After reading this article on a quantum erasure experiment, it seems that if path p (in this experiment) was lengthened enough you can tell, by looking at the double slit results of path s, if the polarizer is in place on path p before the p photon even reaches the polarizer. What if path p was lengthened to a distant location? Could someone there apply or remove the polarizer to path p letting you, by looking at the nearby double slit interference/non-interference results of path s, receive the signal of whether the polarizer is on path p or not before the p photon reaches the distant polarizer? If so, you have FTL communication in one direction.
Well, I think this discourages us non-afraid, educated people in other industrial nations from any natural migration to the UK. All the orwellian traps their government is falling into are becoming widely known around the world. It will increase their ratio of afraid and ignorant to non-afraid and educated immigrants and population. I think this will just make their situation worse over time... but the opposite everywhere else.
Sorry to burst your bubble... but smaller boobies would become more common because they don't sag as much. Smaller people would also become more common for the same reason. The human race adapted to this planet would look like dwarfs!
Don't get me wrong - when I'm in the hospital, I certainly want advanced tech. And when my car crashes, or my home needs power, ditto. But some former citizens of Hiroshima an Nagasaki probably have somewhat mixed feelings on the issue. Hardly anyone alive then or now would have even been born if it weren't for the population growth allowed by the standard of living increases -- which have all been brought by the one thing that keeps us from living in caves beating each other with sticks... (technology!)
General technological advances -- even the harnessing of nuclear energy or control of microorganisms -- have always ALWAYS given us greater benefits than costs.
Knobs don't cost much money. What's 50 cents of knobs on a $200 camera? They do cost much more when considering the extra manufacturing labour time to put them it all together. In other words, it's not the expense of the parts, its the number of them.
Let's say GM remakes the 1965 Chevelle in our prosperous all-electric future. And, since this is a prosperous future, this represents your typical electric car on the road.
The 1965 Chevelle was available with engines that ranged from a small-block V8 with 325 HP to the 396 big-block with 375 HP. This is equal to 242 and 280 kW respectively -- a lot of power compared to a 2003 Corolla with 139 HP (100 kW). Let's say our Electo-Velle uses 210 kW max.
To charge the car in the same amount of time that you raced at 50% throttle on average, use say 210 kW + 20% / 2 = 125 kW. City transmission lines carry something around 7200 V. If you want 125 kW from them, all you have to draw is 17.5 A.
Of course, to charge faster you need more amperage. A nice 4 AWG cable (or two) with teflon insulation could carry ~ 100 A safely, so we can charge at a max power of 720 kW or 5.75 times faster than the rate at which you drained the car battery by driving (50% avg. throttle). Drive for 8 hours on the highway? Charge for 1.4 hours. BUT drive for 1 hour to get to work and back, at 25% avg. throttle? Charge for 7 minutes 50 seconds. Not bad!
Note that I assume an underground-located charging station is used that charges the car from underneath while parked -- the only reasonably safe way to move 100 A at those 7200 V. My knowledge from physics class may be incomplete, though.
Naturally there is pressure from the well-to-do to desire to 'queue-jump' by spending some of that money to avoid time spent in pain. Currently that is disallowed, and that is controversial. I don't have a problem with the rich spending money to get out pain faster; I have a problem with the fact that the more they are allowed to queue jump, the longer the poor have to wait.
Aha! Let's just let the rich jump to the front of the queue if they pay enough to make up the difference for everyone else... If they pay enough, then everyone else gets treated even faster too! (The fact they already pay more in taxes has little to do with this proposal.) I am much enlightened by this discussion.
Slashdot Mirror
Where are the editors? It looks like firehose-type blurbs are starting to make it to the front page...
Oh wait, it's CmdrTaco. Never mind.
OK, what's more expensive? House stilts and dikes or New Orleans flood insurance (if you can even get it).
Hmm... I wonder what's cheaper... (really)
After reading this article on a quantum erasure experiment, it seems that if path p (in this experiment) was lengthened enough you can tell, by looking at the double slit results of path s, if the polarizer is in place on path p before the p photon even reaches the polarizer. What if path p was lengthened to a distant location? Could someone there apply or remove the polarizer to path p letting you, by looking at the nearby double slit interference/non-interference results of path s, receive the signal of whether the polarizer is on path p or not before the p photon reaches the distant polarizer? If so, you have FTL communication in one direction.
Thanks.
Not too much, as long as we don't run out of chemical fertilizer...
Good thing 90% of statistics are made up on the spot.
Seems like a boring static real estate page to me...
Someone would make the "if you are doing nothing wrong you should not mind being watched" post. This was just a preemptive strike.
Other nations have a lot less surveillance. It's the difference that counts.
Well, I think this discourages us non-afraid, educated people in other industrial nations from any natural migration to the UK. All the orwellian traps their government is falling into are becoming widely known around the world. It will increase their ratio of afraid and ignorant to non-afraid and educated immigrants and population. I think this will just make their situation worse over time... but the opposite everywhere else.
And that's the downfall of the plurality voting system.
I agree with Falcon.
Sorry to burst your bubble... but smaller boobies would become more common because they don't sag as much. Smaller people would also become more common for the same reason. The human race adapted to this planet would look like dwarfs!
They could have one powering most video game controllers, at least.
General technological advances -- even the harnessing of nuclear energy or control of microorganisms -- have always ALWAYS given us greater benefits than costs.
Keep that in mind!
Haha! I really like your reply to Sega. Maybe a travel brochure or a banana? Tropical indeed!
OK I take that back. I just installed it and its pretty fast :) It seems faster than the older versions.
Sad but true. Seriously, how hard can it be to make a simple fast word/excel/powerpoint clone?
Knobs don't cost much money. What's 50 cents of knobs on a $200 camera? They do cost much more when considering the extra manufacturing labour time to put them it all together. In other words, it's not the expense of the parts, its the number of them.
Hold on... weren't the alien pilots drunk?
Cap'n! The acronyms are overlapping! I can't hold 'em much longer!
Let's say GM remakes the 1965 Chevelle in our prosperous all-electric future. And, since this is a prosperous future, this represents your typical electric car on the road.
The 1965 Chevelle was available with engines that ranged from a small-block V8 with 325 HP to the 396 big-block with 375 HP. This is equal to 242 and 280 kW respectively -- a lot of power compared to a 2003 Corolla with 139 HP (100 kW). Let's say our Electo-Velle uses 210 kW max.
To charge the car in the same amount of time that you raced at 50% throttle on average, use say 210 kW + 20% / 2 = 125 kW. City transmission lines carry something around 7200 V. If you want 125 kW from them, all you have to draw is 17.5 A.
Of course, to charge faster you need more amperage. A nice 4 AWG cable (or two) with teflon insulation could carry ~ 100 A safely, so we can charge at a max power of 720 kW or 5.75 times faster than the rate at which you drained the car battery by driving (50% avg. throttle). Drive for 8 hours on the highway? Charge for 1.4 hours. BUT drive for 1 hour to get to work and back, at 25% avg. throttle? Charge for 7 minutes 50 seconds. Not bad!
Note that I assume an underground-located charging station is used that charges the car from underneath while parked -- the only reasonably safe way to move 100 A at those 7200 V. My knowledge from physics class may be incomplete, though.
Aha! Let's just let the rich jump to the front of the queue if they pay enough to make up the difference for everyone else... If they pay enough, then everyone else gets treated even faster too! (The fact they already pay more in taxes has little to do with this proposal.)
I am much enlightened by this discussion.
The only point of comparison will be cost - not size or speed (directly).