It's the same exact thing. The author gives the publisher some or all rights to their work in exchange for money and/or royalties. If they have a problem with it, they should have negotiated for more rights.
Uh no. It's not the same thing at all. The author of an academic paper does not get paid for publishing, and often has to pay for the service. (Though usually the university the author works with pays this on his behalf)
Everything is negotiable, but journals like "Nature" and "Science" have very strong bargaining positions since everybody wants to publish there (as they are the most prestigious in the hard sciences).
Wow -- it's all almost as illogical as academia, where professors have to beg permission from publishers to distribute their own works to students. Almost.
Depends on the publishing house. It's the 00's. Everything is negotiable.
Tungsten bulbs, the kind in most household lamps, are about 3000K. That's the color temperature. I don't think any of us have 3000 degree bulbs in our house.
You would be wrong. The coil which emits light reaches 3000K. There's a vacuum between the coil and the glass. This is why you can touch a lamp without getting third degree burns.
You can say I'm off my rocker, but the fact remains: incandescent lamps are very accurately modeled by blackbody radiators (and the smaller and hotter they get, the better the approximation), which have the property that the "color" (or more accurately, the continuous spectrum) they emit is completely dependent on the temperature at which they operate. Moreover, incandescent lamps are modeled accurately enough that their thermal temperature (at the points where they emit light) is essentially their color temperature.
The fact that you're a photographer means nothing. In fact, it's rather worrying that you rely on your "credentials" to dismiss real physics.
Consider this: a regular incandescent bulb operates at about 2500K. AT THE COIL. Look it up if you don't believe me. There's a pretty good vacuum between the coil and the glass bulb. Vacua are pretty good thermal insulators. This is why the glass isn't 2500K, and more like 400K.
If you want to get into "corrected" color temperature, a unit used for discrete spectrum lamps, that's a different story. That unit depends on psychological factors. However, the lamp in the article is a "full spectrum" lamp, which means that it is a continuous spectrum lamp. Until you discover super neato new physics, that means it is incandescent, and so accurately modeled by a black body, and so the thermal temperature at the light emitter is the color temperature.
For an object which is not emitting as a blackbody, "color temperature" means, basically, the temperature that a blackbody would have to be at in order to emit the same color of light, where "color of light" has mostly a lot to do with physics of perception, and not physics of light.
Yes, I was summarizing. Incandescents are very accurately modelled by black bodies (especially as the lamp gets small and hot), but "discrete" lamps like fluorescents are definitely not (since they don't emit a continuous spectrum). Lighting people use the "corrected" color temperature (CTT) unit to measure the "color" of those lights. As you said, that unit depends on psychological factors.
Yes, yes it is. It's not HTML. It's an XML, rendered by Webkit via Cocoa's Webkit hooks. You can telnet onto the phobo.apple.com domains and get your XML straight from there, using plain old HTTP. Hell, phobos runs on Apache, and uses WebObjects.
This is color temperature. Color temperature has absolutely nothing to do with the temperature that a bulb operates.
Oh lord.
What do you think color temperature is? It is the temperature at which an ideal black body radiator emits a given light spectrum. It most certainly has to do with the temperature at which an incandescent bulb operates. The hotter the bulb gets, the higher the color temperature. And moreover, the smaller the light emitter becomes, the closer color temperature and operating temperature become.
In this case, it would be physically impossible for a light of any sort to give off that much energy and only consume the amount of electricity available to even a street light.
Temperature isn't energy. Temperature is energy density. For a given amount of energy, the smaller the emitter is, the hotter it will be.
My space heater uses 1500watts and requires I believe 12amps to operate and it would never be able to get anywhere near 6000k even if it were to ignite.
And? The heat emitter is huge. Scale it down to about a 10th its size and run 1500W through it. It will glow a nice bright white before melting.
I mixed up my pronouns. I mean that fluorescents and similar lamps do not rely on incandescence, so the black body model is not appropriate.
The lamp from the article appears to rely on incandescence (as we can conclude from the fact that it is a high bandwidth lamp), and so its temperature at the point of emission is close to its color temperature.
In light physics, temperature and color temperature are the same thing. Color temperature refers to the temperature at which an ideal black body radiator will emit such a spectrum. This unit is obviously a temperature.
Moreover, this lamp appears to be a high bandwidth lamp -- "full spectrum" as they said. This implies that it does not depend on the absorbsion and emission characteristics of specific atoms. Lamps like these -- fluorescents, high efficiency sodium lamps, and the like -- emit light at discrete wavelengths. High bandwidth lamps depend on incandescence to produce light. Indeed, color temperature doesn't make sense for these kinds of lamps -- no black body radiator will emit discrete spectra. (There's a "corrected" color temperature unit for these lamps used in the lighting trade)
The point is: these lamps get hot. They reach about 6000K.
And there's no such thing as waste heat in the winter. Sure, you're only using 12W. Which means that you'll need another 48W worth of heat to catch up to the incandescent. In my part of the country, electricity is cheaper than oil (due to several nearby hydroelectric dams). Which is why I prefer Halogen lamps most of all. They put out twice as much light output as a standard incandescent for the same power, with a better spectrum, and at higher temperatures. Oh, yes, they last much longer than regular incandescent bulbs too. The one sitting next to me is at least two years old.
Let p2p run rampant. Don't sue anybody. Then watch and see if the music/movie industries up and die. If they do, then consider whether or not legislation is needed to revivify them. If they do not die, then admit that the legislation was never needed in the first place, and just don't bother with it.
They won't. This was the biggest year for the MPAA ever.
Of course its not useful yet. Most of what happens in fast paced games does not go through your conscious mind. Most fast past gaming skills are simple muscle memory and hand eye coordination. The best gamers are on top of their game as they relax and stop thinking about anything. The less you engage your mind the better you do.
Utter bullshit. Yes, hand-eye coordination is very important. But more so is tactical and strategic reasoning. Even in fast paced games. This process of situational analysis is certainly done automatically (you can't really help it -- engaging a game is almost by definition an exercise in situational awareness), and it may or may not be "voiced". But it is not unconscious. It is not mere muscle memory.
Funnily enough, if this technology develops to the point where it can translate a complex plan into the proper sequence of game moves, it will ultimately turn game playing into mathematics (as an activity as practiced by mathematicians). You wouldn't have to do anything but sit in front of a computer quietly, and concentrating on the problem at hand. A day where a complex plan can be translated directly will never come. But even this technology is capable of it if introduced to a child at an early enough age. The child would develop "control sequences" for computer actions we could probably never experience.
Slashdot Mirror
I think he meant that the SCART had the potential to be something like USB for TV, but that the implementation was flawed.
No they didn't. Distribution is illegal, not downloading. People can't seem to understand that.
Because it's wrong, in the US.
It's the same exact thing. The author gives the publisher some or all rights to their work in exchange for money and/or royalties. If they have a problem with it, they should have negotiated for more rights.
Uh no. It's not the same thing at all. The author of an academic paper does not get paid for publishing, and often has to pay for the service. (Though usually the university the author works with pays this on his behalf)
Everything is negotiable, but journals like "Nature" and "Science" have very strong bargaining positions since everybody wants to publish there (as they are the most prestigious in the hard sciences).
Wow -- it's all almost as illogical as academia, where professors have to beg permission from publishers to distribute their own works to students. Almost.
Depends on the publishing house. It's the 00's. Everything is negotiable.
Hint: For this prank to work, the stickers should be different colors.
Yes. The identity map is a map.
That's pretty much what makes it 42nd most abundant...
Painting is Closest Texas Man Will Get to a Woman
Tungsten bulbs, the kind in most household lamps, are about 3000K. That's the color temperature. I don't think any of us have 3000 degree bulbs in our house.
You would be wrong. The coil which emits light reaches 3000K. There's a vacuum between the coil and the glass. This is why you can touch a lamp without getting third degree burns.
You can say I'm off my rocker, but the fact remains: incandescent lamps are very accurately modeled by blackbody radiators (and the smaller and hotter they get, the better the approximation), which have the property that the "color" (or more accurately, the continuous spectrum) they emit is completely dependent on the temperature at which they operate. Moreover, incandescent lamps are modeled accurately enough that their thermal temperature (at the points where they emit light) is essentially their color temperature.
The fact that you're a photographer means nothing. In fact, it's rather worrying that you rely on your "credentials" to dismiss real physics.
Consider this: a regular incandescent bulb operates at about 2500K. AT THE COIL. Look it up if you don't believe me. There's a pretty good vacuum between the coil and the glass bulb. Vacua are pretty good thermal insulators. This is why the glass isn't 2500K, and more like 400K.
If you want to get into "corrected" color temperature, a unit used for discrete spectrum lamps, that's a different story. That unit depends on psychological factors. However, the lamp in the article is a "full spectrum" lamp, which means that it is a continuous spectrum lamp. Until you discover super neato new physics, that means it is incandescent, and so accurately modeled by a black body, and so the thermal temperature at the light emitter is the color temperature.
For an object which is not emitting as a blackbody, "color temperature" means, basically, the temperature that a blackbody would have to be at in order to emit the same color of light, where "color of light" has mostly a lot to do with physics of perception, and not physics of light.
Yes, I was summarizing. Incandescents are very accurately modelled by black bodies (especially as the lamp gets small and hot), but "discrete" lamps like fluorescents are definitely not (since they don't emit a continuous spectrum). Lighting people use the "corrected" color temperature (CTT) unit to measure the "color" of those lights. As you said, that unit depends on psychological factors.
Yes, yes it is. It's not HTML. It's an XML, rendered by Webkit via Cocoa's Webkit hooks. You can telnet onto the phobo.apple.com domains and get your XML straight from there, using plain old HTTP. Hell, phobos runs on Apache, and uses WebObjects.
This is color temperature. Color temperature has absolutely nothing to do with the temperature that a bulb operates.
Oh lord.
What do you think color temperature is? It is the temperature at which an ideal black body radiator emits a given light spectrum. It most certainly has to do with the temperature at which an incandescent bulb operates. The hotter the bulb gets, the higher the color temperature. And moreover, the smaller the light emitter becomes, the closer color temperature and operating temperature become.
In this case, it would be physically impossible for a light of any sort to give off that much energy and only consume the amount of electricity available to even a street light.
Temperature isn't energy. Temperature is energy density. For a given amount of energy, the smaller the emitter is, the hotter it will be.
My space heater uses 1500watts and requires I believe 12amps to operate and it would never be able to get anywhere near 6000k even if it were to ignite.
And? The heat emitter is huge. Scale it down to about a 10th its size and run 1500W through it. It will glow a nice bright white before melting.
I mixed up my pronouns. I mean that fluorescents and similar lamps do not rely on incandescence, so the black body model is not appropriate.
The lamp from the article appears to rely on incandescence (as we can conclude from the fact that it is a high bandwidth lamp), and so its temperature at the point of emission is close to its color temperature.
In light physics, temperature and color temperature are the same thing. Color temperature refers to the temperature at which an ideal black body radiator will emit such a spectrum. This unit is obviously a temperature.
Moreover, this lamp appears to be a high bandwidth lamp -- "full spectrum" as they said. This implies that it does not depend on the absorbsion and emission characteristics of specific atoms. Lamps like these -- fluorescents, high efficiency sodium lamps, and the like -- emit light at discrete wavelengths. High bandwidth lamps depend on incandescence to produce light. Indeed, color temperature doesn't make sense for these kinds of lamps -- no black body radiator will emit discrete spectra. (There's a "corrected" color temperature unit for these lamps used in the lighting trade)
The point is: these lamps get hot. They reach about 6000K.
The iTunes Music Store is web-based. iTunes on OS X is a Webkit enabled browser. I don't know what iTunes for Windows uses for rendering.
Too bad CFL's look like shit.
And there's no such thing as waste heat in the winter. Sure, you're only using 12W. Which means that you'll need another 48W worth of heat to catch up to the incandescent. In my part of the country, electricity is cheaper than oil (due to several nearby hydroelectric dams). Which is why I prefer Halogen lamps most of all. They put out twice as much light output as a standard incandescent for the same power, with a better spectrum, and at higher temperatures. Oh, yes, they last much longer than regular incandescent bulbs too. The one sitting next to me is at least two years old.
CFLs would raise my energy costs.
http://www.fleshlight.com/ has your answer.
Let p2p run rampant. Don't sue anybody. Then watch and see if the music/movie industries up and die. If they do, then consider whether or not legislation is needed to revivify them. If they do not die, then admit that the legislation was never needed in the first place, and just don't bother with it.
They won't. This was the biggest year for the MPAA ever.
Okay, you specifically said you weren't counting nightlies. Fair enough.
Still, nightlies are where it's at. Especially since KDE 4 is basically a developer preview anyway. KDE's nightlies are more usable and stable.
http://liquidat.wordpress.com/2007/12/20/kubuntus-kde-4-livecd-comes-with-webkit-enabled-konqueror/
This is exactly why pornographers and masturbators shouldn't be allowed to found anything.
WebKit is forked from KHTML, so are any fixes to KHTML being ported to WebKit?
Get with the times. KDE dropped KHTML in favor of Webkit.
I see them more as Ubuntu users because of all the brown, but you make an interesting point.
Of course its not useful yet. Most of what happens in fast paced games does not go through your conscious mind. Most fast past gaming skills are simple muscle memory and hand eye coordination. The best gamers are on top of their game as they relax and stop thinking about anything. The less you engage your mind the better you do.
Utter bullshit. Yes, hand-eye coordination is very important. But more so is tactical and strategic reasoning. Even in fast paced games. This process of situational analysis is certainly done automatically (you can't really help it -- engaging a game is almost by definition an exercise in situational awareness), and it may or may not be "voiced". But it is not unconscious. It is not mere muscle memory.
Funnily enough, if this technology develops to the point where it can translate a complex plan into the proper sequence of game moves, it will ultimately turn game playing into mathematics (as an activity as practiced by mathematicians). You wouldn't have to do anything but sit in front of a computer quietly, and concentrating on the problem at hand. A day where a complex plan can be translated directly will never come. But even this technology is capable of it if introduced to a child at an early enough age. The child would develop "control sequences" for computer actions we could probably never experience.