I've done the Paris to Geneva run a couple of times in my car. Once you get into the mountains you can easily keep the same pace as the TGV, if you're willing to drive "snappy".
Then last week i took the TGV for the first time. What really blew me away was the out of Paris bit. I am looking at the cars we are passing when suddenly i see a roadsign that says Paris 118 km, only 25 minutes after leaving Paris.
In my car i would have been lucky to have reached the "periferique" at that point, and would still have a couple of hours left of screaming at what the parisians try to pass off as driving before getting out of paris.;-) (It was during rush hour.)
There is no need for shock belts fencing allready hurts. I have only tried the epee, but you get black and blue all over after a fight. I've even had a burst blood vessel and once i had an open wound through the armor.
The flick, when practiced with an epee can be very painful. I had an opponent who really wanted it to work, I managed to counter each time by attacking his face/neck. This meant that his flick went all the way down my back like a metal whip, it hurt like hell and I had raised welts for a week.
I agree with you that it is a silly sport to watch, but then i do not enjoy watching any kind of sports on tv except maybe rallying. I do find it very fun to practice though.
I think you havent really understood what grid computing is. What you are describing ( someone else's code able to run on your machine when it's idle) is not grid computing it is called cycle-scavenging or when it is using donated computer power Public Resource Computing.
Grid computing is supposed to be usefull for exactly the type of problems you say they are useless for. At least the two i have worked with/on (NORDUgrid and LCG).
The idea is interconnecting supercomputers, so that your specific program, e.g. your Rocket simulation that needs let say 20 closely interconnected CPUs does not have to run on your supercomputer but can be run on any available supercomputer connected to the grid that can supply the hardware your simulation need.
many of the religions of the world do not believe in all-powerfull gods.
In the old celtic religion the gods and man battled over control of ireland, and man won.
In norse mythology gods are mortal, and the god Balder is killed by an arrow. Moreover they are definately not omniscient they are often tricked while dealing with their "evil" counterpart the Giants.
The totally invincible and ompipotent god seems in fact to be restricted to the judeo-christian-islamic religions. Religions which all stem from tribal religions in the dead sea region.
What is so preposterous about the idea of space and matter interacting?
Why is this more or less preposterous than other gravity theories?
Do you find it less preposterous that string theory has 11 or 20 or... dimension, when i can clearly see that there are only 4, and no evidence has yet supported any other claims. (though when the LHC at CERN is turned on we might get it)
>>Stop wasting time on those silly calculations: Gravitational waves do not exist.
Do you have any idea of how science works???
It is impossible to prove a theory, fx GR, but when thousands of scientist all over the world create one experiment after another that has the possibillity of disproving the theory and none of them manages to do so. Your confidence in the theory is greatly increased. Science therefore needs people to test and re-test any theory.
GR has now been tested since it was born almost a 100 years ago, and has been found to fit to observed phenomenae(how do you spell this) with great accuracy (at least in the weak field approximation).
If you have any links or articles about experiments that make GR break down i would very much like to see them?
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
I read this as "because we need a militia to secure a free state, we will not take away the right to bear arms"
Are you still sure of the need of an armed militia to insure the security. Is this really necessary? Many countries in the world are as free or even freer than the US even though thay have no armed militia.
Maybe even the basic premise is flawed. Do you actually need the general population to have the right to bear arms to create a militia. I am not sure you do.
Another thing i don't understand is many americans beleif that the constitution is flawless and must not be changed. Granted it was a well thought out document created by intelligent people. But, it was created around 1800. The world has changed a lot since then both politically and scientifically. They probably had a lot of assumptions for the different articles that are no longer valid. Why should it not be changed? If their reason for putting in fx the 2nd amendment are no longer valid why should it not be removed?
I do not beleive any set of laws can be perfect, and therefore we must not be rigid and insist on keeping them, when we discover them to be incorrect or find that they have flaws.
Personally i do not beleive that everybody should have the right to keep and bear arms. You are off course welcome to disagree. I only have a problem when a progun person justifies it by saying that some 200+ years old amendmendment in his interpretation gives him the right to bear arms.(fifty years ago you could also throw people in concentration camps according to another "constitution"). Who cares? If you disagree then give me a convincing argument why it would be benificial to society to have people running around with guns today. Then we can have a constructive argument.
just my 0.02$
For a totally different system of law try reading Frank Herberts "Dosadi experiment".
I dont think your point of view has any merits, scientist are willing to say if something could or could not happen. The difference is just that they are more aware of the process of stating something and therefore tend to be more reserved.
Most modern scientist are aware that theories change all the time as new data arrive or flaws in old arguments are found.
As for your tobacco argument scientists have always beleived that tobacco smoking was bad for you.
fx.
the danish doctor Simon Paulli published in 1632 an article called "De Tabaci Abiscu" (against the misuse of tobacco). Where he talks about the dangers of smoking tobacco.
tobacco was banned in Bayern and other counties in germany in 1652-3. Because of its danger to the health.
The adictive properties of tobacco was discussed at a meeting at the university of Paris in 1699, by Fagon the Dean of Medicine.
Around 1912 American doctors note an increase in the amount of lung cancers.
1947: The danish doctor Clemmesen compares the increase of lungcancer the last five years with the increase of cigaret sales 20 years before and finds a good correspondence.(20 years because that is the time it takes lung cancer to develop)
1953: the american doctors Graham and Wynder collects the tar of smoked cigarets and put ot on the back of mice, which all develop skin cancer(very similar to lung cancer). Conclusion: 95% of all lung cancers are caused by tobacco.
So the conclusion must be that scientist have claimed tobacco to be unhealthy since it was introduced in Europe.
And it has been proven extremely detrimental to your health for the last 50 years.
So even though the scientist have only been able to prove it for the last 50 years, or have put numbers on it as you put it. They have claimed the danger of tobacco long before they even knew of cancer.
Well, the color of the sky on my planet ranges from black to white over blue yellow red and green. Depending on time of day and year and on the amount of clouds.;-)
For your information Coca-cola, McDonalds and also some non-american multinational companies havent paid taxes in Denmark the last twenty years, probably due to pricefixing. This caused quite a scandal, but nothing could be proved. But it does sound weird that coca-cola and mcDonalds and nestle have only lost money in denmark.
Looking around on the internet i found the energy of a bullet fired by a desert eagle to be around 1200 J. Say i have a hammer weighing 2 kg. To obtain the same energy i would have to swing it at sqrt (1200) = 34 m/s or 120 km/h. I think this is quite possible.
With a heavy hammer like a sledgehammer (10 kg) i would only have to swing it at: sqrt(240) = 55 km/h. This is possible.
I know because i have just torn down a wall with a sledgehammer. On one of my swings i strafed a pipe and lost my grip on the hammer and it went flying through the 10 cm thick wall rebounded on the next wall flew past me in the other direction and landed 2 m behind me. All in all it flew about 7 m and tore down a 20*20*10 cm piece of cement wall. I am very glad it didnt hit me or my friend who was on the other side of the wall.:)
According to a map on legos homepage they have production facilities in Denmark, Schwitzerland, Poland, somewhere on the east coast of north america and japan or korea.
They also have a nice flash animation on how the bricks are made http://www.lego.com/eng/info/default.asp?page=bric ks
When you see the movie with all its links in the chain of production please remember that the minimum wage in Denmark for a person with no education and no union affiliation is about 12$/hour, and pretty much any person in that chain would be entitled to more.
The reason for the high salaries is the income tax, which is about 45% for a low income family.
I am about as low income as you can get. I am on student wellfare(less than ordinary wellfare), and have a 8 hour/week job on a school, and i pay 40% net in tax. also of the wellfare. I postulate the 45% on that background.
I've seen some people saying they do not feel sorry for lego because... specialized bricks.. too expensive. Please remember that denmark is not a big country and we are affected when one of our larger exports fail. Back in 2000 when the last lego crises hit, the taxes in Billund Kommune (the county where lego is situated), had to increase their taxes. A loss of 200 million dollars for the company is a loss of about 40 million dollars in taxes(assuming they could have a comparable profit). That is quite a lot of money to lose for a county of 8700.
And to all the people who have been nagging about the specialisation of pieces. Yes i have to agree i miss the simple bricks too, luckily I also have bags of them in the basement. But i am pretty sure that lego made that move for a reason, the crass commercialisation of our times. I am saddened that that is the way we are moving but there seems to be little we can do about it. It seems to be in keeping with the loss of small specialized shops with craftsmen running them to large supermarkets/superstores (ie wal-mart), where you'll be lucky to actually get bread, when you ask for some sort of bread that would go well with salmon. (this specific example is not from walmart but from a danish supermarket. Yes i am bitter;-))
On a lighter note a couple of friends where over and we where bored when we remembered my old legos in the basement, so hours of fun later we had built a replica of a Blide (a danish siegeweapon) it is only 8" tall but is able to fire a 2-by-4 3 meters up into the air and hit a target ten meters away. (replace meters with yards for the metrically challenged).
As for wether magrethe was queen. She is regarded as a queen of denmark whether you call her husband or not. The manager part is probably better found in her third title of "formynder" and not in "husbond". Besides what else would
you call the sole ruler of a kingdom. She might
have ruled in the name of other persons but she did rule
Yes Erik of Pommerania was a bad king giving rise to the danish expresion "at ga ad Pommern til" meaning that something is going badly.
Frederick the III did not introduce absolutism in Denmark what he introduced was "Eenevold" maybe absolutism is closer than despotism.I did this off the top of my head and I am not a native speaker of the English language, so I do not know the discerning features of those two words.
from Kongeloven af 1665:
I.
Den beste begyndelse till alting er at begynde med Gud. Det forste derfore, som Vi for alting ville udj denne KongeLow allffvaarligen haffve befalet, er: at Voris Effterkommere, Born og Borneborn i tusinde Leed paa Faerne og Morne,
EenevoldsArffveKonger offver danmarck og Norge aere, tiene og dyrcke den eene rette og sande Gud paa den maade og manneer, som hand sig i sit hellige og sande ord aabenbaret haffver, og Voris Christelige Troe og bekiendelse klarligen derom formelder effter den form og maade, som den reen og uforfalsket er bleffven foresatt og fremstillet udj den Augsburgiske confession Aar et tusind fembhundrede og trediffve, og ved samme reene og uforfalskede Christelige Troe holde Landsens Jndbyggere og den vaeldeligen haandhaeffve og beskierme i disse Lande og Riger mot alle Kiettere, Svaermere og Guds bespottere.
Norway was without rigths as a sovereign nation it was ruled as a part of the danish kingdom, but the people were treated as equal (in fact they were treated as the people of one nation).
Call it extensive fires or firestorms, almost the entire northern part of Copenhagen was burned to the ground, including one of the most important churches "Vor Frue Kirke" (church of our lady).
Yes, the cession of Norway was part of the Treaty of Kiel, but the necessity of doing so was because Denmark was bankrupt and the navy had been destroyed.
At the same time(1814) the first danish schoollaw was passed. Requiring that all children(boys and girls) from the age of 7 to the age of confirmation should attend school. This time is therefore often referred to the worst time in danish history by children in school;-)
Harald Blaatand (Bluetooth) was born in 900 died in 987.
He became king of Denmark and Norway in 950.
He was the son of Gorm den gamle(the old) and
father of Sven Tveskaeg (Forkbeard) who ruled england from 1013-1014.
He was the king that converted Denmark to christianity.
As there seem to be a bit of confusion of the different scandinavian languages, here is the ultrashort version of scandinavian history.
ca 900: Scandinavia was filled with vikinks all
speaking old norse. At this point they started
making real kingdoms (norway, sweden and denmark).
1397: the kalmar union all of scandinavia is united under queen Margrethe I.
1512:
sweden leaves the union. Norway and Denmark continues now ruled under the danish king.
1658:Denmark has to give large parts of denmark(southern part of sweden today) and norway to sweden. Because the swedish army is only 20 km from the capital of denmark.
1660:Frederick III induces a royal despotism.
Leaving norway almost without rights in the union.
1807: Denmark has declared itself neutral in the napoleonic wars, but is anyway attacked by the british without a declaration of war, they bomb Copenhagen using the first rockets in warfare killing a third of the population and creating large firestorms.
1813:Denmark is bankrupt and gives Norway to Sweden.
1905: Norway becomes independent of sweden.
This should give some idea of why the scandinavian languages are so close, and why
Norwegian is easiest to understand for both swedes and danes alike.
Does anybody know what tradeoffs if any have
been made to make the scheduler O(1)??
Is it a better algorithm implementing the same scheduling scheme or has the scheme changed??
I mean a O(1) scheduler is extremely easy if you are satisfied with a round robin scheduler:
that is not entirely true it means that for the worst case input, there exist a constant k and a smallest number of processes np where the following equation is fulfilled:
Here is a couple of comments.
First of all denying that there is scientific evidence in favor of global warming as some people here have said is hogwash. There exist plenty of evidence for this, wether it is caused by humans is however debateable.
The danish climate researcher Henrik Svensmark has shown there are other more convincing mechanisms for explaining the temperature variation than human pollution.
H. Svensmark and E. Friis-Christensen, Variation of cosmic ray flux and global cloud coverage - a missing link in solar-climate relationships, J. Atmos. Solar-Terr. Phys., 59, 1225-1232 (1997);
H. Svensmark, Influence of cosmic rays on Earth's climate, Phys. Rev. Lett., 81, 5027 (1998).
Recent research have shown that CO2 might not be the most important gas in global warming, but rather methane and soot are.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/images/climatecu lprit/audio/culprits.ram
Icecore drillings in greenland have shown that the tempearture varies a lot and the global average over the last couple of million years which have been iceages, are 10 K lower than today. An intersting thought is that it might be better with a bit of controlled global warming(think terraforming) rather than another iceage. I live in Denmark and think that it is cold enough as it is.
(for people who understand danish have a look at http://www.glaciology.gfy.ku.dk/)
IAMAPBNAGP (I am a physicist but not a Geophysicist)
I'm all for that flaky european VAT that taxes ebooks, but not p-books.
Unfortunately i live in Denmark where they are both taxed at 25% (everything has VAT in denmark).
So while it is not unfair towards e-books i find it generally unfair against books.
but what can you do.
But i am probably a bit eurocentric.
I think the french spot is good because it is
in europe with some quite strong economies that has been affected as badly by the US recession.
It is also quite close(4:00 hours by tgv ) to the high energy physics research center of CERN(http://www.cern.ch) and the nano tech in Grenoble(the reactor group http://isnwww.in2p3.fr/reacteurs-hybrides/reacteur s-hybrides.html).
Slashdot Mirror
I've done the Paris to Geneva run a couple of times in my car. Once you get into the mountains you can easily keep the same pace as the TGV, if you're willing to drive "snappy".
;-) (It was during rush hour.)
Then last week i took the TGV for the first time. What really blew me away was the out of Paris bit. I am looking at the cars we are passing when suddenly i see a roadsign that says Paris 118 km, only 25 minutes after leaving Paris.
In my car i would have been lucky to have reached the "periferique" at that point, and would still have a couple of hours left of screaming at what the parisians try to pass off as driving before getting out of paris.
There is no need for shock belts fencing allready hurts. I have only tried the epee, but you get black and blue all over after a fight. I've even had a burst blood vessel and once i had an open wound through the armor.
The flick, when practiced with an epee can be very painful. I had an opponent who really wanted it to work, I managed to counter each time by attacking his face/neck. This meant that his flick went all the way down my back like a metal whip, it hurt like hell and I had raised welts for a week.
I agree with you that it is a silly sport to watch, but then i do not enjoy watching any kind of sports on tv except maybe rallying. I do find it very fun to practice though.
I think you havent really understood what grid computing is. What you are describing ( someone else's code able to run on your machine when it's idle) is not grid computing it is called cycle-scavenging or when it is using donated computer power Public Resource Computing.
Grid computing is supposed to be usefull for exactly the type of problems you say they are useless for. At least the two i have worked with/on (NORDUgrid and LCG).
The idea is interconnecting supercomputers, so that your specific program, e.g. your Rocket simulation that needs let say 20 closely interconnected CPUs does not have to run on your supercomputer but can be run on any available supercomputer connected to the grid that can supply the hardware your simulation need.
many of the religions of the world do not believe in all-powerfull gods.
In the old celtic religion the gods and man battled over control of ireland, and man won.
In norse mythology gods are mortal, and the god Balder is killed by an arrow. Moreover they are definately not omniscient they are often tricked while dealing with their "evil" counterpart the Giants.
The totally invincible and ompipotent god seems in fact to be restricted to the judeo-christian-islamic religions. Religions which all stem from tribal religions in the dead sea region.
What do you base this on????
... dimension, when i can clearly see that there are only 4, and no evidence has yet supported any other claims. (though when the LHC at CERN is turned on we might get it)
What is so preposterous about the idea of space and matter interacting?
Why is this more or less preposterous than other gravity theories?
Do you find it less preposterous that string theory has 11 or 20 or
>>Stop wasting time on those silly calculations: Gravitational waves do not exist.
Do you have any idea of how science works???
It is impossible to prove a theory, fx GR, but when thousands of scientist all over the world create one experiment after another that has the possibillity of disproving the theory and none of them manages to do so. Your confidence in the theory is greatly increased. Science therefore needs people to test and re-test any theory.
GR has now been tested since it was born almost a 100 years ago, and has been found to fit to observed phenomenae(how do you spell this) with great accuracy (at least in the weak field approximation).
If you have any links or articles about experiments that make GR break down i would very much like to see them?
QC_DK
(studying physics at NBI)
They had better watch out for microsoft. I am pretty sure they have patented this idea for their MSDN search engine.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
I read this as "because we need a militia to secure a free state, we will not take away the right to bear arms"
Are you still sure of the need of an armed militia to insure the security. Is this really necessary? Many countries in the world are as free or even freer than the US even though thay have no armed militia.
Maybe even the basic premise is flawed. Do you actually need the general population to have the right to bear arms to create a militia. I am not sure you do.
Another thing i don't understand is many americans beleif that the constitution is flawless and must not be changed. Granted it was
a well thought out document created by intelligent people. But, it was created around 1800. The world has changed a lot since then both politically and scientifically. They probably had a lot of assumptions for the different articles that are no longer valid. Why should it not be changed? If their reason for putting in fx the 2nd amendment are no longer valid why should it not be removed?
I do not beleive any set of laws can be perfect, and therefore we must not be rigid and insist on keeping them, when we discover them to be incorrect or find that they have flaws.
Personally i do not beleive that everybody should have the right to keep and bear arms. You are off course welcome to disagree. I only have a problem when a progun person justifies it by saying that some 200+ years old amendmendment in his interpretation gives him the right to bear arms.(fifty years ago you could also throw people in concentration camps according to another "constitution"). Who cares? If you disagree then give me a convincing argument why it would be benificial to society to have people running around with guns today. Then we can have a constructive argument.
just my 0.02$
For a totally different system of law try reading Frank Herberts "Dosadi experiment".
I dont think your point of view has any merits, scientist are willing to say if something could
.
or could not happen. The difference is just that they are more aware of the process of stating something and therefore tend to be more reserved.
Most modern scientist are aware that theories change all the time as new data arrive or flaws in old arguments are found.
As for your tobacco argument scientists have always beleived that tobacco smoking was bad for you.
fx.
the danish doctor Simon Paulli published in 1632 an article called "De Tabaci Abiscu" (against the misuse of tobacco). Where he talks about the dangers of smoking tobacco.
tobacco was banned in Bayern and other counties in germany in 1652-3. Because of its danger to the health.
The adictive properties of tobacco was discussed at a meeting at the university of Paris in 1699, by Fagon the Dean of Medicine
Around 1912 American doctors note an increase in the amount of lung cancers.
1947: The danish doctor Clemmesen compares the increase of lungcancer the last five years with the increase of cigaret sales 20 years before and finds a good correspondence.(20 years because that is the time it takes lung cancer to develop)
1953: the american doctors Graham and Wynder collects the tar of smoked cigarets and put ot on the back of mice, which all develop skin cancer(very similar to lung cancer). Conclusion: 95% of all lung cancers are caused by tobacco.
So the conclusion must be that scientist have claimed tobacco to be unhealthy since it was introduced in Europe.
And it has been proven extremely detrimental to your health for the last 50 years.
So even though the scientist have only been able to prove it for the last 50 years, or have put numbers on it as you put it. They have claimed the danger of tobacco long before they even knew of cancer.
I'll stop rambling now.
Well, the color of the sky on my planet ranges from black to white over blue yellow red and green. Depending on time of day and year and on ;-)
the amount of clouds.
For your information Coca-cola, McDonalds and also some non-american multinational companies havent paid taxes in Denmark the last twenty years, probably due to pricefixing. This caused quite a scandal, but nothing could be proved. But it does sound weird that coca-cola and mcDonalds and nestle have only lost money in denmark.
no no, you're thinking of the HP ScrambleJet
Looking around on the internet i found the energy of a bullet fired by a desert eagle to be around
:)
1200 J.
Say i have a hammer weighing 2 kg. To obtain the same energy i would have to swing it at
sqrt (1200) = 34 m/s or 120 km/h.
I think this is quite possible.
With a heavy hammer like a sledgehammer (10 kg) i would only have to swing it at:
sqrt(240) = 55 km/h.
This is possible.
I know because i have just torn down a wall with a sledgehammer. On one of my swings i strafed a pipe and lost my grip on the hammer and it went flying through the 10 cm thick wall rebounded on the next wall flew past me in the other direction and landed 2 m behind me. All in all it flew about 7 m and tore down a 20*20*10 cm piece of cement wall. I am very glad it didnt hit me or my friend who was on the other side of the wall.
According to a map on legos homepage they have production facilities in Denmark, Schwitzerland, Poland, somewhere on the east coast of north america and japan or korea.
c ks
... specialized bricks.. too expensive. Please remember that denmark is not a big country and we are affected when one of our larger exports fail. Back in 2000 when the last lego crises hit, the taxes in Billund Kommune (the county where lego is situated), had to increase their taxes. A loss of 200 million dollars for the company is a loss of about 40 million dollars in taxes(assuming they could have a comparable profit). That is quite a lot of money to lose for a county of 8700.
;-))
They also have a nice flash animation on how the bricks are made http://www.lego.com/eng/info/default.asp?page=bri
When you see the movie with all its links in the chain of production please remember that the minimum wage in Denmark for a person with no education and no union affiliation is about 12$/hour, and pretty much any person in that chain would be entitled to more.
The reason for the high salaries is the income tax, which is about 45% for a low income family.
I am about as low income as you can get. I am on student wellfare(less than ordinary wellfare), and have a 8 hour/week job on a school, and i pay 40% net in tax. also of the wellfare. I postulate the 45% on that background.
I've seen some people saying they do not feel sorry for lego because
And to all the people who have been nagging about the specialisation of pieces. Yes i have to agree i miss the simple bricks too, luckily I also have bags of them in the basement. But i am pretty sure that lego made that move for a reason, the crass commercialisation of our times. I am saddened that that is the way we are moving but there seems to be little we can do about it. It seems to be in keeping with the loss of small specialized shops with craftsmen running them to large supermarkets/superstores (ie wal-mart), where you'll be lucky to actually get bread, when you ask for some sort of bread that would go well with salmon. (this specific example is not from walmart but from a danish supermarket. Yes i am bitter
On a lighter note a couple of friends where over and we where bored when we remembered my old legos in the basement, so hours of fun later we had built a replica of a Blide (a danish siegeweapon) it is only 8" tall but is able to fire a 2-by-4 3 meters up into the air and hit a target ten meters away. (replace meters with yards for the metrically challenged).
As for wether magrethe was queen. She is regarded as a queen of denmark whether you call her husband or not. The manager part is probably better found in her third title of "formynder" and not in "husbond". Besides what else would you call the sole ruler of a kingdom. She might have ruled in the name of other persons but she did rule
Yes Erik of Pommerania was a bad king giving rise to the danish expresion "at ga ad Pommern til" meaning that something is going badly.
Frederick the III did not introduce absolutism in Denmark what he introduced was "Eenevold" maybe absolutism is closer than despotism.I did this off the top of my head and I am not a native speaker of the English language, so I do not know the discerning features of those two words.
from Kongeloven af 1665:
Norway was without rigths as a sovereign nation it was ruled as a part of the danish kingdom, but the people were treated as equal (in fact they were treated as the people of one nation).
Call it extensive fires or firestorms, almost the entire northern part of Copenhagen was burned to the ground, including one of the most important churches "Vor Frue Kirke" (church of our lady).
Yes, the cession of Norway was part of the Treaty of Kiel, but the necessity of doing so was because Denmark was bankrupt and the navy had been destroyed.
At the same time(1814) the first danish schoollaw was passed. Requiring that all children(boys and girls) from the age of 7 to the age of confirmation should attend school. This time is therefore often referred to the worst time in danish history by children in school
Harald Blaatand (Bluetooth) was born in 900 died in 987. He became king of Denmark and Norway in 950. He was the son of Gorm den gamle(the old) and father of Sven Tveskaeg (Forkbeard) who ruled england from 1013-1014.
He was the king that converted Denmark to christianity.
As there seem to be a bit of confusion of the different scandinavian languages, here is the ultrashort version of scandinavian history.
ca 900: Scandinavia was filled with vikinks all speaking old norse. At this point they started making real kingdoms (norway, sweden and denmark).
1397: the kalmar union all of scandinavia is united under queen Margrethe I.
1512: sweden leaves the union. Norway and Denmark continues now ruled under the danish king.
1658:Denmark has to give large parts of denmark(southern part of sweden today) and norway to sweden. Because the swedish army is only 20 km from the capital of denmark.
1660:Frederick III induces a royal despotism. Leaving norway almost without rights in the union.
1807: Denmark has declared itself neutral in the napoleonic wars, but is anyway attacked by the british without a declaration of war, they bomb Copenhagen using the first rockets in warfare killing a third of the population and creating large firestorms.
1813:Denmark is bankrupt and gives Norway to Sweden.
1905: Norway becomes independent of sweden.
This should give some idea of why the scandinavian languages are so close, and why Norwegian is easiest to understand for both swedes and danes alike.
Is it a better algorithm implementing the same scheduling scheme or has the scheme changed??
I mean a O(1) scheduler is extremely easy if you are satisfied with a round robin scheduler: Which would be O(1) for a sensible choice of queue.
that is not entirely true it means that for the worst case input, there exist a constant k and a smallest number of processes np where the following equation is fulfilled:
Time_To_Switch_n_proces(p)< k where p>np
that is not exactly the same as your definition.
Here is a couple of comments. First of all denying that there is scientific evidence in favor of global warming as some people here have said is hogwash. There exist plenty of evidence for this, wether it is caused by humans is however debateable.
u lprit/audio/culprits.ram
The danish climate researcher Henrik Svensmark has shown there are other more convincing mechanisms for explaining the temperature variation than human pollution.
H. Svensmark and E. Friis-Christensen, Variation of cosmic ray flux and global cloud coverage - a missing link in solar-climate relationships, J. Atmos. Solar-Terr. Phys., 59, 1225-1232 (1997);
H. Svensmark, Influence of cosmic rays on Earth's climate, Phys. Rev. Lett., 81, 5027 (1998).
Recent research have shown that CO2 might not be the most important gas in global warming, but rather methane and soot are.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/images/climatec
Icecore drillings in greenland have shown that the tempearture varies a lot and the global average over the last couple of million years which have been iceages, are 10 K lower than today. An intersting thought is that it might be better with a bit of controlled global warming(think terraforming) rather than another iceage. I live in Denmark and think that it is cold enough as it is.
(for people who understand danish have a look at http://www.glaciology.gfy.ku.dk/) IAMAPBNAGP (I am a physicist but not a Geophysicist)
I'm all for that flaky european VAT that taxes ebooks, but not p-books. Unfortunately i live in Denmark where they are both taxed at 25% (everything has VAT in denmark). So while it is not unfair towards e-books i find it generally unfair against books. but what can you do.
But i am probably a bit eurocentric.r s-hybrides.html).
I think the french spot is good because it is in europe with some quite strong economies that has been affected as badly by the US recession.
It is also quite close(4:00 hours by tgv ) to the high energy physics research center of CERN(http://www.cern.ch) and the nano tech in Grenoble(the reactor group http://isnwww.in2p3.fr/reacteurs-hybrides/reacteu