I never did figure out what Silverlight was for. I went to one site that required it (cant even remember what the site was for), tried to install it but it refused to work.
In most airports that I've been through, you leave the terminal to reach baggage claim.
Not the ones here in Canada, but you do have to leave the gate area to get you luggage. To get back to the gates you would have to go back through security.
The problem is we haven't found billions of planets just like ours - only a handful so far - and 'like ours' in a very vague sense. We are yet to find a planet that is within say 10% of all the parameters of ours. I don't know if there is a reason to suggest that our planet is unusual but until we can find another one the philosophers get to wax lyrical.
I'd say we haven't found them because our technology has just gotten to the point were we are able to detect planets. Just be sheer numbers of possible starts, we're bound to find a lot more.
I can't wait until they definitively discover life (hopefully intelligent) so I can go to these young earth creationists and say 'in your face, you nutbar. In - your - face!'
Absolutely. But the relativistic effects are extremely small at those speeds. For instance, the relativistic time dilation aboard a GPS satellite is about 1 part in 10^10.
The relativistic effects on the GPS onboard clock due to its relative motion to the GPS receiver would result in the position calculation being shifted by 7 miles per day if it were not corrected for.
I wonder to what extent these black hole pairs can be used as laboratories for testing general relativity
General relativity has been verified countless times, from the existence of black holes, to gravitational lensing, to even time dilation. General relativity effects are even needed to be compensated for in GPS clock calculations. Are there aspects of general relativity left to be tested?
GPS satellites need their internal clocks corrected to take into account relativistic effects based on the speed they are going. And they are only travelling at about 4km per second.
Except in my case where the problem can be clearly traced to the software lead being incompetent, lying, and refusing to follow the design or attempt in any way to be part of the team.
It is if you're flying over their airspace. Can you imagine the Russians trying to make that argument during the Cold War?
Ok, lets put the shoe on the other foot.
Lets say Canada insists to the US airlines that it wants the name, gender and birth date of everyone flying to and from Alaska (sine that HAS to fly over Canada), and we are not going to say what we are going to do with it. And lets also assume that collecting this data is against US federal law, so we are asking the US airlines to violate that law.
Think any American will say, 'sure, thats seems fair'.?
But please, let me get a flight my country to another country and back without having to take off my shoes and belt, step through a perv machine, give up all my data to third party TSAs, and sit for an hour without a book, drink, mp3 player, laptop or the right to take a piss
Seriously? It's not that bad in Canada. I've never heard of them taking your electronics, or your laptop here. You can keep your belt and shoes on too unless they set off the metal detector. The only real pain is the liquids limitation.
All this scanning is just to make us think they are doing something. 80% of a planes cargo is commercial freight which is not scanned at all. By mid this year they hope to be able to scan 50% of the commercial freight but it still would mean that almost half the baggage on a plane is not scanned at all. If the airlines were really serious they would scan the commercial baggage and let up on the passengers, but of course that would cause too much of a financial impact.
Second, this is a slippery slope. It's perfectly legal for Canadians to travel to Cuba, and many do for vacations. It's not that much of a stretch for the US to gather names of Canadians travelling to Cuba and then ban them from entering the US for that reason. (maybe not under a Democrat president but probably under a Republican one).
Basically it's none of their freakin business where I decide to travel to if I'm not stopping in their country.
The relative comparison is about the impact of the equations, not the man who came up with them.
And the impact of Einsteins equations is that they are used or influence nearly every theory that came after it including quantum mechanics.
Regardless, Einstein's error was that by using light to synchronize two clocks, you cannot in turn derive that the speed of light as constant; it becomes a circular argument.
No, thats the fundamental misunderstanding of his experiment - he's not using light to synchronize the clocks, he states that it is a thought experiment and you START with synchronized clocks. The fact that you cannot do this in practice is irrelevant.
Einsteins equations shaped our current understanding of the universe. To minimize his discoveries by saying he made a lot of mistakes either means you don't understand what he was doing or are arrogant beyond belief.
So Einstein wasn't wrong because the truth hadn't been discovered?
Your argument is nonsense. It's like saying Newtons equations of motion are wrong because they didn't include relativistic effects.
I would put Maxwell's Equations on a pedestal above relativity.
Maxwell's equations are all the product of other people, namely Gauss, Faraday and Ampere.
there was a logical mistake in the method Einstein proposed to prove it - synchronization with light signals.
His experiment was a thought experiment - starting out with two identical clocks at a distance. People say that this is impossible because you cannot set two clocks to be the same at a distance due to the finite time it takes light to travel. This is true but completely irrelevant. It's a THOUGHT experiment. It's not a logical mistake by any stretch of the imagination. If you were to invalidate the theory based on that, you would have to likewise invalidate every thought experiment in existence.
As for the greatest mind that ever lived - personally I would go with Leonardo da Vinci
Sure, another legend, although he was more of an engineer and artist than a scientist.
His theories have been shown to work in our limited capacity to test them. Like all science there is a good chance that they will at the very least be some need to modify them; we never know what strange and new discoveries there could be.
But that is what made his work so brilliant. It was impossible to test them at the time he created them, impossible even to see the effects of what he was talking about. But everytime we make a scientific advancement allowing us to test one of his theories, they turn out to be correct. Sure some may not turn out to be correct, like when we finally get a GUT, but for now his track record is far beyond any other scientist for accuracy of prediction.
Einstein made a "minor correction" adding vibrations to the classical free motion to improve the accuracy at lower temperatures.
That's like saying Einstein added a minor correction to Newtons laws of motion to compensate for effects at high speed. You are ignoring his fundamental breakthrough.
Except Einstein mistakenly believed in a static universe until there was evidence to the contrary.
Irrelevant. He is a product of his generation which is over 100 years ago. Regardless, new discoveries like an expanding (and now accelerating expanding) universe don't invalidate his theories - they further support them. Few if any scientific theories have passed the test of time like Einsteins.
Quantum theory is the most precisely tested and most successful theory in the history of science.
QM consists of a number of differnt theories applicable only to the small domain they are interested in. That's because they were created to explain the observations. QM is a model to predict different behaviors, it isn't a model of what is actually going on like Einsteins theories.
The mistake was Einstein's method of clock synchronization led to a circular argument.
No. People are just incorrectly using the the experiment to justify a circular argument. The theory is correct.
Einstein was the greatest mind that ever lived. His theories of general relativity, including time dilation not only could never be proved but couldn't even be observed in his time. Only now are we capable of testing theories such as time dilation and we are finding they are perfect.
But Einstein's model was not wrong - before him, there was no model at all. The Debye model is a minor correction in that there are multiple frequencies instead of just one. The Debye model corrects for extremely low temperatures - it is inaccurate at intermediate temperatures.
assuming the universe was not changing until Hubble's discovery
What do you mean? Hubble's expanding universe theory is consistent with Einstein's general relativity.
his flawed challenges to QM in the Bohr-Einstein debates
QM is bases on Einsteins discoveries, but QM is flawed, especially the uncertainty principle which is the part Einstein had a problem with. Here's an example of the problem with uncertainty: Uncertainty states you cannot know both an objects position and velocity at the same time. This also extends to the complete absence of particles, so if you know there is quantity zero of something, you then know the position but by definition you can then not know how fast that nothing is going.
error in clock synchronization for Special Relativity
Clock synchronization is a thought experiment. Those that claim the clock synchonization are wrong are using it to (incorrectly) show that the speed of light is not a constant. Einstein was not wrong here - the speed of light is constant.
a number of failures in proofs including E=mc^2
Not failures - mistakes. He always admitted he was poor in math. I'd like to see you do better.
Even what he considered his greatest mistake - the cosmological constant - new research shows that this constant my be necessary after all.
Thats EXACTLY what I am saying - it's man's interpretation, often varied to suit his own belief system, that religion is based on. This can vary wildly from the intent of the religion when first started.
Christ believed in 'turn the other cheek'. But how many times has the Christian religion been used throughout history to justify killing or repressing other peoples and cultures?
Right and wrong are in the eye of the beholder. Do you think Hitler and the Germans decided 'hey, we're evil!'. No, they thought they were right just as much as we thought we were right.
In the first case, you probably meant "the Quran" or other original islamic sources. In the second, you probably mean "Islamic culture". See the distinction?
Yes, that what I meant. And can you see that the repression of women is merely by the men in power and cultural tradition and nothing really to do with the religious texts? The religion is merely being used as an excuse. For instance the hijab and burqa - Islam does not require that women completely cover themselves - this is a cultural restriction placed on women by the ruling men, but the religion is used as an excuse.
Actually bottlenose dolphins and humans have very similar ratios (dolphins are the closes to us in glial to neuron ratio). They do not have 1/6 the neuroarns we do - both us and dolphins are about 1:1 for glial neuron ratio.
Slashdot Mirror
I never did figure out what Silverlight was for. I went to one site that required it (cant even remember what the site was for), tried to install it but it refused to work.
Never found a need for it since.
In most airports that I've been through, you leave the terminal to reach baggage claim.
Not the ones here in Canada, but you do have to leave the gate area to get you luggage. To get back to the gates you would have to go back through security.
It is Government-run healthcare that is intrinsically oppressive and untenable to freedom loving peoples.
Just like a government run judicial system and military forces.
Sorry to post off topic to your sig, but universal helthcare is socialist. whether or not it is a good thing remains to be seen.
NO. It's a social program, but it not socialist. Unless you consider the police, army, judicial system and public schools also to be socialist.
Socialism is very different than social programs.
What proof would satisfy you?
So other planets and the rest of the universe have bee around for billions of years but we've only been here for 8000?
Patents are for the most part completely useless. We should just get rid of the entire patent process. It's not needed.
The problem is we haven't found billions of planets just like ours - only a handful so far - and 'like ours' in a very vague sense. We are yet to find a planet that is within say 10% of all the parameters of ours. I don't know if there is a reason to suggest that our planet is unusual but until we can find another one the philosophers get to wax lyrical.
I'd say we haven't found them because our technology has just gotten to the point were we are able to detect planets. Just be sheer numbers of possible starts, we're bound to find a lot more.
I can't wait until they definitively discover life (hopefully intelligent) so I can go to these young earth creationists and say 'in your face, you nutbar. In - your - face!'
Absolutely. But the relativistic effects are extremely small at those speeds. For instance, the relativistic time dilation aboard a GPS satellite is about 1 part in 10^10.
The relativistic effects on the GPS onboard clock due to its relative motion to the GPS receiver would result in the position calculation being shifted by 7 miles per day if it were not corrected for.
I wonder to what extent these black hole pairs can be used as laboratories for testing general relativity
General relativity has been verified countless times, from the existence of black holes, to gravitational lensing, to even time dilation. General relativity effects are even needed to be compensated for in GPS clock calculations. Are there aspects of general relativity left to be tested?
Wow, when I was in university, Black Holes were still a mostly theoretical idea and we had no real empirical evidence to support their existence.
Was this a creationist university?
GPS satellites need their internal clocks corrected to take into account relativistic effects based on the speed they are going. And they are only travelling at about 4km per second.
So yeah, relativity does have an effect.
I wanted to see it too, but my wife made me watch Alvin and the Chipmunks instead...
Wow - thats the saddest 'whipped' story I've ever heard.
I agree completely.
Except in my case where the problem can be clearly traced to the software lead being incompetent, lying, and refusing to follow the design or attempt in any way to be part of the team.
It is if you're flying over their airspace. Can you imagine the Russians trying to make that argument during the Cold War?
Ok, lets put the shoe on the other foot.
Lets say Canada insists to the US airlines that it wants the name, gender and birth date of everyone flying to and from Alaska (sine that HAS to fly over Canada), and we are not going to say what we are going to do with it. And lets also assume that collecting this data is against US federal law, so we are asking the US airlines to violate that law.
Think any American will say, 'sure, thats seems fair'.?
But please, let me get a flight my country to another country and back without having to take off my shoes and belt, step through a perv machine, give up all my data to third party TSAs, and sit for an hour without a book, drink, mp3 player, laptop or the right to take a piss
Seriously? It's not that bad in Canada. I've never heard of them taking your electronics, or your laptop here. You can keep your belt and shoes on too unless they set off the metal detector. The only real pain is the liquids limitation.
All this scanning is just to make us think they are doing something. 80% of a planes cargo is commercial freight which is not scanned at all. By mid this year they hope to be able to scan 50% of the commercial freight but it still would mean that almost half the baggage on a plane is not scanned at all. If the airlines were really serious they would scan the commercial baggage and let up on the passengers, but of course that would cause too much of a financial impact.
First, these are airlines not landing in the US.
Second, this is a slippery slope. It's perfectly legal for Canadians to travel to Cuba, and many do for vacations. It's not that much of a stretch for the US to gather names of Canadians travelling to Cuba and then ban them from entering the US for that reason. (maybe not under a Democrat president but probably under a Republican one).
Basically it's none of their freakin business where I decide to travel to if I'm not stopping in their country.
The relative comparison is about the impact of the equations, not the man who came up with them.
And the impact of Einsteins equations is that they are used or influence nearly every theory that came after it including quantum mechanics.
Regardless, Einstein's error was that by using light to synchronize two clocks, you cannot in turn derive that the speed of light as constant; it becomes a circular argument.
No, thats the fundamental misunderstanding of his experiment - he's not using light to synchronize the clocks, he states that it is a thought experiment and you START with synchronized clocks. The fact that you cannot do this in practice is irrelevant.
Einsteins equations shaped our current understanding of the universe. To minimize his discoveries by saying he made a lot of mistakes either means you don't understand what he was doing or are arrogant beyond belief.
So Einstein wasn't wrong because the truth hadn't been discovered?
Your argument is nonsense. It's like saying Newtons equations of motion are wrong because they didn't include relativistic effects.
I would put Maxwell's Equations on a pedestal above relativity.
Maxwell's equations are all the product of other people, namely Gauss, Faraday and Ampere.
there was a logical mistake in the method Einstein proposed to prove it - synchronization with light signals.
His experiment was a thought experiment - starting out with two identical clocks at a distance. People say that this is impossible because you cannot set two clocks to be the same at a distance due to the finite time it takes light to travel. This is true but completely irrelevant. It's a THOUGHT experiment. It's not a logical mistake by any stretch of the imagination. If you were to invalidate the theory based on that, you would have to likewise invalidate every thought experiment in existence.
As for the greatest mind that ever lived - personally I would go with Leonardo da Vinci
Sure, another legend, although he was more of an engineer and artist than a scientist.
His theories have been shown to work in our limited capacity to test them. Like all science there is a good chance that they will at the very least be some need to modify them; we never know what strange and new discoveries there could be.
But that is what made his work so brilliant. It was impossible to test them at the time he created them, impossible even to see the effects of what he was talking about. But everytime we make a scientific advancement allowing us to test one of his theories, they turn out to be correct. Sure some may not turn out to be correct, like when we finally get a GUT, but for now his track record is far beyond any other scientist for accuracy of prediction.
Einstein made a "minor correction" adding vibrations to the classical free motion to improve the accuracy at lower temperatures.
That's like saying Einstein added a minor correction to Newtons laws of motion to compensate for effects at high speed. You are ignoring his fundamental breakthrough.
Except Einstein mistakenly believed in a static universe until there was evidence to the contrary.
Irrelevant. He is a product of his generation which is over 100 years ago. Regardless, new discoveries like an expanding (and now accelerating expanding) universe don't invalidate his theories - they further support them. Few if any scientific theories have passed the test of time like Einsteins.
Quantum theory is the most precisely tested and most successful theory in the history of science.
QM consists of a number of differnt theories applicable only to the small domain they are interested in. That's because they were created to explain the observations. QM is a model to predict different behaviors, it isn't a model of what is actually going on like Einsteins theories.
The mistake was Einstein's method of clock synchronization led to a circular argument.
No. People are just incorrectly using the the experiment to justify a circular argument. The theory is correct.
Einstein was the greatest mind that ever lived. His theories of general relativity, including time dilation not only could never be proved but couldn't even be observed in his time. Only now are we capable of testing theories such as time dilation and we are finding they are perfect.
But Einstein's model was not wrong - before him, there was no model at all. The Debye model is a minor correction in that there are multiple frequencies instead of just one. The Debye model corrects for extremely low temperatures - it is inaccurate at intermediate temperatures.
assuming the universe was not changing until Hubble's discovery
What do you mean? Hubble's expanding universe theory is consistent with Einstein's general relativity.
his flawed challenges to QM in the Bohr-Einstein debates
QM is bases on Einsteins discoveries, but QM is flawed, especially the uncertainty principle which is the part Einstein had a problem with. Here's an example of the problem with uncertainty: Uncertainty states you cannot know both an objects position and velocity at the same time. This also extends to the complete absence of particles, so if you know there is quantity zero of something, you then know the position but by definition you can then not know how fast that nothing is going.
error in clock synchronization for Special Relativity
Clock synchronization is a thought experiment. Those that claim the clock synchonization are wrong are using it to (incorrectly) show that the speed of light is not a constant. Einstein was not wrong here - the speed of light is constant.
a number of failures in proofs including E=mc^2
Not failures - mistakes. He always admitted he was poor in math. I'd like to see you do better.
Even what he considered his greatest mistake - the cosmological constant - new research shows that this constant my be necessary after all.
Thats EXACTLY what I am saying - it's man's interpretation, often varied to suit his own belief system, that religion is based on. This can vary wildly from the intent of the religion when first started.
Christ believed in 'turn the other cheek'. But how many times has the Christian religion been used throughout history to justify killing or repressing other peoples and cultures?
Right and wrong are in the eye of the beholder. Do you think Hitler and the Germans decided 'hey, we're evil!'. No, they thought they were right just as much as we thought we were right.
In the first case, you probably meant "the Quran" or other original islamic sources. In the second, you probably mean "Islamic culture". See the distinction?
Yes, that what I meant. And can you see that the repression of women is merely by the men in power and cultural tradition and nothing really to do with the religious texts? The religion is merely being used as an excuse. For instance the hijab and burqa - Islam does not require that women completely cover themselves - this is a cultural restriction placed on women by the ruling men, but the religion is used as an excuse.
Actually bottlenose dolphins and humans have very similar ratios (dolphins are the closes to us in glial to neuron ratio). They do not have 1/6 the neuroarns we do - both us and dolphins are about 1:1 for glial neuron ratio.