"I am right, and I'm not interested in what you have to say, YOU are wrong". Great way of having a discussion.
While I am not particularly impressed by people mentioning their PhD either, the guy was completely correct. The Mach number IS dimensionless just like the Reynolds number, Nusselt number, Prandtl number,... whatever number. These numbers (mostly having to do with fluid dynamics) have exactly been devised to be dimensionless. The are invented to scale experiments. As long as the dimensionless number of your experiment and the real thing are the same (e.g. by making everything 10 times smaller but in 10 times lighter material and under higher pressure or so), conclusions about the relevant parameters will be unchanged. More info here.
Wow, you really have no idea what you're talking about. Bet you were a great engineer!
The first I agree with, the second not (didn't say I worked on image processing). Image stabilization techniques I have heard of operate digitally. If these cameras use something optical, so much better and I need not worry. Thanks for the judging.
Though I used to work in DSP (digital signal processing) I don't want any of it in my camera, still nor motion. Give me a high resolution, decent optics and preferably a RAW output format. I'll do the buying of memory cards and a tripod for my shaky hands. But NO digital mumbo-jumbo for me.
For old farts the game has become a tired old joke, and the n00bs have never played any of the predecessors.
Maybe this is exactly 3DRealms' strategy to solve this embarassing delay: they only bring it out after everyone who remembered the original has died. Or they don't even release it at all...
He talks about character models almost being done (almost?) and guns being "finished". That sure doesn't seem like things are terribly far along - you build the props for a movie before you start filming, right?
Not necessarily: the work is probably divided into the engine, the plot, artwork, character models etc. I can imagine all testing so far has been done with a wirestick guy (or a squirrel or whatever model they had available) and they can develop the models independently.
Two questions arise: - have they really been developing non-stop of have they hust been slacking? - will the final product (if ever available) appeal to the public? If it is the elaboration of an idea and concepts of ten years ago, won't it be outdated from day one?
But I think Gates & Jobs (along with many others) have created far more value for the world by creating an entire new field in which millions of people have gained employment
True but on the other hand it cost many jobs too. Difficult to determine the net effect.
Hindsight 10/10. I cannot recall hearing a lot of people saying the previous time 'look, a bubble is coming, let's invest and lose'. I don't want to be negative but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. In 10 years we'll separate the booms from the bubbles.
Re:Infrastructure not old business model
on
The New Boom
·
· Score: 1
Google is an enabling technology. It is funded through advertising, but it is something fundamentally new.
Google is in the first place a search engine and it became successful because it was the fastest, just like altavista was the fastest before (iirc) etc. They may index their stuff a bit different, they may offer other services but for most people I know they are in the first place a search engine.
Coicidentally TV showed a documentary on this very topic yesterday. Besides this I have also read Feynman's account. Most of the article's statements are utter crap.
MANY people watched the explosion because of the presence of the school teacher. The shuttle (or booster rockets) exploded all right. And it is generally assumed that the crew may have survived this but died on impact of the cockpit to the ground/sea.
Engineers at Thiokol opposed he launch because THEY KNEW IT WOULD FAIL. The O-rings were not rated for the low temperature. The launch was pushed by (NASA) managers and Thiokol changed their recommendation not to lose a big customer.
He may be an asshole but he has a point. It is not because somebody is in a poor situation that his fate isn't in his own hands.
Both jobs I had I have gotten by sending regular letters/emails to companies. If this guy wouldn't be browsing/. so much he would have more than enough time to write some as well. Once companies are interested a time for an interview can always be arranged. It takes one to know one, I am a procrastinator too. But take your fate in your own hands OR don't complain.
you have to stop it, you cannot just shove it down, or out,
or forward of backward... it must lose energy
This does not contradict my statement. 'throwing' the suit backwards (as well as down) will lower the suit's speed and thus energy and increases your speed and thus energy.
Example: both you and the suit weigh 1 kg and move at 100 m/s (tangential to Earth because you are in orbit). Neglecting the radial speed you give to the suit (e.g. 1m/s downwards), you will 'throw' it backwards with a speed of 100m/s. The suit now stands still and because of the conservarion of momentum you will move at 200 m/h. This means that your energy has increased and the suit's has decreased.
One could now cunningly remark that you gained net energy because this is quadratic in the speed. The solution to this enigma is that you needed a source of energy to push away the suit in the first place, e.g. a compressed spring that was released. This energy, together with the energy taken from the suit is now in your spaceship.
But how do you decide on only three numbers to test out of 10^12 number of digits?
My previous answer did not really address this problem. Imagine the first trillion-digit number of the shape 2^x-1. Now assume this starts with a 1, e.g. 103...[trillion-3 digits]. The second number that complies with the formula would be 206...[trillion-3 digits], the third would be 424...[trillion-3 digits] and the fourth would be 848...[trillions of digits]. A possibly fifth number would be 1696...[trilion-3 digits] but this would no longer be a 1 trillion digit number, but a 1 trillion+1 digit number!
Actually we need not even assume this number will start with a 1! Imagine it would start with e.g. a 3, call this number A. In that case also (A+1)/2-1 complies with 2^x-1 AND it will be a one trillion number. The assumption that the lowest number started with a 3 is therefore wrong.
I wonder what's the optimal direction to throw stuff so that it reenters the atmosphere as soon as possible. Should it be straight down or horizontally in the direction opposite to the orbital movement of the station? Or maybe something in between?
If they were standing still it would be easy (apart from the annoying fact that they would fall themselves): throw it straight down. Them moving doesn't change it, they still need to throw it such that its velocity is directly towards the Earth, which means they need to throw it a bit backwards (and down).
Elementary my dear Watson:-). As stated before, there ARE only three or four numbers 'that are a trillions digits long' that take the shape '2^x-1', just like there are only 4 that have 4 digits (1023, 2047, 4095, 8191). More specifically they are the three (or four) numbers I gave in my formula. This narrows down the trillions.
Factoring them would be no picnic but I don't need to: one of them is your password, so I'd just try them.
You should see my admin key: it is a 10^12 digit mersenne prime.
Not to spoil the joke, but this gives your password away instantly. Assuming that by 'digits' you mean numbers between 0 and 9 and keeping in mind that a Mersenne prime takes the shape 2^x-1, such password can be narrowed down to only four (three?) possibilities. More specifically, the 'x' equals 2log(10)*10^12 rounded up, or one more, two more or possible three more.
I don't know, but now that I look back at it, the commies weren't nearly as abusive in the work place (corruption was rampant, but at LEAST one could actually get ahead based on their skills...
Maybe this is not a matter of communism vs capitalism but a matter of now vs twenty years ago.
A robot dog is a pile of parts running a program.
So is a real dog, just the parts are squishier and the programme is more complex.
While technically this _may_ be true, I am in need of realness. If you consider an electrical and a real dog the same ballpark, maybe we should all chat with Elisa? Fake photographs of countries we never visited? Blend in Lara Croft instead of a real girlfriend? Project 'scenery' on a blank wall to imitate a window? Eat wood chips with chicken flavouring? Mix together semen and eggs in a Petri dish to see how we will evolve genetically? Better still: just simulate what our lives would be like and die instead. Yeah, let's simulate everything. Let's replace reality with articicial surrogate.
The one cool thing about freezing yourself that no one seems to mention is the process, if successful, will seem instant to you regardless of how many hundreds of years you're out for.
Slashdot Mirror
While I am not particularly impressed by people mentioning their PhD either, the guy was completely correct. The Mach number IS dimensionless just like the Reynolds number, Nusselt number, Prandtl number,... whatever number. These numbers (mostly having to do with fluid dynamics) have exactly been devised to be dimensionless. The are invented to scale experiments. As long as the dimensionless number of your experiment and the real thing are the same (e.g. by making everything 10 times smaller but in 10 times lighter material and under higher pressure or so), conclusions about the relevant parameters will be unchanged. More info here.
The first I agree with, the second not (didn't say I worked on image processing). Image stabilization techniques I have heard of operate digitally. If these cameras use something optical, so much better and I need not worry. Thanks for the judging.
Though I used to work in DSP (digital signal processing) I don't want any of it in my camera, still nor motion. Give me a high resolution, decent optics and preferably a RAW output format. I'll do the buying of memory cards and a tripod for my shaky hands. But NO digital mumbo-jumbo for me.
Maybe this is exactly 3DRealms' strategy to solve this embarassing delay: they only bring it out after everyone who remembered the original has died. Or they don't even release it at all...
WTF, Axl is gay??!??
Who cares about Axl... The Duke is gay??!??
Not necessarily: the work is probably divided into the engine, the plot, artwork, character models etc. I can imagine all testing so far has been done with a wirestick guy (or a squirrel or whatever model they had available) and they can develop the models independently.
Two questions arise:
- have they really been developing non-stop of have they hust been slacking?
- will the final product (if ever available) appeal to the public? If it is the elaboration of an idea and concepts of ten years ago, won't it be outdated from day one?
cars drive YOU. In Japan however, cars drive themselves.
Great advise! What do you think we've been trying to do for *years*?!?
True but on the other hand it cost many jobs too. Difficult to determine the net effect.
Hindsight 10/10. I cannot recall hearing a lot of people saying the previous time 'look, a bubble is coming, let's invest and lose'. I don't want to be negative but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. In 10 years we'll separate the booms from the bubbles.
Google is in the first place a search engine and it became successful because it was the fastest, just like altavista was the fastest before (iirc) etc. They may index their stuff a bit different, they may offer other services but for most people I know they are in the first place a search engine.
MANY people watched the explosion because of the presence of the school teacher. The shuttle (or booster rockets) exploded all right. And it is generally assumed that the crew may have survived this but died on impact of the cockpit to the ground/sea. Engineers at Thiokol opposed he launch because THEY KNEW IT WOULD FAIL. The O-rings were not rated for the low temperature. The launch was pushed by (NASA) managers and Thiokol changed their recommendation not to lose a big customer.
He may be an asshole but he has a point. It is not because somebody is in a poor situation that his fate isn't in his own hands.
Both jobs I had I have gotten by sending regular letters/emails to companies. If this guy wouldn't be browsing /. so much he would have more than enough time to write some as well. Once companies are interested a time for an interview can always be arranged. It takes one to know one, I am a procrastinator too. But take your fate in your own hands OR don't complain.
This does not contradict my statement. 'throwing' the suit backwards (as well as down) will lower the suit's speed and thus energy and increases your speed and thus energy.
Example: both you and the suit weigh 1 kg and move at 100 m/s (tangential to Earth because you are in orbit). Neglecting the radial speed you give to the suit (e.g. 1m/s downwards), you will 'throw' it backwards with a speed of 100m/s. The suit now stands still and because of the conservarion of momentum you will move at 200 m/h. This means that your energy has increased and the suit's has decreased.
One could now cunningly remark that you gained net energy because this is quadratic in the speed. The solution to this enigma is that you needed a source of energy to push away the suit in the first place, e.g. a compressed spring that was released. This energy, together with the energy taken from the suit is now in your spaceship.
My previous answer did not really address this problem. Imagine the first trillion-digit number of the shape 2^x-1. Now assume this starts with a 1, e.g. 103...[trillion-3 digits]. The second number that complies with the formula would be 206...[trillion-3 digits], the third would be 424...[trillion-3 digits] and the fourth would be 848...[trillions of digits].
A possibly fifth number would be 1696...[trilion-3 digits] but this would no longer be a 1 trillion digit number, but a 1 trillion+1 digit number!
Actually we need not even assume this number will start with a 1! Imagine it would start with e.g. a 3, call this number A. In that case also (A+1)/2-1 complies with 2^x-1 AND it will be a one trillion number. The assumption that the lowest number started with a 3 is therefore wrong.
If they were standing still it would be easy (apart from the annoying fact that they would fall themselves): throw it straight down. Them moving doesn't change it, they still need to throw it such that its velocity is directly towards the Earth, which means they need to throw it a bit backwards (and down).
As stated before, there ARE only three or four numbers 'that are a trillions digits long' that take the shape '2^x-1', just like there are only 4 that have 4 digits (1023, 2047, 4095, 8191). More specifically they are the three (or four) numbers I gave in my formula. This narrows down the trillions.
Factoring them would be no picnic but I don't need to: one of them is your password, so I'd just try them.
Not to spoil the joke, but this gives your password away instantly. Assuming that by 'digits' you mean numbers between 0 and 9 and keeping in mind that a Mersenne prime takes the shape 2^x-1, such password can be narrowed down to only four (three?) possibilities. More specifically, the 'x' equals 2log(10)*10^12 rounded up, or one more, two more or possible three more.
Maybe this is not a matter of communism vs capitalism but a matter of now vs twenty years ago.
While technically this _may_ be true, I am in need of realness. If you consider an electrical and a real dog the same ballpark, maybe we should all chat with Elisa? Fake photographs of countries we never visited? Blend in Lara Croft instead of a real girlfriend? Project 'scenery' on a blank wall to imitate a window? Eat wood chips with chicken flavouring? Mix together semen and eggs in a Petri dish to see how we will evolve genetically? Better still: just simulate what our lives would be like and die instead. Yeah, let's simulate everything. Let's replace reality with articicial surrogate.
Or he could never wake up again, which sounds most plausible.
How do you know?
Just use all this space debris. Two problems solved at once...
How is this safe? Methinks genuinely security aware person would take another's word for it.