published" and appears to be per curiam (meaning all three judges on the panel concurred in the opinion).
This decision therefore currently should be binding precedent within the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit, including the rather large and important state of California. Given that cases are rarely accepted for appeal by the US Supreme Court (assuming it is even appealed) and there probably is no disagreement in another Circuit on thumbails, this decision is likely to remain binding in the 9th Circuit and be useful as persuasive authority in other Circuits around the country.
Now, it is true that the losing party could ask for a rehearing en banc by the full 9th Circuit before seeking an appeal to the US Supreme Court. However, such requests are rarely granted and this decision would be binding unless and until stayed by this 3 judge panel or reversed by the entire 9th Circuit.
(This is not meant as a formal legal analysis, just a general explanation of how these things typically work).
Regards.
Slashdot Mirror
According to TFA, the collision releases a massive shockwave of gravitational waves and x-rays equal in some simulations to 14% of the mass of the black hole(s). Isn't this information from behind/beyond the event horizon? I've never quite understood how x-rays could 'escape' the event horizon if there is such a thing as an event horizon. Or am I misunderstanding TFA and black holes/x-rays. Cheers.
Gee, what a shock. The FTC could go after any one of the millions of herbal remedy supplements and late night fat reducer pill infomercials and they choose to go after --- carbon offset providers. Think there is any political calculation going on to try to discredit the environmental movement and anti-global warming science directly or by association?
No examples of this?
How about all the old programmers brought back to deal with Y2k? I know the Y2k disaster was a bust, but it put a lot of old programmers back to work.
Step 1: Buy a Mac Step 2: Rinse out PC Step 3; Repeat
You can already synch all of your bookmarks across all of your computers if you only used Macs and subscribe to .Mac.
I have 3 Macs linked. I can even access those bookmarks from my Windows computer at work via http
Cheers
You might have filed a motion to submit the transcript on CD rather than by paper copy and saved a few trees and $3,000. Many courts will now allow this, and the 2nd Circuit allowed us to do this recently. In fact, our brief was submitted on CD with hyperlinks to cases and exhibits. The courts (and particulary young law clerks helping courts) are getting very smart about such things and have been very reasonable in my experience.
The summary states as follows: "Note that this case was decided by a 3-judge panel and thus isn't binding precedent." Be wary what non-lawyers say. Hopefully noone in a position of authority at a tech company would rely on such a statement without asking a lawyer because this statement is incorrect. The decision is marked as "published" and appears to be per curiam (meaning all three judges on the panel concurred in the opinion). This decision therefore currently should be binding precedent within the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit, including the rather large and important state of California. Given that cases are rarely accepted for appeal by the US Supreme Court (assuming it is even appealed) and there probably is no disagreement in another Circuit on thumbails, this decision is likely to remain binding in the 9th Circuit and be useful as persuasive authority in other Circuits around the country. Now, it is true that the losing party could ask for a rehearing en banc by the full 9th Circuit before seeking an appeal to the US Supreme Court. However, such requests are rarely granted and this decision would be binding unless and until stayed by this 3 judge panel or reversed by the entire 9th Circuit. (This is not meant as a formal legal analysis, just a general explanation of how these things typically work). Regards.