Rocket fule weighs 17 times as much as as jet fule per unit energy due to the need for osidiser. So you could build a craft that carried a rocket up to mach 10 then have it shoot into space and the rocet would need a lot less fule so it would weigh less so your scramjet would not need as much fule to lift it ect. You end up with a lot of fule savings and jet's tend to be safer than rockets which also helps.
Basicly an air breathing craft that can hit mach 10 would make a great 1st stage for a space craft.
Same speed, and longer distance, means more travel time. Ditto with the "same acceleration" scenario if you assume the same strength to weight ratio instead of the same speed. Square/cube law means that it's hard for the larger person to have the same strength-to-weight ratio as the smaller person, meaning generally lower acceleration, and an even larger time difference (as well as a time difference even for moving the same distance, and for doing things like changing the direction your body is moving). Exceptions exist - level of physical conditioning varies as greatly as skill level between arbitrary individuals - but if you can throw techniques as quickly as your instructor, or change direction as quickly, it represents a very unusual case. Everything I've seen among the people who train at my own dojo bears this out.
What your forgeting is that larger people dont' need to fully extend / use full force. Think of it this way my arm weighs 50% more than you if I acselerate at the same speed as you well my blow would have 50% more kenetic energy than yous so I can either drop blows that are 50% harder or use less of my rang and hit you just as hard but with less aceleration time and and still endup with your level of power.
This is why people thought of me as having being realy fast. My hands where never moving as fast as thers where but I was acselerating almost as fast so I could hold my arms out further from my body and giving me less time between punches. Then again I could still utalise an off balance aponent to hit harder in a real fight but when when sparing I did not have to move my arm much before somone would sit up and take notice that I had made contact.
A small person won't take a large person down in one shot, while the opposite could still happen, but the large person is still going to have considerable trouble landing that one shot, and can easily leave themselves open in the process.
This is the the basic falicy shrue you could take them down in one blow that you would have trouble landing but if you can hit them 5 times in 3 seconds and send them to the mat why would you need to use more force than that. Be faster than they can be and you will not need to hit harder than they do.
In a real fight most people end up injured. While I only have 2years of training in KENPO I have "owned" people with far more training that where either smaller than my 6'2'' or slower than I am. I have fast reflexes and tend to go with the flow in battle, which helps, but all fights lead to injury. Which is the best reason to avoid fighting, sure I can win the average bar fight hands down but a little bad luck and we all go down. Hell I remember one linebacker who only landed one jab to my ribs (seemed like a good idea to get him over extended and I 'knew" it would be ok.) but damm that hurt for days.
PS: Ok yea once I got in a huge argument with a friend of my and he end up pulling out a sword and threatening me so I felt the need to umm aggressively defend my self while humiliating him. Neither of us got hurt but I did restrain him on the floor in such a manor that I could snap his neck had I so chosen. But that's my point once you can demonstrate you are someone not to be fucked with there is little point in beating some one up for the hell of it.
The thing is orbiting the sun at a high rate of speed.
All they need to do is angle sail such that it's acceleration reduces the sail's orbital speed and it will enter a lower orbit.
It would take a while but the best way to get a solar sail out of the sun's gravity well is to give it a vary eliptical orbit and then acsellerate as fast as it can on the last pass by the sun.
1) What will we do with the waste?
It should be reused for fuel. This allows a reactor to get more energy out of less nuclear material, resulting in both reduced cost and waste. The only reason why the US doesn't do this, is the concern over terrorists or spies obtaining bomb-grade materials.
You still end up with waste. See: thermodinamics
2)
100years a long time but it's still finite. If it took 30 years to do a transiton you would only have 30 years before you would need to do the next one. And even less when you take into act of increasing energy needs over time. See: China/India
Hmm I always thought of Zen Buddhism as: "All things are as they are."
The past and the present are STILL linked but look at the world as it is now not though history's lens nor though your fears of tomorrow.
If a berry tastes sweet it tastes sweet it is sweet which is unchanged by your upcoming death. You may have just watched your family die in a horrific slaughter but should still enjoy the next sunset.
Zen Buddhism is a peasant or soldiers philosophy; a way of dealing with horrific suffering while promoting a passive lifestyle.
"If your Cray takes an hour to transfer the code and data to the machine, a minute to run the program, and another hour to transfer the results back, then there's no need for a computer that can calculate in a minute. You could run the problem on a machine that can calculate in 121 minutes, and have your answer just as fast."
"Irrelevant. No matter what algorithm, iterative or not, it takes time to finish the entire calculation. My example is not refuted."
If you need to wait for a download to finish to start your computation and one machine takes 1 min to do that computation and the other takes 121 min to do that calculation then it's 60 + 1 + 60 vs 60 + 121 + 60 or
121 vs 241
Now if you where going to re encode say a DVD you might end up with something like super computer takes 60min to download + 1 min + do calculation but upload occures at the same time as download so it ends up as 62min or so. vs 121 min to do the calculation and 1 min overhead for the network but you get the final results in 121 min.
I was just pointing out that iterative calculations change the way you compute the effect the network has on your responce time.
the shannon limit for fiber is nut's from:http://www.packet.cc/larry-news/ICMosiac.htm
There is some controversy over the Shannon limit for the capacity of a fiber, but experts agree that there is a limit to the total bandwidth we will be able to achieve in a fiber, no matter how DWDM divides the channel. Current estimates of this limit range from 10 to 100 terabits per second (Tbps).
Although I read somewhere where 512bit's where sent over 1 mile of fiber in a nano pico second (10 ^ -21) which works out to 512 000 000 000 TeraBits per second which is INSANE. But this is from memory and I have yet to locate that again.
Not if you doing an iterative calulation. AKA add the average value to every cell in the table. At which point you can't start adding till you have the average.
I was coding in Pascal today. But as near as I can tell there are only 100 or so people in the US doing real MAC OS work with it. Hell I am using an unsupported hack to compile this Pascal code (there are some people using an open source compiler though) so it's not much of a market for it. But, I know several people who use it for low level coding, as it's easy to write a compiler for it for any given chip. Most of these people then go through the fairly clean ASM code and optimize it as needed.
I was coding in Pascal today. It's just about the oldest GUI program I know of and it still works. It's a single app that handles a flat file database, a real time system for job dispatching with a great GUI, payroll, redundant backup over the network, job capture ect. And it's still readable after 14 years. Damm to bad Pascal lost out to C/C++.
Options:
1) Nothing
2) Evolutionary junk which might at some point prove usefull aka gills and such.
3) They respond to something that did not effect these mice. AKA some disease.
4) They prefome some function that was not detectable aka sent reseptors.
5) They do somehting else.
there are some signs of 'directed mutation' in single cell life
No, some single cell life forms exchange DNA randomly.
Think of it as a game you want your kids to win so you tell them a stratagy. Now vary soon the onlyone left is people who play exactly the same way you do which is great till the rules change. Think of a pond drying up each summer. Over time you end up with 2 set's of rules set 1: servive summer, set 2: reperduce fast. Each will win in there time but nither win's over time. Now what if out of every 4 kids 3 reperduce fast and one is servive summer now that would beat out either set over time. Well exchanging DNA randomly with other cells would work like this. When it's better to reperduce fast then more of the Have kids fast DNA would be around. When it's best to Save energy and not die then more of that DNA would be around. You also get to keep and promote genetic divercity. So you can rember how to deal with extra cobalt in your diet even when it's not strictly needed.
So things might look like there evolving quickly but the truth is they evolved to evolve quickly.
ecoli changes it's dna much faster than random mutation can account for
1st. Mutation rates are not fixed so how can you say there to slow?
2nd. Lot's of single celled organisms exchange DNA fragment's with each other. Which spreads random mutations around a lot faster than simply breading. Which is one of the reasons why antibiotic resistance occurs so quickly.
Perhaps not as much as say the latest new idea in string theory but you should still question it to some degree. Science is a house of cards built on a bead of sand once you stop calling something a theory you enter the realm of faith.
There is no reason to thightly coupple the player and the dealer class. Make an abstact class that inherets from deck that has the draw and hit methods.
That and the only thing you need to change would be the logic in there to hit or not to hit function So you seperate the game play logic from the drawing logic.
As to droping point's that's a little harsh then again something should seperate 95% from 100%. AKA it's anoying to see a few 100's when some of them are shit and you spent a while makeing a much better project.
You forget in a true democracy you can still use a minim number of signatures to get a policy up for popular vote.
Think prop 227: give all gerbals the write to vote or whatever.
The problem with these systems is that people don't feel the need to become informed on enough of the issues for them to do better at these decisions than anyone else.
Let's say you have a bank vault for a front door with 6 locks manufactured by different companies.., Yada Yada
I would break though your wall. Ditto for aircraft security. What's to stop 6 guys with AK 47's driving onto the runway and then boarding an aircraft? Given 3 years to prepare and 20k of supplies I could probably nock down 60% of the eastern seaboards power grid for 24 hours and not get discovered. Granted I feel no need to do so but you gain security though redundancy not giving up freedoms. AKA nothing you do will 100% secure the us power grid but if each home and office had backup power for 2 day's taking down the grid would be meaningless.
If you recall the DC area sniper incident you will recall he was discovered not through detective work but rather a lucky break in finding people sleeping in their car. Now what if you had 200 people doing this once each year on some random day until there demands are met. How many freedoms would you have to give up to find them? They stopped talking to each other years ago and they're just watching the news waiting for you to release some prisoner. Let's say you find a guy well the ballistics will not match his gun for 99.5% of the crimes. And even if you where to bust 50 of them their attacks are still going to continue so what do you do? You live with it or give in that's your only options. What are you going to search every home in the us looking to see if they have a gun in there flower bed's?
While "there's a difference between programming and software engineering" there is going to be a problem in a few years as the US stops producing new programmers so in time will it stop producing new software engineer's. Because without a background in coding to forge there mettle as it where nobody is going to trust them to design software.
If you're asking for proof as a mathematician scientist's deal in measurement's not proof. So replacing proof with evidence we get.
There is no evidence that humans are increasing the temperature of the earth.
Which is False.
The average air temperature over any major city is measurably higher than the surrounding countryside because plants reflect more solar energy than asphalt. Which is some easily verifiable evidence of human's causing an increase in the earth's temperature.
As to the satellite record there is some conflicting data but if you look at ground stations weather balloons and glacial melting the increase in average global temperatures becomes clear.
It's at 1/3 of the population which is fairly stable.
let's say 5% of people under 14 have AIDS.
Mostly from breastfeeding from mothers with AIDS.
And by age 20 70% of the population got AIDS.
What % of the population would die from aids by 35?
VS: starvation, or homiside?
O how times have changed. I had a 240 volvo from 91 lose power assist and I could not tell a difrence unless I was going 5mph or so. Yea it was a little worse but not all that much.
Slashdot Mirror
Rocket fule weighs 17 times as much as as jet fule per unit energy due to the need for osidiser. So you could build a craft that carried a rocket up to mach 10 then have it shoot into space and the rocet would need a lot less fule so it would weigh less so your scramjet would not need as much fule to lift it ect. You end up with a lot of fule savings and jet's tend to be safer than rockets which also helps.
Basicly an air breathing craft that can hit mach 10 would make a great 1st stage for a space craft.
Same speed, and longer distance, means more travel time. Ditto with the "same acceleration" scenario if you assume the same strength to weight ratio instead of the same speed. Square/cube law means that it's hard for the larger person to have the same strength-to-weight ratio as the smaller person, meaning generally lower acceleration, and an even larger time difference (as well as a time difference even for moving the same distance, and for doing things like changing the direction your body is moving). Exceptions exist - level of physical conditioning varies as greatly as skill level between arbitrary individuals - but if you can throw techniques as quickly as your instructor, or change direction as quickly, it represents a very unusual case. Everything I've seen among the people who train at my own dojo bears this out.
What your forgeting is that larger people dont' need to fully extend / use full force. Think of it this way my arm weighs 50% more than you if I acselerate at the same speed as you well my blow would have 50% more kenetic energy than yous so I can either drop blows that are 50% harder or use less of my rang and hit you just as hard but with less aceleration time and and still endup with your level of power.
This is why people thought of me as having being realy fast. My hands where never moving as fast as thers where but I was acselerating almost as fast so I could hold my arms out further from my body and giving me less time between punches. Then again I could still utalise an off balance aponent to hit harder in a real fight but when when sparing I did not have to move my arm much before somone would sit up and take notice that I had made contact.
A small person won't take a large person down in one shot, while the opposite could still happen, but the large person is still going to have considerable trouble landing that one shot, and can easily leave themselves open in the process.
This is the the basic falicy shrue you could take them down in one blow that you would have trouble landing but if you can hit them 5 times in 3 seconds and send them to the mat why would you need to use more force than that. Be faster than they can be and you will not need to hit harder than they do.
In a real fight most people end up injured. While I only have 2years of training in KENPO I have "owned" people with far more training that where either smaller than my 6'2'' or slower than I am. I have fast reflexes and tend to go with the flow in battle, which helps, but all fights lead to injury. Which is the best reason to avoid fighting, sure I can win the average bar fight hands down but a little bad luck and we all go down. Hell I remember one linebacker who only landed one jab to my ribs (seemed like a good idea to get him over extended and I 'knew" it would be ok.) but damm that hurt for days.
PS: Ok yea once I got in a huge argument with a friend of my and he end up pulling out a sword and threatening me so I felt the need to umm aggressively defend my self while humiliating him. Neither of us got hurt but I did restrain him on the floor in such a manor that I could snap his neck had I so chosen. But that's my point once you can demonstrate you are someone not to be fucked with there is little point in beating some one up for the hell of it.
The thing is orbiting the sun at a high rate of speed. All they need to do is angle sail such that it's acceleration reduces the sail's orbital speed and it will enter a lower orbit.
It would take a while but the best way to get a solar sail out of the sun's gravity well is to give it a vary eliptical orbit and then acsellerate as fast as it can on the last pass by the sun.
Why not?
You only need to change 1.5 million votes to change who won. And people seem to be willing to let massave manipulations slide like it's no big deal.
1) What will we do with the waste?
It should be reused for fuel. This allows a reactor to get more energy out of less nuclear material, resulting in both reduced cost and waste. The only reason why the US doesn't do this, is the concern over terrorists or spies obtaining bomb-grade materials.
You still end up with waste. See: thermodinamics
2) 100years a long time but it's still finite. If it took 30 years to do a transiton you would only have 30 years before you would need to do the next one. And even less when you take into act of increasing energy needs over time. See: China/India
Hmm I always thought of Zen Buddhism as: "All things are as they are."
The past and the present are STILL linked but look at the world as it is now not though history's lens nor though your fears of tomorrow.
If a berry tastes sweet it tastes sweet it is sweet which is unchanged by your upcoming death. You may have just watched your family die in a horrific slaughter but should still enjoy the next sunset.
Zen Buddhism is a peasant or soldiers philosophy; a way of dealing with horrific suffering while promoting a passive lifestyle.
"If your Cray takes an hour to transfer the code and data to the machine, a minute to run the program, and another hour to transfer the results back, then there's no need for a computer that can calculate in a minute. You could run the problem on a machine that can calculate in 121 minutes, and have your answer just as fast."
"Irrelevant. No matter what algorithm, iterative or not, it takes time to finish the entire calculation. My example is not refuted."
If you need to wait for a download to finish to start your computation and one machine takes 1 min to do that computation and the other takes 121 min to do that calculation then it's 60 + 1 + 60 vs 60 + 121 + 60 or 121 vs 241
Now if you where going to re encode say a DVD you might end up with something like super computer takes 60min to download + 1 min + do calculation but upload occures at the same time as download so it ends up as 62min or so.
vs 121 min to do the calculation and 1 min overhead for the network but you get the final results in 121 min.
I was just pointing out that iterative calculations change the way you compute the effect the network has on your responce time.
the shannon limit for fiber is nut's from:http://www.packet.cc/larry-news/ICMosiac.htm
There is some controversy over the Shannon limit for the capacity of a fiber, but experts agree that there is a limit to the total bandwidth we will be able to achieve in a fiber, no matter how DWDM divides the channel. Current estimates of this limit range from 10 to 100 terabits per second (Tbps).
Although I read somewhere where 512bit's where sent over 1 mile of fiber in a nano pico second (10 ^ -21) which works out to 512 000 000 000 TeraBits per second which is INSANE. But this is from memory and I have yet to locate that again.
Not if you doing an iterative calulation. AKA add the average value to every cell in the table. At which point you can't start adding till you have the average.
I was coding in Pascal today. But as near as I can tell there are only 100 or so people in the US doing real MAC OS work with it. Hell I am using an unsupported hack to compile this Pascal code (there are some people using an open source compiler though) so it's not much of a market for it. But, I know several people who use it for low level coding, as it's easy to write a compiler for it for any given chip. Most of these people then go through the fairly clean ASM code and optimize it as needed.
I was coding in Pascal today. It's just about the oldest GUI program I know of and it still works. It's a single app that handles a flat file database, a real time system for job dispatching with a great GUI, payroll, redundant backup over the network, job capture ect. And it's still readable after 14 years. Damm to bad Pascal lost out to C/C++.
Options:
1) Nothing
2) Evolutionary junk which might at some point prove usefull aka gills and such.
3) They respond to something that did not effect these mice. AKA some disease.
4) They prefome some function that was not detectable aka sent reseptors.
5) They do somehting else.
there are some signs of 'directed mutation' in single cell life
No, some single cell life forms exchange DNA randomly.
Think of it as a game you want your kids to win so you tell them a stratagy. Now vary soon the onlyone left is people who play exactly the same way you do which is great till the rules change. Think of a pond drying up each summer. Over time you end up with 2 set's of rules set 1: servive summer, set 2: reperduce fast. Each will win in there time but nither win's over time. Now what if out of every 4 kids 3 reperduce fast and one is servive summer now that would beat out either set over time. Well exchanging DNA randomly with other cells would work like this. When it's better to reperduce fast then more of the Have kids fast DNA would be around. When it's best to Save energy and not die then more of that DNA would be around. You also get to keep and promote genetic divercity. So you can rember how to deal with extra cobalt in your diet even when it's not strictly needed.
So things might look like there evolving quickly but the truth is they evolved to evolve quickly.
ecoli changes it's dna much faster than random mutation can account for
1st. Mutation rates are not fixed so how can you say there to slow?
2nd. Lot's of single celled organisms exchange DNA fragment's with each other. Which spreads random mutations around a lot faster than simply breading. Which is one of the reasons why antibiotic resistance occurs so quickly.
Yes, you should question gravity.
Perhaps not as much as say the latest new idea in string theory but you should still question it to some degree. Science is a house of cards built on a bead of sand once you stop calling something a theory you enter the realm of faith.
I agree with the TA.
There is no reason to thightly coupple the player and the dealer class. Make an abstact class that inherets from deck that has the draw and hit methods.
That and the only thing you need to change would be the logic in there to hit or not to hit function So you seperate the game play logic from the drawing logic.
As to droping point's that's a little harsh then again something should seperate 95% from 100%. AKA it's anoying to see a few 100's when some of them are shit and you spent a while makeing a much better project.
You forget in a true democracy you can still use a minim number of signatures to get a policy up for popular vote.
Think prop 227: give all gerbals the write to vote or whatever.
The problem with these systems is that people don't feel the need to become informed on enough of the issues for them to do better at these decisions than anyone else.
Let's say you have a bank vault for a front door with 6 locks manufactured by different companies.., Yada Yada
I would break though your wall. Ditto for aircraft security. What's to stop 6 guys with AK 47's driving onto the runway and then boarding an aircraft? Given 3 years to prepare and 20k of supplies I could probably nock down 60% of the eastern seaboards power grid for 24 hours and not get discovered. Granted I feel no need to do so but you gain security though redundancy not giving up freedoms. AKA nothing you do will 100% secure the us power grid but if each home and office had backup power for 2 day's taking down the grid would be meaningless.
If you recall the DC area sniper incident you will recall he was discovered not through detective work but rather a lucky break in finding people sleeping in their car. Now what if you had 200 people doing this once each year on some random day until there demands are met. How many freedoms would you have to give up to find them? They stopped talking to each other years ago and they're just watching the news waiting for you to release some prisoner. Let's say you find a guy well the ballistics will not match his gun for 99.5% of the crimes. And even if you where to bust 50 of them their attacks are still going to continue so what do you do? You live with it or give in that's your only options. What are you going to search every home in the us looking to see if they have a gun in there flower bed's?
While "there's a difference between programming and software engineering" there is going to be a problem in a few years as the US stops producing new programmers so in time will it stop producing new software engineer's. Because without a background in coding to forge there mettle as it where nobody is going to trust them to design software.
This sounds cool, but what about mead? I love the stuff but it can take months to find out if the batch is good.
Ahh well some things are worth the wait.
Yes you can it just takes mutation and time after all where do you think the bacteria learned how to glow?
If you're asking for proof as a mathematician scientist's deal in measurement's not proof. So replacing proof with evidence we get.
There is no evidence that humans are increasing the temperature of the earth.
Which is False.
The average air temperature over any major city is measurably higher than the surrounding countryside because plants reflect more solar energy than asphalt. Which is some easily verifiable evidence of human's causing an increase in the earth's temperature.
As to the satellite record there is some conflicting data but if you look at ground stations weather balloons and glacial melting the increase in average global temperatures becomes clear.
It's at 1/3 of the population which is fairly stable. let's say 5% of people under 14 have AIDS. Mostly from breastfeeding from mothers with AIDS. And by age 20 70% of the population got AIDS. What % of the population would die from aids by 35? VS: starvation, or homiside?
O how times have changed. I had a 240 volvo from 91 lose power assist and I could not tell a difrence unless I was going 5mph or so. Yea it was a little worse but not all that much.