You are mixing the speed of interaction with the range of interaction. Also, you are talking of the effective strong interaction. Indeed, on a relatively macroscopic, say nuclear, scale that is all you see.
But take a more fundamental level, smaller scales and higher energies. The very early universe, for example. There the distances between particles are so small that the strong and weak force do propagate even in the practical sense of the word.
In fact, on that level, even the Z and W bosons are massless, since they get their masses via the Higgs mechanism at relatively low energies. (Provided I understand the Higgs mechanism correctly. In fact, it should be even somewhat more complicated, as the electromagnetic and weak interactions are united in an electroweak interaction.)
The electromagnetic and strong interaction and gravity indeed propagate at the speed of light, as the particles that mediate these interactions are massless (resp. the photon, gluons, hypothetical graviton).
But the carriers of the weak force are massive Z and W+- bosons -- the weak force cannot travel at the speed of light.
It certainly is. It is one of the few artistic science fiction films out there. The characters are live, the film makes you think. Tarkovsky could use some of the best actors in the Soviet Union. There are those moments of silence that you understand without words, but Soderbergh decided to fill with blabber in his remake.
Lem detests the escapist conclusion of the film (I did not like it either), but that does not make the film any worse artistically or less worth watching, of course.
The remake of the Solaris was awful indeed. It seems that Soderbergh, having made action films that far, thought that an artistic film is an exact opposite of the former: a lot of talk, long, drawn out scenes empty of meaning etc. It is a disaster, compared to the original film by Tarkovsky.
There is a whole spectrum of means of communication, from face-to-face to phone to messenger to e-mail to snail mail.
Every one of them is different and should have its place. Indeed, I find that I say different things (and differently), depending whether conversing face-to-face, via MSN, or e-mail.
The problem with this, of course, is that it only affects *that* timeline and any future forks created from that point onwards
That is, according to the Multiple Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. As the latter is not yet reconciled with general relativity (the domain of time machines), it may or may not be so.
And Wiki Wiki is a vicious character in one of the short stories of the protagonist in Martin Eden by Jack London. The story takes place in Tahiti, of course.:-)
Python docstring used together with the doctest module allow just for that: code that is as "self-documenting" as it can be, and contains specification of expected results at the same time.
But of course, for more complicated designs doctest might not be enough.
And alas, not all applications can be written in Python.
There are plenty of good blogs by physicists, and programmers that I read regularly. I have learned about functional programming languages worth learning from them; about some interesting physics articles, etc.
It is hard to find the good blogs, of course, but once one has found one, he can go on via their blogrolls.
At least some of the science done in the fields with prospects of bringing in money, e.g. solid state physics, and biotechnology, is not published right away, but put to use in technology that is patented. (And sometimes even the discoveries are patented, e.g. specific genes. Definitely a short sighted step by the patent office.)
Slashdot Mirror
GAstrology? I'd prefer GAstronomy.
You are mixing the speed of interaction with the range of interaction. Also, you are talking of the effective strong interaction. Indeed, on a relatively macroscopic, say nuclear, scale that is all you see.
But take a more fundamental level, smaller scales and higher energies. The very early universe, for example. There the distances between particles are so small that the strong and weak force do propagate even in the practical sense of the word.
In fact, on that level, even the Z and W bosons are massless, since they get their masses via the Higgs mechanism at relatively low energies. (Provided I understand the Higgs mechanism correctly. In fact, it should be even somewhat more complicated, as the electromagnetic and weak interactions are united in an electroweak interaction.)
The electromagnetic and strong interaction and gravity indeed propagate at the speed of light, as the particles that mediate these interactions are massless (resp. the photon, gluons, hypothetical graviton).
But the carriers of the weak force are massive Z and W+- bosons -- the weak force cannot travel at the speed of light.
See ASCIIsvg that allows for easy creation of mathematical graphics.
Peter Jipsen's ASCIIsvg script (JavaScript) is an easy and quite powerful way to generate mathematical SVG graphics in HTML.
Mod parent up, he makes a good point.
That would make a great screensaver.
It certainly is. It is one of the few artistic science fiction films out there. The characters are live, the film makes you think. Tarkovsky could use some of the best actors in the Soviet Union. There are those moments of silence that you understand without words, but Soderbergh decided to fill with blabber in his remake.
Lem detests the escapist conclusion of the film (I did not like it either), but that does not make the film any worse artistically or less worth watching, of course.
The remake of the Solaris was awful indeed. It seems that Soderbergh, having made action films that far, thought that an artistic film is an exact opposite of the former: a lot of talk, long, drawn out scenes empty of meaning etc. It is a disaster, compared to the original film by Tarkovsky.
There is a whole spectrum of means of communication, from face-to-face to phone to messenger to e-mail to snail mail.
Every one of them is different and should have its place. Indeed, I find that I say different things (and differently), depending whether conversing face-to-face, via MSN, or e-mail.
The problem with this, of course, is that it only affects *that* timeline and any future forks created from that point onwards
That is, according to the Multiple Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. As the latter is not yet reconciled with general relativity (the domain of time machines), it may or may not be so.
Mod parent up, one should take all those new hypotheses with a grain of salt indeed.
Only that you would have to wait 100000 years for feedback from the edge of the Galaxy, as nothing can go faster than light!
Mod parent up, he makes a good point.
And Wiki Wiki is a vicious character in one of the short stories of the protagonist in Martin Eden by Jack London. The story takes place in Tahiti, of course. :-)
Mod parent up.
Python docstring used together with the doctest module allow just for that: code that is as "self-documenting" as it can be, and contains specification of expected results at the same time.
But of course, for more complicated designs doctest might not be enough.
And alas, not all applications can be written in Python.
There are plenty of good blogs by physicists, and programmers that I read regularly. I have learned about functional programming languages worth learning from them; about some interesting physics articles, etc.
It is hard to find the good blogs, of course, but once one has found one, he can go on via their blogrolls.
Some good blogs: Bruce Eckel's On the Thought, physicist Jacques Distler's Musings, Lambda the Ultimate: The Programming Languages' Weblog, cosmologist Sean Carroll's Preposterous Universe, etc.
At least some of the science done in the fields with prospects of bringing in money, e.g. solid state physics, and biotechnology, is not published right away, but put to use in technology that is patented. (And sometimes even the discoveries are patented, e.g. specific genes. Definitely a short sighted step by the patent office.)
A burned CD is inferior to that of a pressed one in resistance to time.