Actually, it's interactions with the moon that are the most telling. Since this is a heavy ion collider, it's colliding nuclei that are much larger than those found in the earth's atmosphere.
When they disproved this crap before the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider turned on they found that the most powerful constraint came by considering heavy ion interactions when a cosmic ray hit the moon rather than the earth's atmosphere (even though the earth is bigger, to properly compare with conditions at RHIC, you need to look at the number of heavy ion collisions).
If collisions at RHIC were to create strangelets or blackholes, then the moon would have been destroyed long ago.
Google is a great company with some really good services, but where does their core revenue come from, other than ads and maybe sales of their few SE boxes?
Um... you mean like television? ABC, NBC, CBS and FOX have had a pretty good run by providing a free service (stupid television shows and vacuous "news" programming) with their primary revenue from ads.
They were only brought down when cable networks realized they could charge users directly as long as they provided a better service. Google's strategy is very sound.
No. It all depends on the relative velocity of the electron-positron pairs that are annihilating and the relative speed of that "soup" of electron-positron pairs to our reference frame. The radiation could be so broad that you'd never notice it.
Trust me guys -- if it were this trivially tossed aside, it never would have even made it into the proceedings. (In fact, I dare say, George would have never suggested it. I've worked with him briefly -- and, trust me, this is not an amature.)
No. The radiation is of a very specific wavelength in the center of mass of the electron-positron pair.
This does not imply that we would only see one wavelength. If the electrons and positrons are moving, we would see a broad distribution of wavelengths. (where broad is related to the temperature of the electron-positron gas of course)
Even if it is submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, *the* peer reviewed journal of physics ( Physical Review Letters http://prl.aps.org/ ) limits submissions to four pages of text.
Four pages is all it should take to briefly introduce a new theory, which is what George is doing.
p.s. George Chapline is very a bright fella with a history of suggesting contrarian theories. At least one of those theories has led to a entire branch of nuclear physics.
The problem is that nobody thinks "The company I'm looking for is an aerospace company, so I'll try name.aero". Everybody tries name.com, name.net and finally name.org (generally in that order).
No. People do that the first couple times they're looking for a company. Then they realize that a quick google search turns up the company in the first line. No one uses the TLDs at all.
Re:I don't see any way to create an account yet.
on
Gmail Goes Public
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
On the other side, I've got about 50 invites left.
Everyone in gmail has 50 invites left. They currently replenish your used invites daily. I've handed out a few gmail accounts in the past few weeks and my number of invites continues to peg at 50.
As a result, gmail was effectively completely open quite a while ago.
Has anyone but the reviewer even read this book?
on
Blink, Take 2
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
One reviewer comments about how they hated the book (only after thinking about it after the fact).
Then a set of individuals who haven't even read the book incorrectly categorize it as self-help, and delight in adding manure to the top of the pile.
I, for one, have actually read the book and I can tell you it's a great read. I've recommended it to all my friends and family. Not because it will change the world, but because, for me, it opened the door on a set of psychological experiments of the subconcious. There were fascinating anecdotes and, more importantly, actual research that addressed the issue of subconcious behavior and thinking I truly enjoyed. The author is not trying to convince you he has a new take on the subconcious -- but, instead, pointing out where current research is and how it relates to our intuitive understanding.
The first time I heard of relativity I thought it was very strange. Then the more I considered it the more I realized how completely intuitive and obvious it is. Then followed a 'duh' moment where I realized the universe must behave in this fashion. That doesn't take away from the fact that relativity was revolutionary.
The fact that there is research on the subconcious that, after you've considered it, seems obvious doesn't detract from the point that it's original and interesting.
Open your mind.
And please... enjoy the book. You can bitch at me later if you think I've wasted your time. The whole book took me a two legged flight from Oakland to Albuquerque and I couldn't put it down.
It's not $80k per programmer. A business owner calculates the cost per person with overhead (insurance, retirement, other benefits, etc.) which typically is a factor of two.
In our company the real cost per person is closer to $200k. In a large laboratory (of which I was a member till very recently) the factor is closer to 3. So that's $300k per person.
Now you're talking about 1 person-week of effort to purchase this tool.
Trivial...
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it's interactions with the moon that are the most telling. Since this is a heavy ion collider, it's colliding nuclei that are much larger than those found in the earth's atmosphere. When they disproved this crap before the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider turned on they found that the most powerful constraint came by considering heavy ion interactions when a cosmic ray hit the moon rather than the earth's atmosphere (even though the earth is bigger, to properly compare with conditions at RHIC, you need to look at the number of heavy ion collisions). If collisions at RHIC were to create strangelets or blackholes, then the moon would have been destroyed long ago.
Google is a great company with some really good services, but where does their core revenue come from, other than ads and maybe sales of their few SE boxes?
Um ... you mean like television? ABC, NBC, CBS and FOX have had a pretty good run by providing a free service (stupid television shows and vacuous "news" programming) with their primary revenue from ads.
They were only brought down when cable networks realized they could charge users directly as long as they provided a better service. Google's strategy is very sound.
Trust me guys -- if it were this trivially tossed aside, it never would have even made it into the proceedings. (In fact, I dare say, George would have never suggested it. I've worked with him briefly -- and, trust me, this is not an amature.)
This does not imply that we would only see one wavelength. If the electrons and positrons are moving, we would see a broad distribution of wavelengths. (where broad is related to the temperature of the electron-positron gas of course)
Four pages is all it should take to briefly introduce a new theory, which is what George is doing.
p.s. George Chapline is very a bright fella with a history of suggesting contrarian theories. At least one of those theories has led to a entire branch of nuclear physics.
No. People do that the first couple times they're looking for a company. Then they realize that a quick google search turns up the company in the first line. No one uses the TLDs at all.
Everyone in gmail has 50 invites left. They currently replenish your used invites daily. I've handed out a few gmail accounts in the past few weeks and my number of invites continues to peg at 50.
As a result, gmail was effectively completely open quite a while ago.
One reviewer comments about how they hated the book (only after thinking about it after the fact).
Then a set of individuals who haven't even read the book incorrectly categorize it as self-help, and delight in adding manure to the top of the pile.
I, for one, have actually read the book and I can tell you it's a great read. I've recommended it to all my friends and family. Not because it will change the world, but because, for me, it opened the door on a set of psychological experiments of the subconcious. There were fascinating anecdotes and, more importantly, actual research that addressed the issue of subconcious behavior and thinking I truly enjoyed. The author is not trying to convince you he has a new take on the subconcious -- but, instead, pointing out where current research is and how it relates to our intuitive understanding.
The first time I heard of relativity I thought it was very strange. Then the more I considered it the more I realized how completely intuitive and obvious it is. Then followed a 'duh' moment where I realized the universe must behave in this fashion. That doesn't take away from the fact that relativity was revolutionary.
The fact that there is research on the subconcious that, after you've considered it, seems obvious doesn't detract from the point that it's original and interesting.
Open your mind.
And please ... enjoy the book. You can bitch at me later if you think I've wasted your time. The whole book took me a two legged flight from Oakland to Albuquerque and I couldn't put it down.
YMMV
It's not $80k per programmer. A business owner calculates the cost per person with overhead (insurance, retirement, other benefits, etc.) which typically is a factor of two. In our company the real cost per person is closer to $200k. In a large laboratory (of which I was a member till very recently) the factor is closer to 3. So that's $300k per person. Now you're talking about 1 person-week of effort to purchase this tool. Trivial...