Back in my day, we had those worksheets that you had to get all the solutions to to spell out the answer to a riddle. They were fun enough that most kids would give it a good go...
Has anyone else apart from me noticed that, although OP was about how religion and science don't have to be at each other's throats, this has degenerated into a religion/science flamewar in about 3 posts?
IANAP, but it seems to me that space is orthagonal to time and time is orthagonal to space (and thus one can be referenced by the other). His central argument is that time cannot exist as an alternate "dimension", as it is reliant on either a "superior" dimension (META-TIME) or is self-referential. Would it not be logical to claim that time can be measured against space and space against time?
An abstract way to understand this would be to imagine a "shoebox" in which all 3 spacial dimensions are present, but (time, either by his definition or by relativity's definition) time is void (in his definition; nothing changes). By his argument, time does NOT EXIST in this "shoebox" but it exists outside of the shoebox (as change is happening outside the shoebox). For time to have two different values of time in seperate spacial coordinates is both ridiculous, and contradicted by his statement, "The t-axis or time-axis velocity component is 1, a dimensionless number". Therefore, time MUST have multiple values, and hence, is a dimension orthagonal to either space (non-string theory) or extra dimensions (string theory).
Put simply, by his argument you cannot have motion AND non-motion in the same universe. I know that it is close to impossible to completely stop an object (that is, make it reach zero degrees kelvin), but his claims that every single particle in the universe is both IN MOTION and moving in a different VELOCTY AND DIRECTION to any other particle in the universe (any particle can used as a reference point, as velocity can only be measured by reference as per definition) is more absurd than any notions of time travel. Especially when you consider that the relative velocity of a particle only has to equal 0 for a length of time (abstract definition) approaching 0.
Anyone who knows more about the subject, please correct my mistakes or re-explain (if any) valid points (if required).
A lot of these posts suggest no cars... It's pretty hard to get around just with a bike(bicycle). One option you could consider is a motorbike/scooter/minibike. Try sticking to bicycles when you can (with petrol at these prices) - you can make up the difference by offering to take people places, buy groceries, pick stuff up etc. They are also fairly easy to park (you could get away with discretely chaining them to a post). You can get a reasonable(ish) motorbike for well under $1000AUD (about 430).
If you are able to delay how much time you have *before* you move out, then you can save up money and buy expensive-to-buy-but-cheaper-to-run-than-alternati ves... I myself am moving out soonish, but I've decided to wait a little while longer so I can (for example) buy LCDs instead of CRTs and save on power. And little things like buy extra furniture and gear off friends and family (or eBay), or where possible, build it yourself (it's cheaper if you use unguarded lumber from construction sites, where you live now, etc).
So then how come it's only been showing up recently (for most people it seems)?
Surely there should have been at least a note somewhere about it if it's a recent change to an existing feature
You can fit SIX drives in a miniATX case? With no overheating problems?
*bows down to Lumpy* You must be some sort of miracle man, or at least one who can get his hands on large quanitities of liquid nitrogen:P
Moreover, where did you get a miniATX power supply with enough wattage to power six drives?
I don't know about you guys, but I'd pay to get my genes altered so I can interface with electronics, and be replaced in part by electronics. How convenient it would be to lose, say, my leg and think "oh well I can always get a replacement at RadioShack for about $5". Also, I wouldn't mind integrated wireless...but I'd be a little worred about viruses/trojans/spy/malware.
Well this is slightly OT but anyways..
Does anyone else get that thing where you're about to fall asleep, but you feel as if you're freefalling; and then you have a kneejerk reaction and jerk awake violently? It's something to do with closing my eyes and looking down..
When I was younger, I once awoke so violently that i hit my head on the end of my bed (which my feet weren't even touching, it was so far away).. I must have somehow done a half-sommersault and propelled myself forward simultaneously. True story.
I've found this to be more or less true. In fact, when people who have never been drunk before ask me to describe it to them, I explain it as "like pulling an all-nighter [staying up all night doing work due the next day], but drinking massive amounts of coffee [to negate the overwhelming desire to earn the nickname "Rip Van Winkle"]...only more fun."
I think it's the loss of any concentration abilities whatsoever that's makes one like the other.
The "like the time..." gag is probably continually used to keep it going down the path Futurama, which was probably *too* clever (and subsequently alienated people who didn't get it)...
Statistically, there are as many less-than-average-intellegence people as there are smart people, but they probably have more time for watching television (repetition dealienates hostile or confused audiences, makes them comfortable etc.). Which is why a successful cartoon (Family Guy, The Simpsons) does well to pander to them (even if the loyalty/fan base is lower).
Unlike most FG fans, I seem to be the only one irked by the things like Peter continually hitting his shin and sucking in air for a minute, and Stewie's patronising rants (usually to Brian, you know, the ones where his voice gets higher and higher) MORE THAN the "like the time" gags. They're much more repetitive than the "it's like the time" gag, because they are virtually verbatim of each other, whereas the "like the time..." gag at least is different to other "like the time..." gags.
Are you trying to say that advertisers do NOT specifically advertise at certain times or on certain shows? Think about it...would a beer company ask to advertise on "sesame street"? No, they'd ask to advertise when the football's on, and most likely any station would agree to this. Don't believe me? Turn your TV on at one in the morning...if your country is anything like mine, it will be chock-a-block with dating agency services ads and (for some reason) ringtone ads.
It's the same with futurama.. If Fox were running an hour and a half block of fairly nerdy cartoons (FuturamaThe SimpsonsFamily Guy), then I would think that that's the FIRST place people selling pants-with-integrated-wifi would ask to advertise. If Fox would just realise that these shows target an ultra-specific demographic (especially one notorious for their disposable incomes) and the viewership is particularly consistent, then there would be absolutely no reason not to fund these shows.
Yes but you have to realise that the Futurama team were starting to work into their little niche in that season. In almost every show it takes time (usually several seasons) before both the voice acting and writing really starts to take off. You can see it in shows like Scrubs, Stargate (SG-1), Family Guy and even The Simpsons, where the animation/character cohesion is fairly crude. But these shows continue improving for several more seasons until (inevitably) they do something that makes a lot of people unhappy (The Simpsons continues targetting the demographic that grew up with The Simpsons, and not younger viewers).
The point is, Fox cancelled Futurama just as they were reaching their niche, so it's far more likely that they were going to continue improving (as in other shows) and not declining...
(In reply to your comment)
Family Guy got cancelled, because although it was popular, it was extremely controversial and was targeted by many special interest groups (for example, the controversial "When you Wish Upon A Weinstein" episode which was probably the "straw that broke the camels' back"). Or that's what I've heard, anyway.
(In reply to this story)
So this is a
definintive
confirmation of the series' reanimation, and not just speculation like the last/. story?
Thats exactly what I was wondering when they read the article...
Heh, the funny thing about your idiot friends is iTunes (which they undoubtedly had, since they had iPods) converts wmas to mp3 automatically when you load it into the library. If they're anything like me, that would have saved them several hours of digging around trying to find all the CDs.
It would seem prudent to open a new slashdot section for new developments on the energy front, instead of posting it under "hardware" etc... This kind of stuff is especially interesting
*No, this is _NOT_ a troll/flamebait, I'm simply making a suggestion*
If you must know, the approximate running time of each "hour" show is 42 or 42-and-a-half minutes, whilst "half hour" shows are approximately 21 or 21-and-15-seconds.
For example, futurama ran for an average of 21:35. I don't know about firefly, I don't think it aired in my country.
Right now I have about 20 racks full of CDs I've since digitized. A CD takes up WAY more room than a puny nerdstick. So if the choice is between a rack full of CDs which are completely useless (since I have a copy at my fingertips, and they can't be re-used) and a semi-useless-and-smaller nerdstick (which can be used for trafficking data from work to home without the fuss of emailing it, or worrying about losing an expensiveish memory stick), then I'd choose the nerdstick.
This post makes the assumption that there's a relationship between high libido and high demand for attention (as in public exhibitionists, etc). There are probably tens of thousands of people worldwide that can't make it through their day without a conference with mr. winky, but are otherwise normal people with the normal amount of humility/dignity/whatever. You can't typecast people, because 99 times out of 100 there's always people who are different
And seeing as absolutely anything in the past has consequences in the future (butterfly effect, etc.), then really, you would only be a tourist. Even the people seeing you there at all could have some effect, in your fancy 21st century clothes and whatnot. Also, you might kill some bacterii or a bug or something, which would exponentially effect the population of the future bug/bacterii. How does this model circumvent that?
Slashdot Mirror
Now get off my lawn!
Has anyone else apart from me noticed that, although OP was about how religion and science don't have to be at each other's throats, this has degenerated into a religion/science flamewar in about 3 posts?
An abstract way to understand this would be to imagine a "shoebox" in which all 3 spacial dimensions are present, but (time, either by his definition or by relativity's definition) time is void (in his definition; nothing changes). By his argument, time does NOT EXIST in this "shoebox" but it exists outside of the shoebox (as change is happening outside the shoebox). For time to have two different values of time in seperate spacial coordinates is both ridiculous, and contradicted by his statement, "The t-axis or time-axis velocity component is 1, a dimensionless number". Therefore, time MUST have multiple values, and hence, is a dimension orthagonal to either space (non-string theory) or extra dimensions (string theory).
Put simply, by his argument you cannot have motion AND non-motion in the same universe. I know that it is close to impossible to completely stop an object (that is, make it reach zero degrees kelvin), but his claims that every single particle in the universe is both IN MOTION and moving in a different VELOCTY AND DIRECTION to any other particle in the universe (any particle can used as a reference point, as velocity can only be measured by reference as per definition) is more absurd than any notions of time travel. Especially when you consider that the relative velocity of a particle only has to equal 0 for a length of time (abstract definition) approaching 0.
Anyone who knows more about the subject, please correct my mistakes or re-explain (if any) valid points (if required).
A lot of these posts suggest no cars... It's pretty hard to get around just with a bike(bicycle). One option you could consider is a motorbike/scooter/minibike. Try sticking to bicycles when you can (with petrol at these prices) - you can make up the difference by offering to take people places, buy groceries, pick stuff up etc. They are also fairly easy to park (you could get away with discretely chaining them to a post). You can get a reasonable(ish) motorbike for well under $1000AUD (about 430).
If you are able to delay how much time you have *before* you move out, then you can save up money and buy expensive-to-buy-but-cheaper-to-run-than-alternati ves... I myself am moving out soonish, but I've decided to wait a little while longer so I can (for example) buy LCDs instead of CRTs and save on power. And little things like buy extra furniture and gear off friends and family (or eBay), or where possible, build it yourself (it's cheaper if you use unguarded lumber from construction sites, where you live now, etc).
BAHAHAHAHAHA mod parent +funny, please!
So then how come it's only been showing up recently (for most people it seems)? Surely there should have been at least a note somewhere about it if it's a recent change to an existing feature
You can fit SIX drives in a miniATX case? With no overheating problems? *bows down to Lumpy* You must be some sort of miracle man, or at least one who can get his hands on large quanitities of liquid nitrogen :P
Moreover, where did you get a miniATX power supply with enough wattage to power six drives?
I don't know about you guys, but I'd pay to get my genes altered so I can interface with electronics, and be replaced in part by electronics. How convenient it would be to lose, say, my leg and think "oh well I can always get a replacement at RadioShack for about $5". Also, I wouldn't mind integrated wireless...but I'd be a little worred about viruses/trojans/spy/malware.
Well this is slightly OT but anyways.. Does anyone else get that thing where you're about to fall asleep, but you feel as if you're freefalling; and then you have a kneejerk reaction and jerk awake violently? It's something to do with closing my eyes and looking down.. When I was younger, I once awoke so violently that i hit my head on the end of my bed (which my feet weren't even touching, it was so far away).. I must have somehow done a half-sommersault and propelled myself forward simultaneously. True story.
I've found this to be more or less true. In fact, when people who have never been drunk before ask me to describe it to them, I explain it as "like pulling an all-nighter [staying up all night doing work due the next day], but drinking massive amounts of coffee [to negate the overwhelming desire to earn the nickname "Rip Van Winkle"]...only more fun." I think it's the loss of any concentration abilities whatsoever that's makes one like the other.
The "like the time..." gag is probably continually used to keep it going down the path Futurama, which was probably *too* clever (and subsequently alienated people who didn't get it)... Statistically, there are as many less-than-average-intellegence people as there are smart people, but they probably have more time for watching television (repetition dealienates hostile or confused audiences, makes them comfortable etc.). Which is why a successful cartoon (Family Guy, The Simpsons) does well to pander to them (even if the loyalty/fan base is lower). Unlike most FG fans, I seem to be the only one irked by the things like Peter continually hitting his shin and sucking in air for a minute, and Stewie's patronising rants (usually to Brian, you know, the ones where his voice gets higher and higher) MORE THAN the "like the time" gags. They're much more repetitive than the "it's like the time" gag, because they are virtually verbatim of each other, whereas the "like the time..." gag at least is different to other "like the time..." gags.
Are you trying to say that advertisers do NOT specifically advertise at certain times or on certain shows? Think about it...would a beer company ask to advertise on "sesame street"? No, they'd ask to advertise when the football's on, and most likely any station would agree to this. Don't believe me? Turn your TV on at one in the morning...if your country is anything like mine, it will be chock-a-block with dating agency services ads and (for some reason) ringtone ads. It's the same with futurama.. If Fox were running an hour and a half block of fairly nerdy cartoons (FuturamaThe SimpsonsFamily Guy), then I would think that that's the FIRST place people selling pants-with-integrated-wifi would ask to advertise. If Fox would just realise that these shows target an ultra-specific demographic (especially one notorious for their disposable incomes) and the viewership is particularly consistent, then there would be absolutely no reason not to fund these shows.
Yes but you have to realise that the Futurama team were starting to work into their little niche in that season. In almost every show it takes time (usually several seasons) before both the voice acting and writing really starts to take off. You can see it in shows like Scrubs, Stargate (SG-1), Family Guy and even The Simpsons, where the animation/character cohesion is fairly crude. But these shows continue improving for several more seasons until (inevitably) they do something that makes a lot of people unhappy (The Simpsons continues targetting the demographic that grew up with The Simpsons, and not younger viewers). The point is, Fox cancelled Futurama just as they were reaching their niche, so it's far more likely that they were going to continue improving (as in other shows) and not declining...
- definintive
confirmation of the series' reanimation, and not just speculation like the lastThats exactly what I was wondering when they read the article... Heh, the funny thing about your idiot friends is iTunes (which they undoubtedly had, since they had iPods) converts wmas to mp3 automatically when you load it into the library. If they're anything like me, that would have saved them several hours of digging around trying to find all the CDs.
It would seem prudent to open a new slashdot section for new developments on the energy front, instead of posting it under "hardware" etc... This kind of stuff is especially interesting
*No, this is _NOT_ a troll/flamebait, I'm simply making a suggestion*
Can someone mod this entire article as Flamebait? It _is_ slashdot, after all.
If you must know, the approximate running time of each "hour" show is 42 or 42-and-a-half minutes, whilst "half hour" shows are approximately 21 or 21-and-15-seconds. For example, futurama ran for an average of 21:35. I don't know about firefly, I don't think it aired in my country.
Right now I have about 20 racks full of CDs I've since digitized. A CD takes up WAY more room than a puny nerdstick. So if the choice is between a rack full of CDs which are completely useless (since I have a copy at my fingertips, and they can't be re-used) and a semi-useless-and-smaller nerdstick (which can be used for trafficking data from work to home without the fuss of emailing it, or worrying about losing an expensiveish memory stick), then I'd choose the nerdstick.
...which was the idea [attacking Iraq] of the same man who thought up the "after-8pm-do-not-call-register" idea. Noticing a pattern here?
This post makes the assumption that there's a relationship between high libido and high demand for attention (as in public exhibitionists, etc). There are probably tens of thousands of people worldwide that can't make it through their day without a conference with mr. winky, but are otherwise normal people with the normal amount of humility/dignity/whatever. You can't typecast people, because 99 times out of 100 there's always people who are different
As if fat nerds need any less encouragement to leave McDonalds. Then again, maybe that was the idea all along.... hmmm... McStudio apartments?
Yeah... Einstein had a smaller brain than usual, and neanderthals had massive brains.... It's more of a rule-of-thumb than anything...
And seeing as absolutely anything in the past has consequences in the future (butterfly effect, etc.), then really, you would only be a tourist. Even the people seeing you there at all could have some effect, in your fancy 21st century clothes and whatnot. Also, you might kill some bacterii or a bug or something, which would exponentially effect the population of the future bug/bacterii. How does this model circumvent that?