If you weren't a lazy fuck you'd open the PDF which addresses a power failure.
I looked at the PDF, and didn't find anything in the paper that addresses a power failure. In fact, searching on "power failure" returns zero results.
I did find this, though:
Catastrophic failure of the Loop can be expected occasionally because of control failure, fatigue,
weather, improper vehicle handling, or major breaks in the sheath. It is important that the ribbon can be
dumped from the track in a way that is not damaging to the structure or to the environment. 1.5×10^15 J is
enough energy to boil 400,000 m of seawater. This is equivalent to 30,000 tons of burning oil, or about
10% of the capacity of a modern supertanker.
For safety reasons, Launch Loops must not be constructed
near populated areas.
...which sounds a lot more like what the lazy fuck was saying than what you're claiming.
Why not compare it with a browser that's been running for a while?
Because comparing a browser that was just started with one that has been running for a while isn't a fair test. Either compare two that have been running the same amount of time, or two that were freshly started, but don't mix and match.:)
I believe there are some serious memory leaks in Firefox, as I've seen it sitting at 250MB with only one tab open.
Then your machine is hosed somehow. I've run Firefox for weeks with no memory issues, and Firefox doesn't have issues freeing memory for me.
Also, the machine I did the test on from earlier has *dropped* down to 24M with a peak of ~35M and four tabs open.
I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I'm simply not seeing *any* memory leak, and in fact, I am seeing the opposite.
The raw size of this discussion is ~130K. When this discussion is rendered in IE it is ~10M. That's the difference.
Other browsers such as IE don't have this problem
I just did a comparision of IE and Firefox with regard to memory usage. I restarted both of them fresh and did some browsing to the same web sites in a single window. After several minutes, the memory usage, peak memory usage, and VM size are the same for both browsers (~30M, ~30M, and ~20M respectively).
I think the problem people are having with memory usage is that they are comparing a tabbed firefox with a single IE window. Try using a single window in Firefox or opening as many windows in IE as you have tabs in Firefox. Also don't try comparing a fresh browser to another browser that has been running for a while (of course the one that has been running a while will use more memory).
I've never had an issue with memory usage in either browser. If your browser is taking up hundreds of MB while only reading slashdot, your system is hosed.
Indeed. My original hypothesis that you were a broken google record was correct.
Looks like my original hypothesis that you are a troll was also correct.
Pluto's radius is not well known. JPL's value of 1137 is given with an error of +/-8, almost one percent. Now extrapolate that estimate while estimating the albedo of said discovered planet, and drawing _conclusions_ that it is bigger.
The lower bound for the size of 2003 UB313 isn't determined by the albedo of Pluto.
Furthermore, a variance in Pluto's diameter of 16 km doesn't invalidate the statements of the discoverer.
Unfortunately, you fail to see the mathematical difference between an "inference" and a "logical equivalence".
Actually, you're the one who seems to be hung up on the concept.
You by no means are an Astronomer, and at best a 3rd rate mathematician. In time, if you spend less time gathering your intellect off the net and more so from study, you just might...
This opprobrium rings hollow coming from someone who makes little effort to understand simple high school physics.
It is universally apparent that your anterior consummately indwells your plenitudinous fundament.
You already know the brown marble is bigger by.1 inch, yet you claim since the polished white marble is brighter it is bigger?
No, I claim that by knowing the distance, albedo, and brightness of the marbles, we can calculate their size. When we measure these quantities and run them through the equations, the brown marble will be shown to be bigger.
Furthermore, if I move that polished white marble up next to the brown one, it gets brighter, right?
Yes, due to the inverse square law.
So by your definition, that polished marble will GROW bigger in diameter.
No, it appears brighter due to the fact that it's closer.
What I'm trying to convey to you is that there is NOT a 1:1 relation between reflectivity and size.
I didn't make that claim.
Maybe if you could provide a link to how these guys actually measure these distances and sizes WITHOUT actually being able to take a tape measure to them (or send a probe)
OMG, are you for real? Did you even try to Google it?
Bigger objects reflect more light than smaller objects made of the same substance.
Objects appear dimmer the further away from the viewer they are.
The reflectivity of Pluto is known (reflects 60% of sunlight).
The size of Pluto is known.
No substance known reflects 100% of the light that hits it.
The orbit of the new object is known.
From this we can calculate the brightness of a perfect mirror the size of Pluto if it were in the new object's orbit.
From observations we know that the object is almost as bright as a Pluto-sized mirror would be at this distance.
Thus, the smallest the object can be is 97% the size of Pluto. Since the object cannot be a perfect mirror, it is bigger than Pluto.
Likewise, the reflectivity of other substances can be tried. If the object is made of snow (90% reflectivity) it will be 2% larger Pluto, and if the object has the same composition as Pluto it will be 25% larger than Pluto.
I would try and hire the two of them for some hot firey angry lesbian action. Give them both a whiffle ball bat, tell them there are no rules- hit as hard as you can. because the looser is getting the wiffle ball bat in her ass.
I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter...
This game has slipped down the calendar so many times it isn't even amusing anymore. First it fell from a June 2005 release down to August, then to October, and now it's dropped into next year.
I just hope they don't release it too close to the release of Duke Nukem Forever.
That game is supposed to be amazing, and I'd hate to see Nintendo get scooped.
Yeah, and those aren't engineering degrees. So they shouldn't be calling themselves engineers.
What makes it not an engineering degree?
I have a BSCS from an engineering school. At an engineering school, the curriculum is basically the same for all students up to junior year. For instance, I took the same science and math courses as the rest of the engineering students. I had to take the same number of science courses as the EEs, and more math courses than the EEs. Some of the more advanced courses are also the same for CS as they are for EE, so some of the courses I took were also EE courses and taught by EE professors. I was, of course, required to take a course in software engineering. In addition, I also had to take a course on the social implications of software engineering, which is something the other engineering disciplines did not have a course comparable to.
So why is my degree not an engineering degree?
I still don't call myself an engineer. Back off man, I'm a scientist.
Slashdot Mirror
I looked at the PDF, and didn't find anything in the paper that addresses a power failure. In fact, searching on "power failure" returns zero results.
I did find this, though:
Because comparing a browser that was just started with one that has been running for a while isn't a fair test. Either compare two that have been running the same amount of time, or two that were freshly started, but don't mix and match. :)
I believe there are some serious memory leaks in Firefox, as I've seen it sitting at 250MB with only one tab open.
Then your machine is hosed somehow. I've run Firefox for weeks with no memory issues, and Firefox doesn't have issues freeing memory for me.
Also, the machine I did the test on from earlier has *dropped* down to 24M with a peak of ~35M and four tabs open.
I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I'm simply not seeing *any* memory leak, and in fact, I am seeing the opposite.
You don't really need the "S".
Now, I know what you're thinking. You're thinking I'm going reuse the tired meme of, "there are no women on Slashdot".
However, you'd be wrong...
It's actually because all the female moderators have a wonderful sense of humor.
They're also all worldly, erudite, perspicacious, compassionate, shockingly beautiful, and, "really have it together".
(+1, Insightful?)
The raw size of this discussion is ~130K. When this discussion is rendered in IE it is ~10M. That's the difference.
Other browsers such as IE don't have this problem
I just did a comparision of IE and Firefox with regard to memory usage. I restarted both of them fresh and did some browsing to the same web sites in a single window. After several minutes, the memory usage, peak memory usage, and VM size are the same for both browsers (~30M, ~30M, and ~20M respectively).
I think the problem people are having with memory usage is that they are comparing a tabbed firefox with a single IE window. Try using a single window in Firefox or opening as many windows in IE as you have tabs in Firefox. Also don't try comparing a fresh browser to another browser that has been running for a while (of course the one that has been running a while will use more memory).
I've never had an issue with memory usage in either browser. If your browser is taking up hundreds of MB while only reading slashdot, your system is hosed.
Hey, that's a good reason not to get TiVo... ;)
Looks like my original hypothesis that you are a troll was also correct.
Pluto's radius is not well known. JPL's value of 1137 is given with an error of +/-8, almost one percent. Now extrapolate that estimate while estimating the albedo of said discovered planet, and drawing _conclusions_ that it is bigger.
The lower bound for the size of 2003 UB313 isn't determined by the albedo of Pluto.
Furthermore, a variance in Pluto's diameter of 16 km doesn't invalidate the statements of the discoverer.
Unfortunately, you fail to see the mathematical difference between an "inference" and a "logical equivalence".
Actually, you're the one who seems to be hung up on the concept.
You by no means are an Astronomer, and at best a 3rd rate mathematician. In time, if you spend less time gathering your intellect off the net and more so from study, you just might...
This opprobrium rings hollow coming from someone who makes little effort to understand simple high school physics.
It is universally apparent that your anterior consummately indwells your plenitudinous fundament.
Pluto is 2274 km in diameter. You can get the estimate of the diameter of 2003 UB313 by:
- Getting the distances from Earth and the Sun.
- Getting the magnitudes from the discoverer's paper.
- Using these equations.
The smallest size calculated with this method is 2193 km (i.e. 96% the diameter of Pluto).Or, you could just look on the discoverer's page and get 97%.
You already know the brown marble is bigger by .1 inch, yet you claim since the polished white marble is brighter it is bigger?
No, I claim that by knowing the distance, albedo, and brightness of the marbles, we can calculate their size. When we measure these quantities and run them through the equations, the brown marble will be shown to be bigger.
Furthermore, if I move that polished white marble up next to the brown one, it gets brighter, right?
Yes, due to the inverse square law.
So by your definition, that polished marble will GROW bigger in diameter.
No, it appears brighter due to the fact that it's closer.
What I'm trying to convey to you is that there is NOT a 1:1 relation between reflectivity and size.
I didn't make that claim.
Maybe if you could provide a link to how these guys actually measure these distances and sizes WITHOUT actually being able to take a tape measure to them (or send a probe)
OMG, are you for real? Did you even try to Google it?
Given:
From this we can calculate the brightness of a perfect mirror the size of Pluto if it were in the new object's orbit.
From observations we know that the object is almost as bright as a Pluto-sized mirror would be at this distance.
Thus, the smallest the object can be is 97% the size of Pluto. Since the object cannot be a perfect mirror, it is bigger than Pluto.
Likewise, the reflectivity of other substances can be tried. If the object is made of snow (90% reflectivity) it will be 2% larger Pluto, and if the object has the same composition as Pluto it will be 25% larger than Pluto.
No, actually that's not the point.
I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter...
You're thinking of caca.
Kaka means something else.
We all die a little inside when forced to re-install Windows.
But why is this called a Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren?
Fixed linky: dbmail :)
I just hope they don't release it too close to the release of Duke Nukem Forever.
That game is supposed to be amazing, and I'd hate to see Nintendo get scooped.
"You're a happy, fluffy, little sheep."
Okay...
Hmmm, not installed. Okay...
Damn.
What makes it not an engineering degree?
I have a BSCS from an engineering school. At an engineering school, the curriculum is basically the same for all students up to junior year. For instance, I took the same science and math courses as the rest of the engineering students. I had to take the same number of science courses as the EEs, and more math courses than the EEs. Some of the more advanced courses are also the same for CS as they are for EE, so some of the courses I took were also EE courses and taught by EE professors. I was, of course, required to take a course in software engineering. In addition, I also had to take a course on the social implications of software engineering, which is something the other engineering disciplines did not have a course comparable to.
So why is my degree not an engineering degree?
I still don't call myself an engineer. Back off man, I'm a scientist.
Dec. 23, 1975
Where have you been?
Obviously "satire" is a synonym for "troll". Oy, mods on crack.
So what you're saying is that reverse engineering is only just sort of legal.
What happens if you get caught?
Inquiring minds want to know...
</SATIRE>
Yeah, who has hardwood floors?
Everyone who didn't look it up is a cunning linguist.
Hmmm, 50% funny, 50% overrated. Was that one too subtle or too inflammatory for Slashdot?