"Now.. the force of gravity acting on an earthbound object changes relative to the position of the moon. If the moon is directly overhead, its gravitational pull cancels some of the Earth's gravity. If the moon is on the opposite side of the Earth, its gravitational pull adds to that of the Earth.
So.. basic physics tell us that a water balloon dropped from 100' will be moving faster or slower at the time of impact relative to the position of the moon, and that the difference in speeds will be reflected in the size of the splash patterns. The correlations are theoretically indisputable, and each effect can be demonstrated, repeatably, in the lab."
I would be very suspicious of any lab that could show splash patterns that were smaller when the moon was directly overhead than when it is on the opposite side of the Earth, since Newtonian mechanics shows they should be roughly the same. This is for the same reason that high tides occur at both new and full moons.
First of all, most of the Linux kernel does not have the "V2 or later" clause. Even if it did it wouldn't hurt the current device makers: what they are doing is making a device, say a VCR, that uses GPL software but won't run unless it is signed with a secret key. The draft GPLv3 wouldn't allow this, but the user deciding treat the software as being under v3 isn't going to help him after he's bought the crippled hardware in the first place.
In pure water there would be no effect, but in salt water there is a small one. Since the ice excludes salt, when it melts the ocean becomes less dense and raises the sea level slightly. See: http://www.physorg.com/news5619.html/
Centrifugal and Coriolis forces don't exist in an inertial reference frame, but are a necessary addition to real forces to make Newton's laws of motion work in a rotating reference frame. They are not only used by laymen; if it's easier to understand or calculate something in a rotating reference frame then scientists will use them. I've read that the calculation of the Lagrange points is easier done that way.
This quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_force is perhaps instructive:
"Because rotating frames are not vital for understanding mechanics, science teachers often de-emphasize the fictitious centrifugal force that arises in a rotating reference frame. However, in their zeal to stamp out the misunderstanding of the term in this one case, they may try to expunge it from the language entirely."
I think it's a bit funny that every time centrifugal forces are mentioned, someone pops out of the woodwork to complain that they don't exist, but no one seems to mind explanations citing a Coriolis force. Both are pseudo-forces and have equal legitimacy.
My notion of a few in this context would not extend to twelve, so I misunderstood you.
Now I think it likely that you, like some others here, think that the claim of warmest in 1200 years means that that it WAS warmer 1200 years ago, when what the article actually said was that was as far back as the evidence went. There was nothing stated about the climate more that 1200 years ago.
"In fact, it was significantly warmer just a few hundred years ago..."
Well, this whole discussion is about evidence that it hasn't been warmer in the northern hemisphere for the last 1200 years, so if the world was hotter a few hundred years ago it must have been hellacious in the south.
I'm not sure how bad global warming is going to be, but it seems prudent to do what is easy and affordable to mitigate it, such as phasing out coal fired electrical generation.
Yes, it seems Google is a bit evil, but I don't think they're evil enough to take action against, like boycott, so that fact's not going to make much difference in my life.
I was more interest in the statement by Google that they comply with similar (but much more limited) requests by the USA, France and Germany. I'd like some details on just what they would suppress in my searches.
I don't know where Nature got the 15,000 degree number. I've seem reports of measurements of sonoluminescence temperatures of over 100,000 K (from the spectrum, and only a lower limit because the fluid wasn't transparent to high enough frequency light). For the fusion experiments different techniques were used and temperatures of over 100M K were targeted.
The case for fusion here is perhaps not solid yet, but if it is fusion, it's hot.
Even if gold can be extracted as easily as uranium, and I have no idea if that is true, uranium is more than 100 times more abundant in sea water. That would make it unprofitable to extract gold by itself, but it could be an important part of the total revenue stream.
They are actually saying that six gallons of ethanol would cost $7.87, if you removed the subsidies. They are also saying you need to produce six gallons of ethanol to replace one gallon of gasoline, mostly because without any other energy source most of the ethanol produced would have to be used in refining process.
I have no idea if their numbers are accurate, but my gut feeing is that crop land is to too valuable to waste on growing crops for ethanol. Brazil seems to be doing it, but isn't that one reason they are destroying so much rain forest?
Nitrogen oxides are nasty, and strong greenhouse gases, but I don't think they remain in the atmosphere nearly as long as carbon dioxide (I can't find a reference one way or another on the Web). They are readily absorbed by raindrops, which makes them a major cause of acid rain.
I knew a couple who had a genuine Salvador Dali painting. I was looking forward to seeing it, since I liked the pictures of the droopy clocks I'd seen in photographs of his art in books and magazines, but I was very disappointed in the actual painting when I saw it. The painting wasn't a picture of anything, just your typical "modern art" type paint smears.
After talking about it I found out they didn't even like the painting but bought it because Dali was famous and old, and they expected the value to go up after he died. So Dali could put nearly zero effort into his paintings and get big bucks from collectors who only cared about it being a genuine Dali that they could sell for even more bucks after he died.
The name is often the only thing that matters to people.
I think it's more a negative women's bias towards CS. I think most of us try to encourage women to get into CS, but it's still not enough to get them to get them on board.
He didn't say a major volcanic eruption would cause warming, just disruption. The last eruption that I would call major in this sense was Toba, around the time humans were starting to spread. It appears that it caused a larger change in climate than we have yet to, although probably not as long lasting; possibly because the extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere helped to reverse the short term cooling.
By the time we are ready to send people to other stars technology will be so advanced that speculating about it now is just entertainment. I like the idea of just sending the essential information and constructing copies of people in place. This is risk free as far as people here is concerned, since I see no reason to destroy the originals.
I'm not certain, but I think with a much lighter bullet that the shock wave from the gunpowder may not expand fast enough to efficiently transfer energy. The lighter bullet may not go very much faster than the heavy one.
A candle is not hot enough to soften most glass. If you do heat it enough, there is a near vacuum in the tube so it will collapse unless you were working under similar low pressure.
Not much risk, but some. A guy on a bike was killed and (mostly) eaten out here in California a few years ago, and a girl was badly mauled by the same mountain lion.
Slashdot Mirror
"Now.. the force of gravity acting on an earthbound object changes relative to the position of the moon. If the moon is directly overhead, its gravitational pull cancels some of the Earth's gravity. If the moon is on the opposite side of the Earth, its gravitational pull adds to that of the Earth.
So.. basic physics tell us that a water balloon dropped from 100' will be moving faster or slower at the time of impact relative to the position of the moon, and that the difference in speeds will be reflected in the size of the splash patterns. The correlations are theoretically indisputable, and each effect can be demonstrated, repeatably, in the lab."
I would be very suspicious of any lab that could show splash patterns that were smaller when the moon was directly overhead than when it is on the opposite side of the Earth, since Newtonian mechanics shows they should be roughly the same. This is for the same reason that high tides occur at both new and full moons.
First of all, most of the Linux kernel does not have the "V2 or later" clause. Even if it did it wouldn't hurt the current device makers: what they are doing is making a device, say a VCR, that uses GPL software but won't run unless it is signed with a secret key. The draft GPLv3 wouldn't allow this, but the user deciding treat the software as being under v3 isn't going to help him after he's bought the crippled hardware in the first place.
In pure water there would be no effect, but in salt water there is a small one. Since the ice excludes salt, when it melts the ocean becomes less dense and raises the sea level slightly. See: http://www.physorg.com/news5619.html/
Centrifugal and Coriolis forces don't exist in an inertial reference frame, but are a necessary addition to real forces to make Newton's laws of motion work in a rotating reference frame. They are not only used by laymen; if it's easier to understand or calculate something in a rotating reference frame then scientists will use them. I've read that the calculation of the Lagrange points is easier done that way.
This quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_force is perhaps instructive:
"Because rotating frames are not vital for understanding mechanics, science teachers often de-emphasize the fictitious centrifugal force that arises in a rotating reference frame. However, in their zeal to stamp out the misunderstanding of the term in this one case, they may try to expunge it from the language entirely."
I think it's a bit funny that every time centrifugal forces are mentioned, someone pops out of the woodwork to complain that they don't exist, but no one seems to mind explanations citing a Coriolis force. Both are pseudo-forces and have equal legitimacy.
The main bubble memory device I remember was a 92k bit device from Texas Instruments. I think I recall AT&T using them to store canned phone messages.
My notion of a few in this context would not extend to twelve, so I misunderstood you.
Now I think it likely that you, like some others here, think that the claim of warmest in 1200 years means that that it WAS warmer 1200 years ago, when what the article actually said was that was as far back as the evidence went. There was nothing stated about the climate more that 1200 years ago.
"In fact, it was significantly warmer just a few hundred years ago..."
Well, this whole discussion is about evidence that it hasn't been warmer in the northern hemisphere for the last 1200 years, so if the world was hotter a few hundred years ago it must have been hellacious in the south.
I'm not sure how bad global warming is going to be, but it seems prudent to do what is easy and affordable to mitigate it, such as phasing out coal fired electrical generation.
Now just what would nuclear submarines be doing flying over the south pole? Ok, I guess you could sled them in, but that doesn't sound much easier.
Yes, it seems Google is a bit evil, but I don't think they're evil enough to take action against, like boycott, so that fact's not going to make much difference in my life.
I was more interest in the statement by Google that they comply with similar (but much more limited) requests by the USA, France and Germany. I'd like some details on just what they would suppress in my searches.
I don't know where Nature got the 15,000 degree number. I've seem reports of measurements of sonoluminescence temperatures of over 100,000 K (from the spectrum, and only a lower limit because the fluid wasn't transparent to high enough frequency light). For the fusion experiments different techniques were used and temperatures of over 100M K were targeted.
The case for fusion here is perhaps not solid yet, but if it is fusion, it's hot.
Am I the only one who found that clicking the link didn't work? The paper is the top link on this page:http://www.rpi.edu/~laheyr/laheypub.html
Even if gold can be extracted as easily as uranium, and I have no idea if that is true, uranium is more than 100 times more abundant in sea water. That would make it unprofitable to extract gold by itself, but it could be an important part of the total revenue stream.
They are actually saying that six gallons of ethanol would cost $7.87, if you removed the subsidies. They are also saying you need to produce six gallons of ethanol to replace one gallon of gasoline, mostly because without any other energy source most of the ethanol produced would have to be used in refining process.
I have no idea if their numbers are accurate, but my gut feeing is that crop land is to too valuable to waste on growing crops for ethanol. Brazil seems to be doing it, but isn't that one reason they are destroying so much rain forest?
Nitrogen oxides are nasty, and strong greenhouse gases, but I don't think they remain in the atmosphere nearly as long as carbon dioxide (I can't find a reference one way or another on the Web). They are readily absorbed by raindrops, which makes them a major cause of acid rain.
I like mine too.
I'm really disappointed that RAW support was dropped for the S80, which is otherwise a nice improvement. Not that I'm in the market for a new one yet.
I knew a couple who had a genuine Salvador Dali painting. I was looking forward to seeing it, since I liked the pictures of the droopy clocks I'd seen in photographs of his art in books and magazines, but I was very disappointed in the actual painting when I saw it. The painting wasn't a picture of anything, just your typical "modern art" type paint smears.
After talking about it I found out they didn't even like the painting but bought it because Dali was famous and old, and they expected the value to go up after he died. So Dali could put nearly zero effort into his paintings and get big bucks from collectors who only cared about it being a genuine Dali that they could sell for even more bucks after he died.
The name is often the only thing that matters to people.
Yes, it's called the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic http://mathworld.wolfram.com/FundamentalTheoremofA rithmetic.html
I think it's more a negative women's bias towards CS. I think most of us try to encourage women to get into CS, but it's still not enough to get them to get them on board.
He didn't say a major volcanic eruption would cause warming, just disruption. The last eruption that I would call major in this sense was Toba, around the time humans were starting to spread. It appears that it caused a larger change in climate than we have yet to, although probably not as long lasting; possibly because the extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere helped to reverse the short term cooling.
By the time we are ready to send people to other stars technology will be so advanced that speculating about it now is just entertainment. I like the idea of just sending the essential information and constructing copies of people in place. This is risk free as far as people here is concerned, since I see no reason to destroy the originals.
I'm not certain, but I think with a much lighter bullet that the shock wave from the gunpowder may not expand fast enough to efficiently transfer energy. The lighter bullet may not go very much faster than the heavy one.
A candle is not hot enough to soften most glass. If you do heat it enough, there is a near vacuum in the tube so it will collapse unless you were working under similar low pressure.
No joy...
Not much risk, but some. A guy on a bike was killed and (mostly) eaten out here in California a few years ago, and a girl was badly mauled by the same mountain lion.
"Has there been any positive news about whipped cream's potential health benefits?"
c fm?ContentID=6564
Yes actually, there are reports it may reduce colon cancer. See:
http://www.traill.uiuc.edu/dairynet/paperDisplay.
There is actually a 3684x3684 version (JPEG or TIFF) available if you need it.