This would be why the aircraft have external antennae for that sort of thing. The metal fuselage blocks signals, and you can't really depend on data coming in the windows.
That little vertical airfoil mid-dorsal on the aircraft? It's an antenna.
I've read TFA, and re-read it twice. At no point does anyone other than the writer of the article refer to the formula as a "law." The writer, a journalist, will use jargon colloquially, not in the way a scientist would. The only time the physicist uses the word "law" is when he opines that the possibility of rewriting Newton's formulation (or Einstein's, take your pick) for the force of gravity has always existed. That's it. He doesn't claim to have a new "law" of anything--just a formula based on a theory--and it is certainly testable.
"We have created a new formula for gravity which we call 'the simple formula', and which is actually a refinement of Milgrom's and Bekenstein's. It is consistent with galaxy data so far, and if its predictions are further verified for solar system and cosmology, it could solve the Dark Matter mystery. We may be able to answer common questions such as whether Einstein's theory of gravity is right and whether the so-called Dark Matter actually exists".
They're already comparing the predictions of their formula to existing data, and expect to perform more comparisons. That sounds like a theory to me, because there's lots and lots of objects in the Universe that can be measured. If the new formulation correctly predicts the values before they're measured, and if the whole caboodle can be reproduced by anyone calculating some predictions and then making measurements, where's your complaint?
My crank-o-meter is sitting on zero. My "you're cranky" meter is hitting about 50% on the scale, though.
He's not sure. He says that the material he's worked up might not be quite correct, and could need refinement. He wants to put the work before others in the scientific community so that they can inspect it, work with it, and provide feedback. If it works, he says, we'll have moved forward, but he freely admits that it might not be the right answer.
That, ladies and germs, is science. That's how you tell the crackpots from the professionals. That's what separates the good guys from the Time Cube-style guys.
I wonder if he'll accept my invitation to dinner. We'll have cake.
I just left messages with both Intel and Skype regarding how, thanks to this deal, I'll no longer be buying, using, or recommending their respective products. (Okay, I wasn't recommending Intel anyway, but they didn't know that.)
Direct feedback works, and few things are more compelling than a looming tide of negative brand image. I suggest everyone else write in and do the same; the sites have clearly-marked contact links.
I'm still not convinced a pure democracy (as opposed to a republic) makes sense politically, but it sure makes sense economically. Let the rat bastards hear you. It'll matter.
I'm not sure I follow that logic. The First Amendment primarily defends political speech, but has been reinterpreted over the years to include just about anything you'd want to say. (Not that it covers libel, slander, assault, or exhortation to murder, because those are illegal under a different standard.) I'm not going to go into that right now, though.
To state that the First Amendment doesn't cover radio or TV or blogs because such media were not available 200-ish years ago is missing the point. The First Amendment protects content, not the medium of transmission of that content. The Founding Fathers didn't have audio recordings, either, but only the completely fatuous would suggest that political content in a recorded speech isn't covered by the First Amendment. If the original speech was protected, then the recording is also protected. Likewise, content in a blog is protected, and so on.
Don't confuse deceleration (a decline in the rate at which expansion occurs) with contraction (the universe growing smaller in size). The universe has continued to expand since the Big Bang, but the rate of expansion appears to have varied over time, and currently appears to be in an accelerating mode for about the last four billion years.
I believe the alternative explanation is that the scientists involved would rather invent boojums than invest in a thorough study of General Relativity.
The case for Elvis being alive has also been built for several decades. There is a mountain of evidence that also needs an alternative explanation. My guess is that explanation is stupidity, as the major proponent theorists are Wal-Mart shoppers.
If, for some God-forsaken reason, Linux had become the pre-eminent operating system, then my dad wouldn't have a computer. Most people wouldn't. The prices of hardware would still be sky-high, and there wouldn't be a Wikipedia or Amazon.com. Do you think Joe Average is going to be able to manage a computer when every software installation involves downloading source, inspecting it for bugs and backdoors, then compiling it?
The Linux priesthood is the modern-day equivalent of the pre-millenial (that is, year 1,000) Catholic Church, or the Pharisees of Jesus' time.
I'd be exactly where I am now--a comedic genius who wrote a joke reply based on the Open Source movement, clearly intended as a satiric/ironic aside on the article in question.
Looks like all of those rumors about Continental Europe going through a humor drought are true. Quick, someone call the Red Cross and get some humor shipped to Europe right now! Mobilize the U.N.! Get some hot water, clean towels, and iodine and...no, wait, that's the thing when someone is giving birth. Never mind that last thing.
This wouldn't even be an issue if we had Open Source PINs.
If they weren't secret, then it wouldn't matter how they were delivered. They could even be delivered on a large banner pulled by a 1950's-era tail-dragger Piper aircraft.
I mean, seriously, they're called (P)ersonal Identification Numbers, not (S)ecret Identification Numbers.
I'm going over to SourceForge right now to start the project. Anyone coming with me? (If someone else drives, I call shotgun!)
You know, 60 years after the fact, such recriminations are useless. In fact, they just border on the petty and pointless. It's like a little sister whining about some pony she didn't get on her 12th birthday.
And, as far as it goes, consider that we didn't start the damned war. Were the Axis powers somehow not evil for starting the war? If you're a combatant in a war, your job is to win. By whatever means necessary, and, of course, by inflicting as much damage as possible.
It isn't chess, it isn't football, and it isn't goddamned tiddley-winks. It's war, it's not pretty, and it wasn't intended to be pretty.
It's about time the soc-lib contingent threw away the Nintendo cartridges and started to grow up just a little.
Hate to point this out, but that article is flawed, flawed, flawed.
To begin: Wolfgang Pauli postulated the neutrino, not Einstein.
Next: Whatever one concludes about the validity of Eddington's solar eclipse experiment, the predictions of General Relativity have been tested and proved out in hundreds, if not thousands, of repeatable and rigorous experiments since then.
And Next:
The physics community is also supported by a three-legged stool. The first leg is Einstein's physics. The second leg is cold fusion. The third leg is autodynamics. The overriding problem with a three-legged stool is that if only one leg is sawed off, the stool collapses. There are at least three very serious disciplines where it is predictable that physics may collapse.
This quote falls somewhere between the irrelevant and a non-sequitur. Thanks for sharing man--but what does it mean? No physicist takes cold fusion seriously, and autodynamics is a competing theory to General Relativity, for which Richard Moody, Jr. is clearly a shill.
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter whom it was that provided the first, or the first accurate, derivation of e=mc^2. It could have been Einstein, Poincare', or William goddamn Shakespeare, for all I care. What matters is that both Special and General Relativity have withstood an awful lot of testing over the last century, and stood up well under that onslaught.
The autodynamics camp also seems to believe that Special Relativity is used in radioactive decay calculations, and I could have sworn that Quantum/Statistical Mechanics holds sway there....
Yeah, there's no way that could happen unless it was a tube like those used in an oscilloscope. It's just not possible to manually/programmatically direct the beams on a monitor or television, because they're inherently raster-scanning devices.
Slashdot Mirror
That little vertical airfoil mid-dorsal on the aircraft? It's an antenna.
Daggone corner-cutters.
They're already comparing the predictions of their formula to existing data, and expect to perform more comparisons. That sounds like a theory to me, because there's lots and lots of objects in the Universe that can be measured. If the new formulation correctly predicts the values before they're measured, and if the whole caboodle can be reproduced by anyone calculating some predictions and then making measurements, where's your complaint?
My crank-o-meter is sitting on zero. My "you're cranky" meter is hitting about 50% on the scale, though.
That, ladies and germs, is science. That's how you tell the crackpots from the professionals. That's what separates the good guys from the Time Cube-style guys.
I wonder if he'll accept my invitation to dinner. We'll have cake.
Direct feedback works, and few things are more compelling than a looming tide of negative brand image. I suggest everyone else write in and do the same; the sites have clearly-marked contact links.
I'm still not convinced a pure democracy (as opposed to a republic) makes sense politically, but it sure makes sense economically. Let the rat bastards hear you. It'll matter.
ALM products give middle-managers wet dreams, mostly. Other than that, nobody really knows what the hell they're for.
To state that the First Amendment doesn't cover radio or TV or blogs because such media were not available 200-ish years ago is missing the point. The First Amendment protects content, not the medium of transmission of that content. The Founding Fathers didn't have audio recordings, either, but only the completely fatuous would suggest that political content in a recorded speech isn't covered by the First Amendment. If the original speech was protected, then the recording is also protected. Likewise, content in a blog is protected, and so on.
And yes, IANAL, if it makes a difference.
Don't confuse deceleration (a decline in the rate at which expansion occurs) with contraction (the universe growing smaller in size). The universe has continued to expand since the Big Bang, but the rate of expansion appears to have varied over time, and currently appears to be in an accelerating mode for about the last four billion years.
The case for Elvis being alive has also been built for several decades. There is a mountain of evidence that also needs an alternative explanation. My guess is that explanation is stupidity, as the major proponent theorists are Wal-Mart shoppers.
???
How about--the whole time?
What a friggin' day to have no Mod points available.
It's the end of the world as we know it....
Visio, visio--powerpoint PCX GIMP tar c++ RAM. Outlook? Gigahertz!
A computer IS a CD player, bitch.
It's also a DVD player.
It's also (in some ways) a photo-copier.
Not to mention a print shop.
Mine (which happens to be properly equipped) is also a television.
A computer can be a radio.
My mom's computer is also a recipe box.
You know, I don't think Tommmi really gets it.
On a couple of levels, probably.
If, for some God-forsaken reason, Linux had become the pre-eminent operating system, then my dad wouldn't have a computer. Most people wouldn't. The prices of hardware would still be sky-high, and there wouldn't be a Wikipedia or Amazon.com. Do you think Joe Average is going to be able to manage a computer when every software installation involves downloading source, inspecting it for bugs and backdoors, then compiling it?
The Linux priesthood is the modern-day equivalent of the pre-millenial (that is, year 1,000) Catholic Church, or the Pharisees of Jesus' time.
Ya'll need to wake up and smell the bits.
So that makes it 1^5, which is still 1.
If you want to write 10,000, why not just write 10,000? (Geekdom is one thing, readability is another, and better, thing.)
1E5 is ... 1.
Damn.
I guess maybe he was uninformed with regards to the troll dress code.
I'd be exactly where I am now--a comedic genius who wrote a joke reply based on the Open Source movement, clearly intended as a satiric/ironic aside on the article in question.
Looks like all of those rumors about Continental Europe going through a humor drought are true. Quick, someone call the Red Cross and get some humor shipped to Europe right now! Mobilize the U.N.! Get some hot water, clean towels, and iodine and...no, wait, that's the thing when someone is giving birth. Never mind that last thing.
If they weren't secret, then it wouldn't matter how they were delivered. They could even be delivered on a large banner pulled by a 1950's-era tail-dragger Piper aircraft.
I mean, seriously, they're called (P)ersonal Identification Numbers, not (S)ecret Identification Numbers.
I'm going over to SourceForge right now to start the project. Anyone coming with me? (If someone else drives, I call shotgun!)
And, as far as it goes, consider that we didn't start the damned war. Were the Axis powers somehow not evil for starting the war? If you're a combatant in a war, your job is to win. By whatever means necessary, and, of course, by inflicting as much damage as possible.
It isn't chess, it isn't football, and it isn't goddamned tiddley-winks. It's war, it's not pretty, and it wasn't intended to be pretty.
It's about time the soc-lib contingent threw away the Nintendo cartridges and started to grow up just a little.
Yeah, amen to that, brother, I was too. Nice how finally people come around to the right way of doing things.
Well, now it's done.
To begin: Wolfgang Pauli postulated the neutrino, not Einstein.
Next: Whatever one concludes about the validity of Eddington's solar eclipse experiment, the predictions of General Relativity have been tested and proved out in hundreds, if not thousands, of repeatable and rigorous experiments since then.
And Next:
This quote falls somewhere between the irrelevant and a non-sequitur. Thanks for sharing man--but what does it mean? No physicist takes cold fusion seriously, and autodynamics is a competing theory to General Relativity, for which Richard Moody, Jr. is clearly a shill.
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter whom it was that provided the first, or the first accurate, derivation of e=mc^2. It could have been Einstein, Poincare', or William goddamn Shakespeare, for all I care. What matters is that both Special and General Relativity have withstood an awful lot of testing over the last century, and stood up well under that onslaught.
The autodynamics camp also seems to believe that Special Relativity is used in radioactive decay calculations, and I could have sworn that Quantum/Statistical Mechanics holds sway there....