Why can't we sell it or donate it to another country as a gift if they are willing to take over upkeep?
The point of building a new one is that the old one is too expensive to repair. You would probably need to give money to any potential caretaker. Don't forget that even if someone else just uses it until it completely breaks down without trying to repair it, you still have the problem that you need to crash it safely like the Mir station. Hubble is too big to be left wandering over our heads.
Actually, I am french-canadian. My accent is very noticeable. It was really the passport. But, while it does not apply to this particular case, I think your argument makes a lot of sense.
Actually, crossing the american border as a canadian is quite funny. I was in Logan airport recently on a flight from Paris. The line-up was awful, everyone single person got interrogated and fingerprinted, included families with children, until it was my turn. I had filled all the papers they gave me in the plane (which takes a long time!) but when the border agent saw my passport, he basically said "Oh, you're canadian! You don't need this! Welcome to America! Next!!!". That felt nice...until I realised all that other people had to go through. Honestly, it's too much.
If you only want to find the information, Wikipedia is good enough, in fact probably better because you often have the kind of up-to-date information from very knowledgeable people. Encyclopedias are written by encyclopedia writers, wikipedia articles are usually written by experts in the particular field.
Of course, it is not completely unbiased, but you should be able to figure which articles are right and which are not.
Now, I think your point was more about what to do when you want to refer to something: Encarta seems more "academic-friendly". But my advice is to always look for a more precise, obscure reference. You can use an encyclopedia to figure out what to look for, but then, look for it!! There rarely is enough detail in an encyclopedia to make an insightful analysis, and it certainly does not look like you worked very hard to get it.
It is now a crime to conspire to monopolize??? Isn't it the whole point of communist economic policy in the firstplace? A communist revolution is after all one big conspiracy to monopolize, with the belief that it creates a better world!
Maybe when they find out that no one is doing anything useful on the space station and that you don't need a base on the moon to go to mars, then they will repair Hubble out of the billions saved.
Then, they might also decide that invading another country is a better idea.
Hey, I know! Why not present Hubble as "a tool to invade the privacy of terrorists who might hide in other solar systems". That might just work!!
The idea seems like science fiction, but it is consistent with the laws of physics and biology.
Well, not really. It is consistent with some theory in physics, which might turn out to be true or not. We have no idea that M-theory works, and even then M-theory is not necessarly suitable to such scenarios. The only thing we can say is that it`s not been disproved.
Of course they will, when they run out of the energy which, according to the article, they "do not need". Now, if you feed them, then maybe they will run a lot longer.
I can build a car that runs without fuel. It's very easy. You just have to compress a very stiff spring inside the car at the factory and let it slowly uncompress. Then, after a few tens kilometers, you throw away the car and you buy a new one. How clever.
You're right, the actual speed at which the information travels around is not much different. If I remember well, voltage goes at (2/3)c in a coaxial cable. It's probably different in silicon, but in the similar range.
Secondly, did you ever see a fibre optic cable? They can be made invisible to the eye already. I do not think size is a real limitation here. The cost of laying down the fibre is probably more than the cost of the fibre.
It is important to note that this this is false. And I mean, Completely Wrong. Not only is the effect completely negligible, the little effect that it has goes in the other direction: the photons from the moon are PUSHING the earth in the other directions, just like if you shoot a bullet a something, it recoils in the other direction. How you could attract something by throwing others things at it is beyond my imagination.
(For the actual physicists around, yes, I know about gluons and virtual photons. This is not what we are talking about here.)
You are right, what they have done is the equivalent of creating five 1-qubit computers side by side, which is not terribly useful. It basically allows you to factorize one (factors are one and....), but FIVE TIMES!!!
Still, there are first steps to everything. Let's see if they are able to do interactions.
In fact, the original name (and one that is still used by many physicists) for the top and bottom quarks were Truth and Beauty. Now, of course, joykillers like you say that's not technical enough and that it can't be serious. As if Top and Bottom meant something more....If you want to do any anything technical, they should be called 1,2,3,4,5, and 6. Otherwise, give any name you want, they're just names.
Slashdot Mirror
Why can't we sell it or donate it to another country as a gift if they are willing to take over upkeep?
The point of building a new one is that the old one is too expensive to repair. You would probably need to give money to any potential caretaker. Don't forget that even if someone else just uses it until it completely breaks down without trying to repair it, you still have the problem that you need to crash it safely like the Mir station. Hubble is too big to be left wandering over our heads.
Actually, I am french-canadian. My accent is very noticeable. It was really the passport. But, while it does not apply to this particular case, I think your argument makes a lot of sense.
Actually, crossing the american border as a canadian is quite funny. I was in Logan airport recently on a flight from Paris. The line-up was awful, everyone single person got interrogated and fingerprinted, included families with children, until it was my turn. I had filled all the papers they gave me in the plane (which takes a long time!) but when the border agent saw my passport, he basically said "Oh, you're canadian! You don't need this! Welcome to America! Next!!!". That felt nice...until I realised all that other people had to go through. Honestly, it's too much.
If you only want to find the information, Wikipedia is good enough, in fact probably better because you often have the kind of up-to-date information from very knowledgeable people. Encyclopedias are written by encyclopedia writers, wikipedia articles are usually written by experts in the particular field.
Of course, it is not completely unbiased, but you should be able to figure which articles are right and which are not.
Now, I think your point was more about what to do when you want to refer to something: Encarta seems more "academic-friendly". But my advice is to always look for a more precise, obscure reference. You can use an encyclopedia to figure out what to look for, but then, look for it!! There rarely is enough detail in an encyclopedia to make an insightful analysis, and it certainly does not look like you worked very hard to get it.
It is now a crime to conspire to monopolize??? Isn't it the whole point of communist economic policy in the firstplace? A communist revolution is after all one big conspiracy to monopolize, with the belief that it creates a better world!
Maybe when they find out that no one is doing anything useful on the space station and that you don't need a base on the moon to go to mars, then they will repair Hubble out of the billions saved. Then, they might also decide that invading another country is a better idea. Hey, I know! Why not present Hubble as "a tool to invade the privacy of terrorists who might hide in other solar systems". That might just work!!
Well, not really. It is consistent with some theory in physics, which might turn out to be true or not. We have no idea that M-theory works, and even then M-theory is not necessarly suitable to such scenarios. The only thing we can say is that it`s not been disproved.
I can build a car that runs without fuel. It's very easy. You just have to compress a very stiff spring inside the car at the factory and let it slowly uncompress. Then, after a few tens kilometers, you throw away the car and you buy a new one. How clever.
You're right, the actual speed at which the information travels around is not much different. If I remember well, voltage goes at (2/3)c in a coaxial cable. It's probably different in silicon, but in the similar range. Secondly, did you ever see a fibre optic cable? They can be made invisible to the eye already. I do not think size is a real limitation here. The cost of laying down the fibre is probably more than the cost of the fibre.
It is important to note that this this is false. And I mean, Completely Wrong. Not only is the effect completely negligible, the little effect that it has goes in the other direction: the photons from the moon are PUSHING the earth in the other directions, just like if you shoot a bullet a something, it recoils in the other direction. How you could attract something by throwing others things at it is beyond my imagination.
(For the actual physicists around, yes, I know about gluons and virtual photons. This is not what we are talking about here.)
You are right, what they have done is the equivalent of creating five 1-qubit computers side by side, which is not terribly useful. It basically allows you to factorize one (factors are one and....), but FIVE TIMES!!! Still, there are first steps to everything. Let's see if they are able to do interactions.
In fact, the original name (and one that is still used by many physicists) for the top and bottom quarks were Truth and Beauty. Now, of course, joykillers like you say that's not technical enough and that it can't be serious. As if Top and Bottom meant something more....If you want to do any anything technical, they should be called 1,2,3,4,5, and 6. Otherwise, give any name you want, they're just names.