See, Terrorist states in the Middle East are the closest thing we've got to a threat resembling the former Soviet Union in the modern world, and offering security, protection, and stability to Iraq is little different.
Yes, the oil is a nice bonus, and yes, a great many corrupt people in the government are benefitting from it right now. That doesn't change the fact that a stable Iraq is beneficial in the long run to everyone involved, and the United States will eventually pull out.
If the US government were so serious about pulling out of Germany back after WWII, Why am I stationed on Rammstein Air Force Base? Which is, yes, still here in Germany.
But uh, dude, that isn't false. It IS a fact, copyright infringement IS theft.
You're taking someone else's property without consent. It doesn't matter that you can make practically infinite copies of the stuff electronically, it doesn't matter that no-one is stopping you from doing it, or that it's easy to do and not get caught, or any of the other justifications people use to keep stealing.
That doesn't stop people, me included, but you really have to stop lying to yourself.
There's a mark twain quote I'd love to bring out right now about focusing on Grammar. I know full well I've made more mistakes than that in just these few posts, no points for pointing out the easy ones.:P. " Your claim was "decreasing the size of something doesn't increase the heat it produces, no. it makes it harder for said something to dissipate the heat, as it has less surface area."
I pointed out that the surface area alone is irrelevant. It's the ratio of surface area to volume that matters in heat dissipation.
The fact that you never said anything about that ratio -is- my point.
I'm not even arguing about the second half of your comment.
No. Decreasing the size of something -increases- the surface area compared to the volume of the object, increasing it's overall ability to dissipate heat.
It started off as a quote from a movie or something, I never did quite get which one. Either way, it's become incredibly popular on slashdot as a way to get an instant -1 flamebait score.
Something like "In America, you vote for president, In Soviet Russia, President votes for you!"
I am indeed comfortable with a Scientific community that can admit "We don't know" - which is why they don't address the issue of what happened before the Big Bang. There is no evidence (experimental or otherwise) which even comes close to explaining what the universe was like before existence as we know it.
Creationism is an ideal that just.. Makes something up, the wise man of the tribe says "this is how it all began" and that's the truth. I can't accept that. I can accept "We've tried to figure it out, and we're STILL trying to figure it out, but we don't have any conclusive answers right now" - because it's true.
I know we may never know the answers, we probably won't in my lifetime.
Everything in the theory begins from something, and even if you had an explaination for what went on before the big bang, there'd be a question of "well, what went on before that." Analogous to the "who created god" question that no creationist has ever been able to answer to my satisfaction.
You may as well ask them to explain why is the gravitational constant what it is, or how mathmeticians really know 1+1=2.
A Mainframe with that much processing power has more groups wanting to use it, time is valuable. So they leave it running just long enough to get the data they need, or, alternatively, the entire time they're alloted the mainframe's processing power.
"Just a theory" is a phrase that should never be used in the context of Scientific discussions. It shows a misunderstanding of what the word theory means in Science.
A Theory, put simply, is an explaination for observed phenominon which can be experimentally disproven, and is capable of being used to make predictions. Mathmatical theory applies to the real world only insofar as it correctly explains real-world phenomina, and predicts the actions of the real universe.
Current theories on the creation of the Universe are anything but simplistic, and are accurate according to the data we've collected so far. When more data comes along that proves the theory false or inadequate, the theory will have to change, creating a stronger theory. The idea that it's somehow worthless because it's incomplete is ridiculous.
Slashdot Mirror
in only 300,000 years?
That's still a blink of an eye compared to the billions it's been around.
That's kinda've the point I was trying to make.
See, Terrorist states in the Middle East are the closest thing we've got to a threat resembling the former Soviet Union in the modern world, and offering security, protection, and stability to Iraq is little different.
Yes, the oil is a nice bonus, and yes, a great many corrupt people in the government are benefitting from it right now. That doesn't change the fact that a stable Iraq is beneficial in the long run to everyone involved, and the United States will eventually pull out.
If the US government were so serious about pulling out of Germany back after WWII, Why am I stationed on Rammstein Air Force Base? Which is, yes, still here in Germany.
Same goes with the bases in Japan, Italy, etc.
But uh, dude, that isn't false. It IS a fact, copyright infringement IS theft.
You're taking someone else's property without consent. It doesn't matter that you can make practically infinite copies of the stuff electronically, it doesn't matter that no-one is stopping you from doing it, or that it's easy to do and not get caught, or any of the other justifications people use to keep stealing.
That doesn't stop people, me included, but you really have to stop lying to yourself.
Why is this Modded down as a Troll?
If anything it should be modded up for insightful or interesting.
Obviously, Glass is a Solid. [googlefight]
There's a mark twain quote I'd love to bring out right now about focusing on Grammar. I know full well I've made more mistakes than that in just these few posts, no points for pointing out the easy ones. :P.
"
Your claim was "decreasing the size of something doesn't increase the heat it produces, no. it makes it harder for said something to dissipate the heat, as it has less surface area."
I pointed out that the surface area alone is irrelevant. It's the ratio of surface area to volume that matters in heat dissipation.
The fact that you never said anything about that ratio -is- my point.
I'm not even arguing about the second half of your comment.
*WHOOSH*
that's my point, flying past your head.
*Sigh*
t orials/Scaling/scaling.html%5BUniversity of Minnesota, Mechanical engineering]
No. Decreasing the size of something -increases- the surface area compared to the volume of the object, increasing it's overall ability to dissipate heat.
http://www.me.umn.edu/education/courses/me5221/Tu
Get your physics straight.
Generally, the smaller an object, the larger it's surface area compared to it's mass, allowing heat to dissipate faster.
Anyone that can put togather a nuclear bomb from spare parts deserves -some- props.
It started off as a quote from a movie or something, I never did quite get which one. Either way, it's become incredibly popular on slashdot as a way to get an instant -1 flamebait score.
Something like "In America, you vote for president, In Soviet Russia, President votes for you!"
I am indeed comfortable with a Scientific community that can admit "We don't know" - which is why they don't address the issue of what happened before the Big Bang. There is no evidence (experimental or otherwise) which even comes close to explaining what the universe was like before existence as we know it.
Creationism is an ideal that just.. Makes something up, the wise man of the tribe says "this is how it all began" and that's the truth. I can't accept that. I can accept "We've tried to figure it out, and we're STILL trying to figure it out, but we don't have any conclusive answers right now" - because it's true.
I know we may never know the answers, we probably won't in my lifetime.
Everything in the theory begins from something, and even if you had an explaination for what went on before the big bang, there'd be a question of "well, what went on before that." Analogous to the "who created god" question that no creationist has ever been able to answer to my satisfaction.
You may as well ask them to explain why is the gravitational constant what it is, or how mathmeticians really know 1+1=2.
A Mainframe with that much processing power has more groups wanting to use it, time is valuable. So they leave it running just long enough to get the data they need, or, alternatively, the entire time they're alloted the mainframe's processing power.
"Just a theory" is a phrase that should never be used in the context of Scientific discussions. It shows a misunderstanding of what the word theory means in Science. A Theory, put simply, is an explaination for observed phenominon which can be experimentally disproven, and is capable of being used to make predictions. Mathmatical theory applies to the real world only insofar as it correctly explains real-world phenomina, and predicts the actions of the real universe. Current theories on the creation of the Universe are anything but simplistic, and are accurate according to the data we've collected so far. When more data comes along that proves the theory false or inadequate, the theory will have to change, creating a stronger theory. The idea that it's somehow worthless because it's incomplete is ridiculous.