Vandenburg. Thanks. I got it confused with Edwards.
For the mylar, I was thinking it would be removed before launch. It could be plenty leaky. If those stupid inflatable lawn ornaments can stay up, this might too with enough air being pushed (dry, of course). Sort of the rocket equivalent of an athletic warm-up suit.
But I'm just throwing out ideas. It'd probably be expensive, but kinda cool.
It may be a case of 20-20 hindsight, but trying to keep giant tanks of cryogenic gases cool and ice free in Florida seems a mistake. Granted, there are huge advantages to being located towards the south, so heat is a given, but the whole icing problem would have been reduced by launching from Edwards, Yuma, or White Sands.
I wonder if anyone has considered wrapping the tanks loosly in mylar and blowing dry air in to create a bubble. You'd get some thermal barrier effect and avoid ice. The trick would be to rip the mylar off in the seconds before launch, but some Vegas magicians could teach NASA how to do that.
I enjoyed reading the machine translation from german. Makes you think about about how language works and it's down right funny. My favorite line (from a comment): "With open SOURCE is too much abgekupfert." Don't know what it means, but I find my self agreeing...
They got to the US government. Do I have to sign up for hotmail too?
Re:Air pressure is critical
on
Bang But No Splash
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Hey, don't shoot the messenger. I'm just telling you what I remember from the article.
As for elastic collision, liquids have no elasticity in the way you are suggesting. Bouncing comes from bulk compression. Fluids, well, flow unless constrained. A droplet isn't constrained so it splats. Except for a miniscule shock propagation wave, you won't get KE->PE->KE of a bounce.
But your point about it splashing over itself is a good observation. Sort of creating its own pool then splashing it out. I wonder if they considered it.
I apologize for the word intuitive. It's a subjective term.
Air pressure is critical
on
Bang But No Splash
·
· Score: 5, Informative
This was discussed in Science News (or maybe elsewhere) some time back so I'm working from memory. One of the things reseachers noted was that air was crucial for splashing. It's rather intuitive in a way.
All of the momentum is downward, then converted to radially outward. What makes it go up? The leading edge of the droplet is rushing outward. With the right speed and gas pressure, it splashes up like popping the hood of your car while going down the highway. Get rid of the speed or the gas and it will stay low.
Yes, engineers will put $10k of software on a $500 PC. We're an odd bunch. Personally, I take the money saved and buy another, faster computer a year later.
There isn't any descent cad or analysis software. Don't bother with "Try Wizo-X." I'm talking analysis stuff where 1 gig of dual channel ram is barely adequate. And solid modeling. The OSX programs are niche and years behind. And from my research, emulation of a PC is not worth it.
If OSX had come out 5 or 10 years sooner, all the workstation stuff would have been ported over. But Apple missed the opportunity. Now it's like the graphics market, but stacked against them.
Best advice I ever heard for videoconferencing via internet was to set up the audio by conference call. Better quality and frees bandwith for video.
It can also solve the lag problem people are concerned with. Since the phone lag should be negligible (no guarantees), each contestent can be equiped with a different noise maker. You could even make them funny sounds. Whichever is heard first wins the buzzer. Could be automated, but making it fun could keep people more involved.
They do, but are a poor carbon sink. Trees do not live forever and when they die... it all gets released again. Faster if burned.
There is a common misunderstanding that tropical rain forests produce a large portion of the earth's oxygen (and by correlary, take in carbon). They are at steady state with organic matter rotting as fast as it's created. Some does get buried, but not much. It is true that they hold a lot of carbon.
So in theory, you can help the earth by cutting down the forests, burying them (as paper), and growing a new one. Cut, bury, cut, bury. Etc. Since it would be a tragedy to cut down tropical rain forests, and since the tree farms that are used to make paper will work just as well, why not bury paper!
It's just a thought provoking joke. Some folks just don't get it. Some folks fight it, which is why it's fun.
I think most of you missed his point(s). One of the best ways to drive adoption of other energy sources is for fossil fuels to be expensive. High demand makes them expensive. His other point, totally missed by all, is that it's fun to piss people off with counter intuitive arguments.
Such as: Try not to recycle paper anymore. Growing trees then burying them is a great way to sequester carbon and take it out of the atmosphere. If you recycle paper, the trees that are growing will just rot and release C02. So recycling paper==bad for environment.
Fun to watch people twitch trying to deal with that one.
I haven't seen any mention of it yet so here goes:
If you'd like to do a little fusion work on the cheap (a few grand), check out webs sites dedicated to the Farnsworth Fusor. Yes, it does work. Well enough to be a safty hazard.
Your parents are probably more typical. My mom has little interest in using the web despite my efforts. She has broadband at work and doesn't use it there either. But then again, she doesn't watch much tv, so doesn't have cable. Doesn't listen to music or watch movies much, so has the cheapest cd and dvd players possible. Different strokes for different folks, eh?
I'd be curious what local usage rates are. We're kind of lucky in Cincinnati to have TimeWarner and Cincinnati Bell slugging it out. Both are around $40 for broadband. I forget what TW is offering at that price. CB is 3M/768k. And Cinergy, our power company, is thinking of getting in the business.
Add home phone and unlimited cell phone and you can get it all for $130 month here.
Actually, what you are describing is the difference between what you value and what others value. If $20 service gets them what they want at a price they want, then they are getting a good value. It's the same internet, just a different speed. I put more of a premium on speed too, so I have broadband. But my mom couldn't care less. She does email. $10 a month is more service than she needs.
The article is a nice opinion piece. But before all you folks start ranting, please learn what a patent is/isn't and how they work. I predict a huge ammount of nonsense is about to be spewed.
A common plastic made from corn is polylactic acid (just google it). It's strong, clear, and easy to work with. More expensive than its comptetitors. But yes, it is biodegradable. Just toss it in the compost heap. It's also the same plastic used to make absorbable medical implants (sutures, screws, etc). That's right, if put a chunk under your skin (not that I recommend it), your body slowly absorbs it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll still be unsatisfied with the first two.
Since it seems most folks don't have a clue how patents work, but might want to learn, here's one place to start: http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page= 20050402193202442
Vandenburg. Thanks. I got it confused with Edwards.
For the mylar, I was thinking it would be removed before launch. It could be plenty leaky. If those stupid inflatable lawn ornaments can stay up, this might too with enough air being pushed (dry, of course). Sort of the rocket equivalent of an athletic warm-up suit.
But I'm just throwing out ideas. It'd probably be expensive, but kinda cool.
It may be a case of 20-20 hindsight, but trying to keep giant tanks of cryogenic gases cool and ice free in Florida seems a mistake. Granted, there are huge advantages to being located towards the south, so heat is a given, but the whole icing problem would have been reduced by launching from Edwards, Yuma, or White Sands.
I wonder if anyone has considered wrapping the tanks loosly in mylar and blowing dry air in to create a bubble. You'd get some thermal barrier effect and avoid ice. The trick would be to rip the mylar off in the seconds before launch, but some Vegas magicians could teach NASA how to do that.
I enjoyed reading the machine translation from german. Makes you think about about how language works and it's down right funny. My favorite line (from a comment): "With open SOURCE is too much abgekupfert." Don't know what it means, but I find my self agreeing...
Lack of Mt. Dew puts US programers at a serious disadvantage.
They got to the US government. Do I have to sign up for hotmail too?
Hey, don't shoot the messenger. I'm just telling you what I remember from the article. As for elastic collision, liquids have no elasticity in the way you are suggesting. Bouncing comes from bulk compression. Fluids, well, flow unless constrained. A droplet isn't constrained so it splats. Except for a miniscule shock propagation wave, you won't get KE->PE->KE of a bounce. But your point about it splashing over itself is a good observation. Sort of creating its own pool then splashing it out. I wonder if they considered it. I apologize for the word intuitive. It's a subjective term.
This was discussed in Science News (or maybe elsewhere) some time back so I'm working from memory. One of the things reseachers noted was that air was crucial for splashing. It's rather intuitive in a way. All of the momentum is downward, then converted to radially outward. What makes it go up? The leading edge of the droplet is rushing outward. With the right speed and gas pressure, it splashes up like popping the hood of your car while going down the highway. Get rid of the speed or the gas and it will stay low.
Yes, engineers will put $10k of software on a $500 PC. We're an odd bunch. Personally, I take the money saved and buy another, faster computer a year later.
There isn't any descent cad or analysis software. Don't bother with "Try Wizo-X." I'm talking analysis stuff where 1 gig of dual channel ram is barely adequate. And solid modeling. The OSX programs are niche and years behind. And from my research, emulation of a PC is not worth it.
If OSX had come out 5 or 10 years sooner, all the workstation stuff would have been ported over. But Apple missed the opportunity. Now it's like the graphics market, but stacked against them.
Best advice I ever heard for videoconferencing via internet was to set up the audio by conference call. Better quality and frees bandwith for video.
It can also solve the lag problem people are concerned with. Since the phone lag should be negligible (no guarantees), each contestent can be equiped with a different noise maker. You could even make them funny sounds. Whichever is heard first wins the buzzer. Could be automated, but making it fun could keep people more involved.
Neglecting stuff like OS or processor, how about two categories:
1) Fewest lines (characters) of custom code
2) Smallest compiled code size
Runtime compiled or scripts might only be eligible for the first category.
--warning, cheap joke coming--
Then guys can whip it out and compare sizes like real men.
They do, but are a poor carbon sink. Trees do not live forever and when they die ... it all gets released again. Faster if burned.
There is a common misunderstanding that tropical rain forests produce a large portion of the earth's oxygen (and by correlary, take in carbon). They are at steady state with organic matter rotting as fast as it's created. Some does get buried, but not much. It is true that they hold a lot of carbon.
So in theory, you can help the earth by cutting down the forests, burying them (as paper), and growing a new one. Cut, bury, cut, bury. Etc. Since it would be a tragedy to cut down tropical rain forests, and since the tree farms that are used to make paper will work just as well, why not bury paper!
It's just a thought provoking joke. Some folks just don't get it. Some folks fight it, which is why it's fun.
I think most of you missed his point(s). One of the best ways to drive adoption of other energy sources is for fossil fuels to be expensive. High demand makes them expensive. His other point, totally missed by all, is that it's fun to piss people off with counter intuitive arguments.
Such as: Try not to recycle paper anymore. Growing trees then burying them is a great way to sequester carbon and take it out of the atmosphere. If you recycle paper, the trees that are growing will just rot and release C02. So recycling paper==bad for environment.
Fun to watch people twitch trying to deal with that one.
Just wanted to clarify in case you meant Ohio may have had its electronic voting stations tampered with.
Yeah, I think the same thing. Nothing mysterious.
I haven't seen any mention of it yet so here goes:
If you'd like to do a little fusion work on the cheap (a few grand), check out webs sites dedicated to the Farnsworth Fusor. Yes, it does work. Well enough to be a safty hazard.
IP every day.
Your parents are probably more typical. My mom has little interest in using the web despite my efforts. She has broadband at work and doesn't use it there either. But then again, she doesn't watch much tv, so doesn't have cable. Doesn't listen to music or watch movies much, so has the cheapest cd and dvd players possible. Different strokes for different folks, eh?
I'd be curious what local usage rates are. We're kind of lucky in Cincinnati to have TimeWarner and Cincinnati Bell slugging it out. Both are around $40 for broadband. I forget what TW is offering at that price. CB is 3M/768k. And Cinergy, our power company, is thinking of getting in the business.
Add home phone and unlimited cell phone and you can get it all for $130 month here.
Actually, what you are describing is the difference between what you value and what others value. If $20 service gets them what they want at a price they want, then they are getting a good value. It's the same internet, just a different speed. I put more of a premium on speed too, so I have broadband. But my mom couldn't care less. She does email. $10 a month is more service than she needs.
WTF came to mind, until my sense of humor kicked in. Nice one ... you got me.
The article is a nice opinion piece. But before all you folks start ranting, please learn what a patent is/isn't and how they work. I predict a huge ammount of nonsense is about to be spewed.
A common plastic made from corn is polylactic acid (just google it). It's strong, clear, and easy to work with. More expensive than its comptetitors. But yes, it is biodegradable. Just toss it in the compost heap. It's also the same plastic used to make absorbable medical implants (sutures, screws, etc). That's right, if put a chunk under your skin (not that I recommend it), your body slowly absorbs it.