I was recently up at GSFC and got a chance to see the acoustic test chambers firsthand. The big horn (yes, there is a little one too) sits at the top of the acoustic test chamber and is roughly the size of a Volkswagen Beetle. They weren't testing at that point, but I'm informed that the whole building shakes when they fire this thing up. It simulates the noise and vibration of a launch.
Definitely loud enough to annoy the neighbors. I wanted one for my living room.
As some others have mentioned, how do you propose to get the equipment needed (which is rather large and cumbersome) to be mobile?
MRI while not NMR, is very similar to NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance - google it yourself). The subject (or sample) is placed in a powerful magnetic field; powerful enough to align the hydrogen atoms along field lines. Then radio frequency energy is beamed through the subject, from which we can make a "picture" (in the case if MRI, I believe we look at the water in your body, but I might be wrong). These techniques require REALLY POWERFUL MAGNETS. Magnets that are super-cooled with liquid nitrogen and weigh several tons. Have you ever been in for an MRI scan? These machines are BIG. And LOUD.
And these are only the practical matters. None of this addresses the basic issue which is still, "We won't know what you're thinking." Look here for some clues on why we won't know what you're thinking...
Who's geekier? The geek who makes the SCT joke or the geek who laughs at the SCT joke?
*I* thought it was funny, but I'm an amateur astronomy geek myself...
True. But in this instace, that was not the case. He was just stubborn.
I have done some FORTRAN as well as COBOL programming back in my IBM 370 days. I prefer the C-based languages (C, C++, ObjectiveC) these days for general purpose and simulation systems programming.
I actually ran into this once in Real Life. I worked with an old curmudgeon who was absolutely convinced that programming had been perfected with the advent of FORTRAN, back in 1957. He would not listen to anyone about other programming languages. We had to run f2c a lot when we got his coded up equations. Darn smart scientist, darn stupid programmer.
Ostensibly, the reason for this would seem to be that they don't want to deal with our revised emissions standards.
I might be wrong, but I've heard from the VW dealers that VW will be releasing a slew of TDI's in America around 2008 or so. They're redesigning the TDI's to comply with the new, stricter American emissions standards. In late 2008 you should be able to find new, cleaner TDI Jettas, Beetles, and Rabbits along with the Toureg. My wife has a TDI Beetle. 99 HP, 177ft/lbs. Goes like heck when the turbo kicks in. And 32/45 mpg, too. Now, if we could only get a biodiesel dealer in the NOVA area...
James P. Hogan's "Thrice Upon A Time" is about exactly this. They can't send physical objects back in time, but they can send information (using DEC PDP's!). They avert a disaster by sending information about it back to themselves before the disaster happened. If I recall the story correctly, they could only send a message back a certain interval, say three days, due to power and storage limitations. They ended up setting up a series of relays between earlier versions of themselves in order to leapfrog a message back to the beginning of the project, several months prior to the disaster.
Having worked in both the biotechnology and computer programming fields, I can tell you that there is not going to be a computer simulation that is good enough to obviate the need for all animal testing anytime soon. Biological systems are way too complex to accurately model. Also, there are almost always unexpected synergistic effects with new drugs. Of course, it is ridiculous to test a new hairspray on a rabbits eyes - we pretty much know what's going to happen there.
Most people who work in biotechnology are not the sadistic torturers you might think. One time in the lab I worked in, an animal tech didn't check all the mouse cages before a rack of cages went through the autoclave. There was a mouse left in one of the cages. The mouse most likely died a horrible and painful death. The tech was devestated about the mouse, and resigned even before she could be fired (which was the lab's policy if anyone was shown to have committed any animal cruelty).
Most reputable laboratories go to great lengths to ensure the comfort of the animals being tested. But the hard fact is that it is more ethical to test new drugs and procedures on animals than it is on humans.
Another thing that nobody on the Animal Rights side of the issue seems to mention is that a lot of this kind of testing furthers veterinary science. I have a 14-year-old dog that we rescued from a shelter when she was a pup. She is currently sporting two TPLO operations: one on each knee and is taking an antiinflammetory drug for arthritis. Both this surgery and the drug were experimental at one time, but thanks to science my dog is living out her final days in relative comfort rather than having to be put to sleep several years ago.
In fact, most if not all of the original astronauts and cosmonauts were test pilots. These are folks who have academic training as well as real world experience with such jock-related topics as aerodynamics, structural engineering, fluid dynamics, etc. Just because they have cojones the size of basketballs doesn't mean that they don't also have brains the size of, well, basketballs.
Slashdot Mirror
Betelgeuse is approximately 50 dozen light years away. We should be fine.
Listening to my Grado SR60s right now. Grados sound fantastic!
I was recently up at GSFC and got a chance to see the acoustic test chambers firsthand. The big horn (yes, there is a little one too) sits at the top of the acoustic test chamber and is roughly the size of a Volkswagen Beetle. They weren't testing at that point, but I'm informed that the whole building shakes when they fire this thing up. It simulates the noise and vibration of a launch. Definitely loud enough to annoy the neighbors. I wanted one for my living room.
I wish I had mod points. Not only funny, but true.
As some others have mentioned, how do you propose to get the equipment needed (which is rather large and cumbersome) to be mobile?
MRI while not NMR, is very similar to NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance - google it yourself). The subject (or sample) is placed in a powerful magnetic field; powerful enough to align the hydrogen atoms along field lines. Then radio frequency energy is beamed through the subject, from which we can make a "picture" (in the case if MRI, I believe we look at the water in your body, but I might be wrong). These techniques require REALLY POWERFUL MAGNETS. Magnets that are super-cooled with liquid nitrogen and weigh several tons. Have you ever been in for an MRI scan? These machines are BIG. And LOUD.
And these are only the practical matters. None of this addresses the basic issue which is still, "We won't know what you're thinking." Look here for some clues on why we won't know what you're thinking...
"And 10 years from now, the technology will be much smarter. We'll scan a person with one of these things and tell what they're actually thinking."
I call crap on this. We will be able to detect biometric data. We will not be able to tell "what you're thinking."
Who's geekier? The geek who makes the SCT joke or the geek who laughs at the SCT joke? *I* thought it was funny, but I'm an amateur astronomy geek myself...
(Oops! Hit "submit" too soon.)
If CEO's are frightened by this concept, they should get out of business.
We did nott get to where we are today without failures. We learn from our failures. "Risk-free innovation" is a fantasy, pure and simple.
/ Checks to see if somebody mentioned blipverts. Yup. Very good. Carry on.
Zing! Heinlein approves.
But I can't pay. I gave all my money to some kinda groovy religious guy, two songs ago...
True. But in this instace, that was not the case. He was just stubborn. I have done some FORTRAN as well as COBOL programming back in my IBM 370 days. I prefer the C-based languages (C, C++, ObjectiveC) these days for general purpose and simulation systems programming.
I actually ran into this once in Real Life. I worked with an old curmudgeon who was absolutely convinced that programming had been perfected with the advent of FORTRAN, back in 1957. He would not listen to anyone about other programming languages. We had to run f2c a lot when we got his coded up equations. Darn smart scientist, darn stupid programmer.
Yup. Still dead.
Ostensibly, the reason for this would seem to be that they don't want to deal with our revised emissions standards.
I might be wrong, but I've heard from the VW dealers that VW will be releasing a slew of TDI's in America around 2008 or so. They're redesigning the TDI's to comply with the new, stricter American emissions standards. In late 2008 you should be able to find new, cleaner TDI Jettas, Beetles, and Rabbits along with the Toureg. My wife has a TDI Beetle. 99 HP, 177ft/lbs. Goes like heck when the turbo kicks in. And 32/45 mpg, too. Now, if we could only get a biodiesel dealer in the NOVA area...
I guess the wolves finally got him.
Personally, I'd have called it the offon.
Wow. You have a lot of baggage. Lighten up, Francis!
What? You mean like this?
+1 Funny
James P. Hogan's "Thrice Upon A Time" is about exactly this. They can't send physical objects back in time, but they can send information (using DEC PDP's!). They avert a disaster by sending information about it back to themselves before the disaster happened. If I recall the story correctly, they could only send a message back a certain interval, say three days, due to power and storage limitations. They ended up setting up a series of relays between earlier versions of themselves in order to leapfrog a message back to the beginning of the project, several months prior to the disaster.
Inconvenient? Like polio or pertussis or plague?
Having worked in both the biotechnology and computer programming fields, I can tell you that there is not going to be a computer simulation that is good enough to obviate the need for all animal testing anytime soon. Biological systems are way too complex to accurately model. Also, there are almost always unexpected synergistic effects with new drugs. Of course, it is ridiculous to test a new hairspray on a rabbits eyes - we pretty much know what's going to happen there.
Most people who work in biotechnology are not the sadistic torturers you might think. One time in the lab I worked in, an animal tech didn't check all the mouse cages before a rack of cages went through the autoclave. There was a mouse left in one of the cages. The mouse most likely died a horrible and painful death. The tech was devestated about the mouse, and resigned even before she could be fired (which was the lab's policy if anyone was shown to have committed any animal cruelty).
Most reputable laboratories go to great lengths to ensure the comfort of the animals being tested. But the hard fact is that it is more ethical to test new drugs and procedures on animals than it is on humans.
Another thing that nobody on the Animal Rights side of the issue seems to mention is that a lot of this kind of testing furthers veterinary science. I have a 14-year-old dog that we rescued from a shelter when she was a pup. She is currently sporting two TPLO operations: one on each knee and is taking an antiinflammetory drug for arthritis. Both this surgery and the drug were experimental at one time, but thanks to science my dog is living out her final days in relative comfort rather than having to be put to sleep several years ago.
So how does Minesweeper run on it?
Agreed.
In fact, most if not all of the original astronauts and cosmonauts were test pilots. These are folks who have academic training as well as real world experience with such jock-related topics as aerodynamics, structural engineering, fluid dynamics, etc. Just because they have cojones the size of basketballs doesn't mean that they don't also have brains the size of, well, basketballs.