Going back further, Fermilab had a chance to be expanded to a state-of-the-art facility that could have made the LHC moot. But under the first Bush, rather than building on the existing infrastructure at Fermilab, the Superconducting Super Collider began to be built from scratch in Texas (surprise, surprise). Then the SSC went over budget (surprise again) and was cancelled after spending $billions. That gave the LHC its' chance to outshine the competition. More budget cuts now mean the government won't support ongoing research at the Tevatron, especially since it is not state-of-the-art like the LHC.
They're delivered by guys earning minimum wage who don't receive security vetting.
Actually, in order to drive a delivery truck into the airport, or get anywhere on the "airside" of the airport without a plane ticket, you need an airport ID badge, for which you do get fingerprinted and background checked. To get a badge, I even had to sign a statement that I hadn't been convicted of certain felonies, including murder, arson, and highjacking, in the last 10 years.
It does not overcome the Bernoulli effect, it overcomes the shape of the airfoil to create a Bernoulli effect in the upward direction even though the wing is upside down.
If 50 cell divisions created errors in 1/3 of all genes, then life would be doomed before 50 generations pass, since the germs cells also must replicate, at least once per generation.
Also, just to clarify, telomerase is not a gene, it is a repeating stretch of DNA that ends the chromsome, like the plastic tip of shoelaces that keeps them from fraying. I have no clue how telomeres could possibly "divvy-up the workload" as the parent says.
Have to comment, since I design plumbing for a living:
It's true that "water saving" 3.5 gal per flush water closets are no longer sold, but the current standard is 1.6 gallons per flush (not 1 gallon as stated by the parent post). There are some ultra-low flow units being sold that are 1.28 gallons per flush, but almost none less than that.
A few years after 1.6 gpf was mandated in most codes, testing was done which found that many 3.5 gallon-per-flush water closets performed worse than most of the new 1.6 gpf fixtures, and on average there was no real reduction in performance going with the lower flow fixtures. (Of course, if similar research and development had been put into the 3.5 gpf fixtures, they could have been improved)
While I do double flush, I have a 3.5 gpf toilet at my house that I regularly block up, and I'm pretty sure that I could stop up one of the old 5 gallons per flush toilets, too.
First, to clarify, peak oil is not when oil production peaks, it is when production outpaces the discovery of new reserves. There is reasonable evidence that this has already occurred, though we probably won't be able to tell for sure until well after the peak.
Increased prices have indeed increased the proven reserves by making it economical to spend lots of money developing hard-to-get pockets of oil. This can't really reduce oil prices, though, since the high prices are required to make that production feasible
Frakking is not really one of the things that will bring more oil, it is mainly for extraction of natural gas.
However, peak oil is one thing, but natural gas and coal are far from being used up. If oil prices rise enough, we will be able to use natural gas and coal as feedstocks instead.
Many (most?) people don't actually create content using Office. They just read/view the results, perhaps with minor editing.
To the contrary, in the offices I've worked, even discounting e-mail, around 90% of employees create content with MS Office (or occasionally Wordperfect/Open Office) The only ones not regularly using an office suite to create content were the CAD operators and the president of the company. Of course, if you're working in a different type of office, like a call center, YMMV.
Some modern plants use super-critical "steam", and the water never really boils. And from room temperature to just below boiling at atmospheric pressures, liquid water expands around 4%, not under 1%.
PWR and BWR reactors are the main operating principle of the reactor - in both cases, water cooling.
No, the PWR and BWR reactors use water/steam as the working fluid. The fact that they also use a secondary cooling water loop as a heat sink for their thermodynamic cycle is a separate issue. I suspect most "modern" non-PWR/BWR reactors would also use water as a cooling source.
The ironic thing about this situation is that the entire problem could be solved (especially for newer reactors) by building cooling towers rather than using rivers for cooling.
Uh, no. Even if I hadn't RTFA I'd know you are wrong. Cooling towers are built to cool the water through evaporation, and said evaporation (and blowdown) of the proposed "closed-loop" cooling system is what TFA was complaining about, since none of the water taken would be returned to the river.
Also, a lot of cooling towers are built precisely to cool the used river water before returning it to the river, so, because of evaporation, they not only return less water to the river than taken, because the river is lower temperature than the typical ambient wet bulb temperature, what they return is warmer than the river (unless you had a really unusually hot river).
However, is there some kind of water shortage problem that we actually need to resolve? Unless we plan to pipeline water from Kansas to Boston I doubt that use of water in the one area has much effect on availability of water in the other.
On the contrary, that has been a huge issue in many parts of the world (California, e.g.) for at least decades.
Worse, I have seen a college educated mechanical engineer take out his calculator, do a little arithmetic on it, and type the results into spreadsheet cells.
To put that in perspective, the current levels are around 339ppm. If you are not good at math, 6000 is more than 10 x 339.
Not to challenge your main point, but current CO2 levels are above 380 ppm and at the present rate of increase, they will be above 400 ppm in a few years. Also, if the levels were above 6,000 ppm, that would cause a lot of serious health problems for people.
In the industrial sector, which is their primary business and one where they have been leading innovation in for decades.
Honeywell is one of the best-known brand names in the controls industry, mostly due to their past dominance. In the last couple of decades they have not been what you could call leading or innovating. (IMHO, anyway)
Some of the patents include "thermostat is round and can be rotated"
How could have they possibly applied for this patent in 2004, when they've produced round thermostats with rotating setpoint adjustments since just about forever?
Jokes aside, I've actually had a couple of blue screens with Windows 7 at work for the last year, and a lot of freeze-ups.
(I'm not saying it's all Micrsoft's fault; it's a large part due to crappy video driver that doesn't handle too much memory demand gracefully and an older version of AutoCAD with known problems with file dialogs in Windows 7. But still, it shouldn't freeze the whole computer)
If the user never saved it, then where is it when the user needs it later? Auto-saved, OK, but where and under what name? There still needs to be a save option, and an icon, even if outdated, is useful for that.
Slashdot Mirror
Going back further, Fermilab had a chance to be expanded to a state-of-the-art facility that could have made the LHC moot. But under the first Bush, rather than building on the existing infrastructure at Fermilab, the Superconducting Super Collider began to be built from scratch in Texas (surprise, surprise). Then the SSC went over budget (surprise again) and was cancelled after spending $billions. That gave the LHC its' chance to outshine the competition. More budget cuts now mean the government won't support ongoing research at the Tevatron, especially since it is not state-of-the-art like the LHC.
Actually, in order to drive a delivery truck into the airport, or get anywhere on the "airside" of the airport without a plane ticket, you need an airport ID badge, for which you do get fingerprinted and background checked. To get a badge, I even had to sign a statement that I hadn't been convicted of certain felonies, including murder, arson, and highjacking, in the last 10 years.
It does not overcome the Bernoulli effect, it overcomes the shape of the airfoil to create a Bernoulli effect in the upward direction even though the wing is upside down.
Which doesn't address the GGP post about mnutation rates.
If 50 cell divisions created errors in 1/3 of all genes, then life would be doomed before 50 generations pass, since the germs cells also must replicate, at least once per generation. Also, just to clarify, telomerase is not a gene, it is a repeating stretch of DNA that ends the chromsome, like the plastic tip of shoelaces that keeps them from fraying. I have no clue how telomeres could possibly "divvy-up the workload" as the parent says.
Have to comment, since I design plumbing for a living:
It's true that "water saving" 3.5 gal per flush water closets are no longer sold, but the current standard is 1.6 gallons per flush (not 1 gallon as stated by the parent post). There are some ultra-low flow units being sold that are 1.28 gallons per flush, but almost none less than that.
A few years after 1.6 gpf was mandated in most codes, testing was done which found that many 3.5 gallon-per-flush water closets performed worse than most of the new 1.6 gpf fixtures, and on average there was no real reduction in performance going with the lower flow fixtures. (Of course, if similar research and development had been put into the 3.5 gpf fixtures, they could have been improved)
While I do double flush, I have a 3.5 gpf toilet at my house that I regularly block up, and I'm pretty sure that I could stop up one of the old 5 gallons per flush toilets, too.
First, to clarify, peak oil is not when oil production peaks, it is when production outpaces the discovery of new reserves. There is reasonable evidence that this has already occurred, though we probably won't be able to tell for sure until well after the peak.
Increased prices have indeed increased the proven reserves by making it economical to spend lots of money developing hard-to-get pockets of oil. This can't really reduce oil prices, though, since the high prices are required to make that production feasible
Frakking is not really one of the things that will bring more oil, it is mainly for extraction of natural gas.
However, peak oil is one thing, but natural gas and coal are far from being used up. If oil prices rise enough, we will be able to use natural gas and coal as feedstocks instead.
But it wouldn't have cloven hooves.
An OS just gets in the way of controlling the synthesizer, anyway.
Instead, the Monopoly broke the Browser.
(Not that Netscape was quite ready to take over anyway, but they sure scared the shit out of Microsoft)
To the contrary, in the offices I've worked, even discounting e-mail, around 90% of employees create content with MS Office (or occasionally Wordperfect/Open Office) The only ones not regularly using an office suite to create content were the CAD operators and the president of the company. Of course, if you're working in a different type of office, like a call center, YMMV.
Some modern plants use super-critical "steam", and the water never really boils. And from room temperature to just below boiling at atmospheric pressures, liquid water expands around 4%, not under 1%.
No, the PWR and BWR reactors use water/steam as the working fluid. The fact that they also use a secondary cooling water loop as a heat sink for their thermodynamic cycle is a separate issue. I suspect most "modern" non-PWR/BWR reactors would also use water as a cooling source.
Uh, no. Even if I hadn't RTFA I'd know you are wrong. Cooling towers are built to cool the water through evaporation, and said evaporation (and blowdown) of the proposed "closed-loop" cooling system is what TFA was complaining about, since none of the water taken would be returned to the river.
Also, a lot of cooling towers are built precisely to cool the used river water before returning it to the river, so, because of evaporation, they not only return less water to the river than taken, because the river is lower temperature than the typical ambient wet bulb temperature, what they return is warmer than the river (unless you had a really unusually hot river).
On the contrary, that has been a huge issue in many parts of the world (California, e.g.) for at least decades.
The biological contaminants are not hard to control, the heavy metals and other industrial contaminants are a much bigger problem.
Worse, I have seen a college educated mechanical engineer take out his calculator, do a little arithmetic on it, and type the results into spreadsheet cells.
Not to challenge your main point, but current CO2 levels are above 380 ppm and at the present rate of increase, they will be above 400 ppm in a few years. Also, if the levels were above 6,000 ppm, that would cause a lot of serious health problems for people.
Honeywell is one of the best-known brand names in the controls industry, mostly due to their past dominance. In the last couple of decades they have not been what you could call leading or innovating. (IMHO, anyway)
You are confusing the "lameness" of the patent with the "lameness" of the feature.
How could have they possibly applied for this patent in 2004, when they've produced round thermostats with rotating setpoint adjustments since just about forever?
Jokes aside, I've actually had a couple of blue screens with Windows 7 at work for the last year, and a lot of freeze-ups. (I'm not saying it's all Micrsoft's fault; it's a large part due to crappy video driver that doesn't handle too much memory demand gracefully and an older version of AutoCAD with known problems with file dialogs in Windows 7. But still, it shouldn't freeze the whole computer)
If the user never saved it, then where is it when the user needs it later? Auto-saved, OK, but where and under what name? There still needs to be a save option, and an icon, even if outdated, is useful for that.
Around 4% to 6%. (6% in the lungs, 4% because about 1/3 of each breath never makes it past the bronchia.)
Paths of least resistance, then.