Why go with a 4 GB Windows box when...
on
Laptops with Big RAM?
·
· Score: -1, Troll
You could get a Mac? Really, Mac apps run sooooo much more efficiently, CPU-wise and RAM-wise. If you can get away with it, I highly recommend doing so. Macs cost more, but work *better*.
. . . at the feet of whoever wants to recycle? If I want to recycle it (which I often lean in favor of doing for recyclables), I can find someone who will recycle it for me (either at a cost to me or free). If I toss it in the trash, my trash company knows the possibility exists computer parts might be included among the refuse. What they do with the garbage upon reception is their responsibility. If any harmful chemicals were to leak out of the parts and into the trashyard, they *are* responsible for making sure it does not leak into anyone elses property. And if such leakage happens, people can sue for damages.
Since, according to the article, matter has positive energy and gravity has negative energy of equal value, does this not mean the net energy of the universe is 0 and we could create matter, theoretically, out of nothing without violating the principle that Energy not be created nor destroyed (that is, create some matter out of nothing and its energy should be offset entirely by gravity's negative energy)?
Therefore, could we not create enough matter to convert to thermal energy to keep the universe "warm" and prevent the "Big Freeze"?
Slashdot Mirror
You could get a Mac? Really, Mac apps run sooooo much more efficiently, CPU-wise and RAM-wise. If you can get away with it, I highly recommend doing so. Macs cost more, but work *better*.
. . . at the feet of whoever wants to recycle? If I want to recycle it (which I often lean in favor of doing for recyclables), I can find someone who will recycle it for me (either at a cost to me or free). If I toss it in the trash, my trash company knows the possibility exists computer parts might be included among the refuse. What they do with the garbage upon reception is their responsibility. If any harmful chemicals were to leak out of the parts and into the trashyard, they *are* responsible for making sure it does not leak into anyone elses property. And if such leakage happens, people can sue for damages.
So, what's the problem?
Since, according to the article, matter has positive energy and gravity has negative energy of equal value, does this not mean the net energy of the universe is 0 and we could create matter, theoretically, out of nothing without violating the principle that Energy not be created nor destroyed (that is, create some matter out of nothing and its energy should be offset entirely by gravity's negative energy)?
Therefore, could we not create enough matter to convert to thermal energy to keep the universe "warm" and prevent the "Big Freeze"?