I've been watching gallons per hour, which has never gone down to zero... There are a few other things I can see such as throttle position or ignition timing. I've never seen any indication it's actually stopping fuel flow / closing the throttle / stopping the ignition. Also, my engine is a very poor brake - it seems more likely to rev up then slow the car down on any significant hill, which I'd think could be another sign it's still powered.
I'd think it would idle the same speed in neutral whether the car is moving or not, yet as I slow from to stop the idle speed drops from 1100 to 750. It's as if the computer is keeping the engine running faster for some reason.
I second this question.
03 Dodge Neon, 5 speed manual. I have never seen the fuel consumption cut off when engine braking. Instead I get better mileage by popping the car into neutral and using the brakes to slow down. Ignoring the case of mountain driving, I can't think of any reason to do engine braking.
Specifically: at stop, the car idles at ~750 rpms, in neutral at speed it idles at ~1100 rpms. Engine braking can get rpms down just about as low as I want until the engine starts knocking at ~600-700 rpms. I have a tool that plugs into the ODB2 port and it shows fuel consumption is lower during the 1100 rpm neutral idle than at any point during the engine braking. Now if only I could get the engine to idle at 750 the entire time, not just when it's at a standstill...
That's extremely good to know... I was considering switching to them, having heard praises of their banking. I suppose it's possible the banking side of things works fine in firefox, but I'll at least know to check into it. There's some things you just come to expect these days...
Yes, you used to have to do everything in a graphical environment, but not any more. With nVidia's CUDA you program in C/C++, have a general memory model (you can access texture memory if it's efficient for what you need, but you also have general device memory and several other types of memory to choose from) and run on fully capable stream processors. As far as the programmer is concerned, the gpu is just a stream processor add-in card. You do have to manually transfer to and from device memory, but once you have your data on the gpu you're free to access it however you want (arrays, textures, linear memory, whatever). It's not a difficult system to understand, though tuning your program for performance will be challenging. Check out http://developer.nvidia.com/object/cuda.html for more info.
If you read the comment by the SL developer he mentions they need support for Win, OSX, and Linux. I already responded asking about Linux, hopefully it's a sign they've got someone working on it.
Does this mean there's finally a Linux version in the works?
Toshiba Portege 3500 works great with linux...
on
Linux On Your Tablet PC
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I've had my Toshiba Portege 3500 running Gentoo for a long time now. As far as I know everything is supported except for IR and some software configuration (sleep modes, etc). The digitizer works wonderfully with the beta drivers. Support may have moved into the stable driver by now. For help setting it up, I found this page: http://rekl.no-ip.org/3500/ which covers about everything. The only problem I had was that PCMCIA CDROM support is sketchy. For installation I found that Mandrake 9 (or was it 10 beta) worked but I couldn't find any other distro that detected the drive. At one point I may have had it working in Gentoo but I don't recall.
There's two reasons I still have Windows on the tablet as well... first, the Toshiba BIOS is very difficult to access and the Windows tools to change bios settings are much easier. Second, I just haven't found any good inking programs for linux. I bought this for school and use ink all the time in taking class notes, it's very useful. The digitizer works great for gimp (pressure sensitivity works very well) but that's about it.
Any ideas for linux inking programs that would work well for taking and organizing notes?
I've got a Portege 3500, so it's the older model, but from what I hear the digitizers are basically the same. Check out the beta drivers http://linuxwacom.sourceforge.net/index.php/main from linuxwacom, they support mine just fine.
They've got more data then they'll ever know what to do with. My guess is they probably look up the top ten searches matching the input, sorted by the number of click searches.
I'm not suprised that more people search for Paris Hilton then PC World or Paypal, or that more people search for weather then walmart or whitepages... the order seems to make sense.
The newest (890 I believe was the model I was looking at) have a clock built in, supposedly with an alarm. I don't know about a timer. I have no idea about m3u support, but a built in playlist is enough for me. I've got a laptop, so if I'd ever need more than the 256 MB player can hold I could always hook up to that.
Thanks guys for your comments on the iRiver:) You've convinced me to get one... Sigh, it almost seems like $200 down the drain, but I don't have one yet, and it's Vorbis support is a very nice feature. Line-in recording, fm tuner, voice recording, and the clock basically settled it though:P Really, this sounds like just about what I could possibly need.
Note: though clock isn't listed on iRiver's site,http://www.iriveramerica.com/products/iFP-890.aspx# other review sites such as http://www.digimania.be/en/prod_det.asp?ProductID= 494 do mention it. Guess it also has a timer:D Score! They're doing a good job of keeping a poor college student poor:/
If I remember correctly, if the theory holds then gravitational attraction from objects in our own universe would be very slightly reduced... reduced by an ammount much smaller than previous experiments could detect. The experiment was to check extremely precisely the gravitational attraction of an object, and see if it was actually reduced. Note that I read this a few years ago and haven't heard about any outcome so perhaps nothing has come of it.
One of the possible outcomes of string theory is multiple universes, each separated by a fairly small distance (of course this distance is in a higher dimension so we can't notice them). If these alternate universes do exist, it is thought that the gravity from particles in our universe affects the other nearby universes. Imagine our universe as a flat sheet and another universe is a parallel flat sheet close to ours. In this model, gravity would still be three dimensional - ie, it would be able to bridge the gap between universes and affect the other universe. Perhaps this is what we're noticing - the gravity of massive particles in another universe?
BTW, I am not a physist but I have read up on this stuff. The theory of gravity carrying over to other universes actually does make sense - it explains why gravity is so much weaker than the other forces, because much of gravity's effect isn't on this universe. There's experiments going on now to test and see whether this is actually the case but I don't know the outcome. Anyway, this is just my thought on perhaps why we can't detect the dark matter - because it's not physically in our universe.
Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot's rss feed didn't correctly link to the article, so maybe people are having problems getting here.
I've been watching gallons per hour, which has never gone down to zero... There are a few other things I can see such as throttle position or ignition timing. I've never seen any indication it's actually stopping fuel flow / closing the throttle / stopping the ignition. Also, my engine is a very poor brake - it seems more likely to rev up then slow the car down on any significant hill, which I'd think could be another sign it's still powered.
I'd think it would idle the same speed in neutral whether the car is moving or not, yet as I slow from to stop the idle speed drops from 1100 to 750. It's as if the computer is keeping the engine running faster for some reason.
I second this question. 03 Dodge Neon, 5 speed manual. I have never seen the fuel consumption cut off when engine braking. Instead I get better mileage by popping the car into neutral and using the brakes to slow down. Ignoring the case of mountain driving, I can't think of any reason to do engine braking.
Specifically: at stop, the car idles at ~750 rpms, in neutral at speed it idles at ~1100 rpms. Engine braking can get rpms down just about as low as I want until the engine starts knocking at ~600-700 rpms. I have a tool that plugs into the ODB2 port and it shows fuel consumption is lower during the 1100 rpm neutral idle than at any point during the engine braking. Now if only I could get the engine to idle at 750 the entire time, not just when it's at a standstill...
That's extremely good to know... I was considering switching to them, having heard praises of their banking. I suppose it's possible the banking side of things works fine in firefox, but I'll at least know to check into it. There's some things you just come to expect these days...
Yes, you used to have to do everything in a graphical environment, but not any more. With nVidia's CUDA you program in C/C++, have a general memory model (you can access texture memory if it's efficient for what you need, but you also have general device memory and several other types of memory to choose from) and run on fully capable stream processors. As far as the programmer is concerned, the gpu is just a stream processor add-in card. You do have to manually transfer to and from device memory, but once you have your data on the gpu you're free to access it however you want (arrays, textures, linear memory, whatever). It's not a difficult system to understand, though tuning your program for performance will be challenging. Check out http://developer.nvidia.com/object/cuda.html for more info.
If you read the comment by the SL developer he mentions they need support for Win, OSX, and Linux. I already responded asking about Linux, hopefully it's a sign they've got someone working on it.
"Plus, we need support for Win32, Mac and Linux."
Does this mean there's finally a Linux version in the works?
I've had my Toshiba Portege 3500 running Gentoo for a long time now. As far as I know everything is supported except for IR and some software configuration (sleep modes, etc). The digitizer works wonderfully with the beta drivers. Support may have moved into the stable driver by now. For help setting it up, I found this page: http://rekl.no-ip.org/3500/ which covers about everything. The only problem I had was that PCMCIA CDROM support is sketchy. For installation I found that Mandrake 9 (or was it 10 beta) worked but I couldn't find any other distro that detected the drive. At one point I may have had it working in Gentoo but I don't recall. There's two reasons I still have Windows on the tablet as well... first, the Toshiba BIOS is very difficult to access and the Windows tools to change bios settings are much easier. Second, I just haven't found any good inking programs for linux. I bought this for school and use ink all the time in taking class notes, it's very useful. The digitizer works great for gimp (pressure sensitivity works very well) but that's about it. Any ideas for linux inking programs that would work well for taking and organizing notes?
I've got a Portege 3500, so it's the older model, but from what I hear the digitizers are basically the same. Check out the beta drivers http://linuxwacom.sourceforge.net/index.php/main from linuxwacom, they support mine just fine.
They've got more data then they'll ever know what to do with. My guess is they probably look up the top ten searches matching the input, sorted by the number of click searches.
I'm not suprised that more people search for Paris Hilton then PC World or Paypal, or that more people search for weather then walmart or whitepages... the order seems to make sense.
The newest (890 I believe was the model I was looking at) have a clock built in, supposedly with an alarm. I don't know about a timer. I have no idea about m3u support, but a built in playlist is enough for me. I've got a laptop, so if I'd ever need more than the 256 MB player can hold I could always hook up to that.
:) :P Really, this sounds like just about what I could possibly need.
0 .aspx#= 494 do mention it. Guess it also has a timer :D Score! They're doing a good job of keeping a poor college student poor :/
Thanks guys for your comments on the iRiver
You've convinced me to get one... Sigh, it almost seems like $200 down the drain, but I don't have one yet, and it's Vorbis support is a very nice feature. Line-in recording, fm tuner, voice recording, and the clock basically settled it though
Note: though clock isn't listed on iRiver's site,http://www.iriveramerica.com/products/iFP-89
other review sites such as http://www.digimania.be/en/prod_det.asp?ProductID
If I remember correctly, if the theory holds then gravitational attraction from objects in our own universe would be very slightly reduced... reduced by an ammount much smaller than previous experiments could detect. The experiment was to check extremely precisely the gravitational attraction of an object, and see if it was actually reduced. Note that I read this a few years ago and haven't heard about any outcome so perhaps nothing has come of it.
One of the possible outcomes of string theory is multiple universes, each separated by a fairly small distance (of course this distance is in a higher dimension so we can't notice them). If these alternate universes do exist, it is thought that the gravity from particles in our universe affects the other nearby universes. Imagine our universe as a flat sheet and another universe is a parallel flat sheet close to ours. In this model, gravity would still be three dimensional - ie, it would be able to bridge the gap between universes and affect the other universe. Perhaps this is what we're noticing - the gravity of massive particles in another universe?
BTW, I am not a physist but I have read up on this stuff. The theory of gravity carrying over to other universes actually does make sense - it explains why gravity is so much weaker than the other forces, because much of gravity's effect isn't on this universe. There's experiments going on now to test and see whether this is actually the case but I don't know the outcome. Anyway, this is just my thought on perhaps why we can't detect the dark matter - because it's not physically in our universe.