You're limited by energy loss by coupling to the non-resonant modes, though. That's why amplitude is important, and resonant effects will not "build up" from an arbitrarily small amplitude. The resonance gets the energy into the mode with great efficiency, it doesn't keep it there.
Is it my imagination, or does this proposal only apply for TLDs, like.uk and.jp? I don't see any mention of supporting it for the rest of the domain name. That seems a logical extension, but it's not been announced.
Sure, sure, I won't believe it until I see some DFT and experimental results from some actual physical chemists, I'm just pointing out that this isn't a pie-in-the-sky hypothesis. And absolutely, research this early shouldn't drive policy.
I imagine that the folk at the airport would be given an occupational exposure limit and told to stand behind the emitter when they're not being scanned themselves.
Single-stranded DNA has its information-encoding side exposed and flops around kind of pathetically. Double-stranded DNA sticks the two information-encoding sides together so that they're hidden and inactive, and helps you wind up and store the DNA. However the double strand can "unzip" along a small part of its length to expose two single strands which can go to work.
You can get triple-stranded DNA, but it's not traditionally been thought of as important. Normally the groove for the third strand would be occupied by proteins involved in the function and maintainence of the DNA instead. However it now seems that forming a triple strand in some regions might be important in DNA's control mechanisms too.
The authors aren't concerned about it unzipping the entire DNA strand like string cheese. The process creates local regions of unzipping, which your DNA gains and loses as a matter of course. These unexpectedly-open regions interfere with replication and translation, but your DNA can cope with the the "normal amount", so the question is whether these additional regions are enough to be a problem.
Actually, it's a theoretical explanation for some difficult experimental results. The issue was that some studies suggested that THz radiation would be harmful at any frequency/power range, while others pegged it as only being significant at particular resonant amplitudes or frequencies. It transpires that in the presence of thermal perturbations, you do indeed get some non-specific disruption of the base pairing, which would only be an issue if you had a long enough exposure to actually get a significant thermal perturbation and thus cause a very significant disruption. However there is also a resonant mechanism, at a particular frequency with a critical minimum amplitude, that can immediately cause a significant disruption, without the need to wait for a particularly big thermal perturbation. That's my reading, anyway.
That would depend on the degree. Your DNA's a mess at the best of times from exposure to the normal background of crap, and would be a mess in isolation by its very nature. The body has coping mechanisms: the question is, is this significant enough to pose them problems? The answer, according to this paper's lit review, is "sometimes, at a high enough or sufficiently prolonged level of exposure or at a particular frequency".
Actually, the article states that "THz-radiation can affect biological function, but only under specific conditions, viz. high power, or/and extended exposure, or/and specific THz frequency". At any rate resonant absorbance does not, as a common property, "build up from very small amplitudes" outside of Star Trek. It's a way of getting energy into particular modes of the system, which can ensure you put the energy in the place where it'll do the most good (or bad), not a way of boosting that energy.
I recall there was a force-feedback vest back in the 16-bit console days, which I think was also based on audio (bass, which most gamers' TV rarely reproduced anyway). It wasn't a huge success, in spite (or because) of its USP: a game based on flatulence in which you played ambulant snot.
It was never a "legal requirement". It's Apache licenced, so changes to the original (available) Android source don't have to be added back in. It's to encourage commercial devs to develop "exclusives" like the HTC Sense features. Noncommercials are free to release the source on their modifications, but it's not an obligation.
It's not a music industry group. It's a "society" which shakes down performers on behalf of songwriters. The music publisher actually pays the PRS too, who hand the cash over to the musician who wrote the song in the first place.
Highlighting how consumer internet companies have oversold their capacity could be a benefit, mind you. If people get oversold on flights they get some sort of comeback, maybe people whose internet is unusuable when the sun's up would start to ask for a discount.
You realise that those restrictions are the only reason that the data could be gathered in the first place, right? People won't allow their information to be disclosed at all unless there's some reassurance about what will be done with it. Maybe you should collaborate with somebody who can get access instead of trying to work around it, if only for your own good. It's not good for your career to be known as "the guy who stole all that private medical data and wrote a paper with it". The journals frown upon ethics violations.
It's a trade-off. For trivial tasks like word processing, the performance trade-off is worth the convenience benefit. For the home user's idea of a high-performance-computing task, such as gaming and video watching, the convenience benefit is negligable for the huge performance trade-off.
For real high-performance-computing tasks where purchasing a lot of computing resources for one project might not be justified, again there's a very large convenience benefit to just renting at a distance, which is why mainframes are still in use for scientific research. That's the only example I can think of where it's honestly about power, and it's not what you'd call "cloud computing", if only because that's a term created for home-user consumption.
I don't think anyone pushing to cut down standby power actually thought they'd discovered some shocking new phenomenon hitherto unreported to science. I've never heard it called "phantom power" at any rate: it must be unique to your region.
Slashdot Mirror
You're limited by energy loss by coupling to the non-resonant modes, though. That's why amplitude is important, and resonant effects will not "build up" from an arbitrarily small amplitude. The resonance gets the energy into the mode with great efficiency, it doesn't keep it there.
Is it my imagination, or does this proposal only apply for TLDs, like .uk and .jp? I don't see any mention of supporting it for the rest of the domain name. That seems a logical extension, but it's not been announced.
Sure, sure, I won't believe it until I see some DFT and experimental results from some actual physical chemists, I'm just pointing out that this isn't a pie-in-the-sky hypothesis. And absolutely, research this early shouldn't drive policy.
4-stranded DNA's definitely on the cards. Not sure if those are theoretical or experimental cards though.
I encourage everyone to google 528Hz. What the crap.
I imagine that the folk at the airport would be given an occupational exposure limit and told to stand behind the emitter when they're not being scanned themselves.
Single-stranded DNA has its information-encoding side exposed and flops around kind of pathetically. Double-stranded DNA sticks the two information-encoding sides together so that they're hidden and inactive, and helps you wind up and store the DNA. However the double strand can "unzip" along a small part of its length to expose two single strands which can go to work.
You can get triple-stranded DNA, but it's not traditionally been thought of as important. Normally the groove for the third strand would be occupied by proteins involved in the function and maintainence of the DNA instead. However it now seems that forming a triple strand in some regions might be important in DNA's control mechanisms too.
The authors aren't concerned about it unzipping the entire DNA strand like string cheese. The process creates local regions of unzipping, which your DNA gains and loses as a matter of course. These unexpectedly-open regions interfere with replication and translation, but your DNA can cope with the the "normal amount", so the question is whether these additional regions are enough to be a problem.
It wasn't any better than just measuring the kid's feet, to boot. Shoe-curity theatre.
Actually, it's a theoretical explanation for some difficult experimental results. The issue was that some studies suggested that THz radiation would be harmful at any frequency/power range, while others pegged it as only being significant at particular resonant amplitudes or frequencies. It transpires that in the presence of thermal perturbations, you do indeed get some non-specific disruption of the base pairing, which would only be an issue if you had a long enough exposure to actually get a significant thermal perturbation and thus cause a very significant disruption. However there is also a resonant mechanism, at a particular frequency with a critical minimum amplitude, that can immediately cause a significant disruption, without the need to wait for a particularly big thermal perturbation. That's my reading, anyway.
That would depend on the degree. Your DNA's a mess at the best of times from exposure to the normal background of crap, and would be a mess in isolation by its very nature. The body has coping mechanisms: the question is, is this significant enough to pose them problems? The answer, according to this paper's lit review, is "sometimes, at a high enough or sufficiently prolonged level of exposure or at a particular frequency".
Actually, the article states that "THz-radiation can affect biological function, but only under specific conditions, viz. high power, or/and extended exposure, or/and specific THz frequency". At any rate resonant absorbance does not, as a common property, "build up from very small amplitudes" outside of Star Trek. It's a way of getting energy into particular modes of the system, which can ensure you put the energy in the place where it'll do the most good (or bad), not a way of boosting that energy.
I recall there was a force-feedback vest back in the 16-bit console days, which I think was also based on audio (bass, which most gamers' TV rarely reproduced anyway). It wasn't a huge success, in spite (or because) of its USP: a game based on flatulence in which you played ambulant snot.
And that old favourite, "ban quashed due to bad light".
I suppose it's based on the Linux kernel, isn't it, huh? So it would be. :self-facepalm:
It was never a "legal requirement". It's Apache licenced, so changes to the original (available) Android source don't have to be added back in. It's to encourage commercial devs to develop "exclusives" like the HTC Sense features. Noncommercials are free to release the source on their modifications, but it's not an obligation.
It's not a music industry group. It's a "society" which shakes down performers on behalf of songwriters. The music publisher actually pays the PRS too, who hand the cash over to the musician who wrote the song in the first place.
"most successful Windows upgrade" and "disaster" are not mutually exclusive.
I suppose that's nVidia's idea with the new platform, then: to make graphics rendering genuinely fungible.
Highlighting how consumer internet companies have oversold their capacity could be a benefit, mind you. If people get oversold on flights they get some sort of comeback, maybe people whose internet is unusuable when the sun's up would start to ask for a discount.
Someone has to pay for the computer eventually.
You realise that those restrictions are the only reason that the data could be gathered in the first place, right? People won't allow their information to be disclosed at all unless there's some reassurance about what will be done with it. Maybe you should collaborate with somebody who can get access instead of trying to work around it, if only for your own good. It's not good for your career to be known as "the guy who stole all that private medical data and wrote a paper with it". The journals frown upon ethics violations.
You're right, its meaning is even more specific better-defined than I had laid out. In my haste I made it too general.
It's a trade-off. For trivial tasks like word processing, the performance trade-off is worth the convenience benefit. For the home user's idea of a high-performance-computing task, such as gaming and video watching, the convenience benefit is negligable for the huge performance trade-off.
For real high-performance-computing tasks where purchasing a lot of computing resources for one project might not be justified, again there's a very large convenience benefit to just renting at a distance, which is why mainframes are still in use for scientific research. That's the only example I can think of where it's honestly about power, and it's not what you'd call "cloud computing", if only because that's a term created for home-user consumption.
I don't think anyone pushing to cut down standby power actually thought they'd discovered some shocking new phenomenon hitherto unreported to science. I've never heard it called "phantom power" at any rate: it must be unique to your region.