Good point, but your example would have been a bit stronger if you described a mix of different nuclei rather than the same molecular formula. 2-butyne and 1,3-butadiene have the same molecular formula. The difference in energy between two single and one triple bond and with another molecule, same # of same nuclei 2 double bond one single (well, really a conjugated bond) should be miniscule as compared to nucleus bonding energy - for argument's sake, would it be detectable with the instrument that they were using ? (any physics person feel like picking up a calculator and calculating the difference in chemical energy of the two molecules?) That instrument has really great resolving power and exact mass is down to ppq (had to look that one up - parts per quadrillion - 10^-15 ) OK sorry for the nit-pick:-)
But aside that it does boil down to what other experts in the field have to say. I've done mass spec using instruments that go down to 1 ppm (on good days:-)). The limitation on how good the results are (if you can tell one molecular formula from another by examining the mass results) depends an awful lot on stability of the instrument (which depends a bit on the environment) and the calibrants used. Their instrument is out of my league:-).I'd hate to see the hoops that have to be jumped through required to keep an instrument like that working properly. If their paper doesn't pan out, I'll bet that will be the sticking point (assuming this is not another Pons/Fleishman type of error.:-) )
I'll believe it once it gets off the arXiv and into a peer-reviewed journal.
Well yeah, but a stable element with all those freaky f and g orbitals might have some extremely interesting and probably even useful chemical properties - in metallurgy, catalysts. etc.
Single molecules. and nuclei, as conditions allow are detected all the time in mass spectrometers - thats what they do.(actually quantum efficiency of commonly used detectors are not that sensitive and will detect maybe 1 out of every 10 or 100 particle that comes its way - but it takes one lucky particle to make the signal.)
In mass spec, 292 is a common 'background" signal when analyzing organics- most likely from plasticizer - but could be something else. There was no description of the equipment that they used or whether they were detecting singly charged (or - unlikely - the nuclei fully stripped of electrons)
Exactly! As much as I respect Hawking, that has to be one of the most bone headed comments...
In any case, its a perfect example why you don't go to your friendly neighborhood chemist (the one with the PhD) to treat your broken leg, you go to an MD.
The only think that sucks worse than Silk is chocolate Silk.
I absolutely **love** Soy Milk - and yes, it doesn't taste like cows milk - but I absolutely hate the packaged milk in boxes and cartons (sold to "Americans"). I think the only way people like stuff like SIlk is because they drink it and think over and over again "its good for me - must drink- slurp - yum - its good for me - slurp - must drink- yum- its..."
Only good stuff is what you buy from asian markets or, if thats not available, made yourself :
While you do make some valid points, I shall comment in the general direction of this point:
. A 10 year old Mac is useless today, not because it's too slow to run a browser, word processor and email client, but because you can't run modern software on it
Ha ha. - 10 year old Mac. 10 year old PC - Windows 98?
Ha ha. I have a bunch of 10 year old Macs running right now (Proprietary software - sigh). They work great. They're all still working. Had to change a monitor or two and last year changed all monitors to flat screens. They have ethernet, can access my LAN for printing and filesharing as well as the web. I have USB adapters in them so I can carry stuff out on memory sticks (no CD burner)
Ha ha. I have some 10 year old PCs running Windows 98 (I think one is on NT). (Proprietary software - again sigh) Network? {blank stares from IT} uh... Memory stick? uh....Getting data out? No CD burner, hey I have a floppy drive! How can I stick a zip drive on it...dang....Reliability? Had to change 2 of the computers at one point in their life. Can't put the software on an XP machine.
But then again, besides basic research (and innovations in drive technology), what has IBM done recently to garner respect or disrespect in recent years (besides spin off their PC arm to a firm in China?)
Crappy, closed-technology machines
A bit subjective, but most of Apple's Macs were pretty solid. They last far past their technology (and their tech is goo enough to outlast many PCs.
The cult of the single-button mouse.
(turns red). Yeah. But...those who prefer 2 or 3 button mouse could buy one from 3rd parties. Right mouse click does work on a Mac. Multi button mouse just didn't come with Macs.
Reseller programs from hell.
I'll bet:-)
laser printers that became ultimately useless
Huh? Most of Apple's model were pretty good - I had most of them at work and can only think of one lemon model (one of the last of their laser printers)
Two wire AppleTalk networks with all of the speed of ISDN
ha ha. And what did PC have during that time period? The Macs came with networking standard and it was pretty simple to setup and get working. A bit later you could get ethernet.
Cute little useless Newtons
Can you say a bit advanced for its time? And for its time the technology was not there to make it great. Only so much you can do in so little RAM, etc.
Servers that could never rise above simple workgroup needs.
I suppose that was not its market?
I'm tired. The PPC? It was waaaay ahead of whatever Intel offered and had potential to stay that way. But Motorola and IBM totally dropped the ball on that one. Sorry if Intel stock made you $$, but it was true. Many of the Apple koolaid drinkers kept claiming that the PPC was more advanced than Intel's offerings long after Intel left PPC in the dust - they were hopeful and it was possible for a while for PPC to catch up and surpass. But it did not. Thanks goodness for Apple's sake that Steve Jobs made that controversial move to Intel.
One of those words that is most egregiously misused is "theory"--the "common" form of the word is almost universally understood, but the "scientific" meaning of the word, even when carefully explained, becomes conflated with the common form.
and not the "hypothesis of evolution" (which many people incorrectly interpret "theory" as meaning - http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=hypothesis Hypothesis: a proposal intended to explain certain facts or observations
What the RIAA should do is throw us all off guard and say
"you're right! fair use! we're wrong, you're right! here take our ill-gotten gains and here have our Samauri sword and please please please be swift and merciful!
Then everyone would be completely confused, erase their file sharing software and run to Wal-mart to buy CDs.
Slashdot Mirror
But there i pressure.
Schools giving assignments about a certain TV show, and for computers:
kids handing in assignments via e-mail, all assignments must be typed, powerpoint presentations...Simple, basic non-linear - the "Rodney Dangefield" of electronic devices, I suppose...
But aside that it does boil down to what other experts in the field have to say. I've done mass spec using instruments that go down to 1 ppm (on good days :-)). The limitation on how good the results are (if you can tell one molecular formula from another by examining the mass results) depends an awful lot on stability of the instrument (which depends a bit on the environment) and the calibrants used. Their instrument is out of my league :-).I'd hate to see the hoops that have to be jumped through required to keep an instrument like that working properly. If their paper doesn't pan out, I'll bet that will be the sticking point (assuming this is not another Pons/Fleishman type of error. :-) )
I'll believe it once it gets off the arXiv and into a peer-reviewed journal.
Seconded!
(Talk about self-image in this case! growl)
Well yeah, but a stable element with all those freaky f and g orbitals might have some extremely interesting and probably even useful chemical properties - in metallurgy, catalysts. etc.
Single molecules. and nuclei, as conditions allow are detected all the time in mass spectrometers - thats what they do.(actually quantum efficiency of commonly used detectors are not that sensitive and will detect maybe 1 out of every 10 or 100 particle that comes its way - but it takes one lucky particle to make the signal.)
In mass spec, 292 is a common 'background" signal when analyzing organics- most likely from plasticizer - but could be something else. There was no description of the equipment that they used or whether they were detecting singly charged (or - unlikely - the nuclei fully stripped of electrons)
Great discovery if it is what it is.
In any case, its a perfect example why you don't go to your friendly neighborhood chemist (the one with the PhD) to treat your broken leg, you go to an MD.
The only think that sucks worse than Silk is chocolate Silk.
I absolutely **love** Soy Milk - and yes, it doesn't taste like cows milk - but I absolutely hate the packaged milk in boxes and cartons (sold to "Americans"). I think the only way people like stuff like SIlk is because they drink it and think over and over again "its good for me - must drink- slurp - yum - its good for me - slurp - must drink- yum- its..."
Only good stuff is what you buy from asian markets or, if thats not available, made yourself :
http://chinesefood.about.com/od/breakfast/r/soybeanmilk.htm/
Display (both types of 20")
20-inch (viewable) glossy widescreen TFT active-matrix LCD, 1680 by 1050 pixels, millions of colors
24-inch (viewable) glossy widescreen TFT active-matrix LCD, 1920 by 1200 pixels, millions of color
http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html
Besides other differences, I think most people perceive the following as being the most significant differences between the two companies:
perception: Microsoft says:
#1 - How can we maximize profits for our company?
#2 - Lets make great products that accomplish #1!
perception:Apple says:
#1 - How can we make great products?
#2 - How can we profit from #1?
Order of things is important.
I don't think I can squeeze XP or even 2000 on my 10 year old PCs. Maybe I'm wrong.
. A 10 year old Mac is useless today, not because it's too slow to run a browser, word processor and email client, but because you can't run modern software on it
Ha ha. - 10 year old Mac. 10 year old PC - Windows 98?
Ha ha. I have a bunch of 10 year old Macs running right now (Proprietary software - sigh). They work great. They're all still working. Had to change a monitor or two and last year changed all monitors to flat screens. They have ethernet, can access my LAN for printing and filesharing as well as the web. I have USB adapters in them so I can carry stuff out on memory sticks (no CD burner)
Ha ha. I have some 10 year old PCs running Windows 98 (I think one is on NT). (Proprietary software - again sigh) Network? {blank stares from IT} uh... Memory stick? uh....Getting data out? No CD burner, hey I have a floppy drive! How can I stick a zip drive on it...dang....Reliability? Had to change 2 of the computers at one point in their life. Can't put the software on an XP machine.
Kind of interesting - a lot of Mac fanatics are opposite - love the stuff, hate the company (at least in the past)
But then again, besides basic research (and innovations in drive technology), what has IBM done recently to garner respect or disrespect in recent years (besides spin off their PC arm to a firm in China?)
Crappy, closed-technology machines A bit subjective, but most of Apple's Macs were pretty solid. They last far past their technology (and their tech is goo enough to outlast many PCs.
The cult of the single-button mouse. (turns red). Yeah. But...those who prefer 2 or 3 button mouse could buy one from 3rd parties. Right mouse click does work on a Mac. Multi button mouse just didn't come with Macs.
Reseller programs from hell. I'll bet :-)
laser printers that became ultimately useless Huh? Most of Apple's model were pretty good - I had most of them at work and can only think of one lemon model (one of the last of their laser printers)
Two wire AppleTalk networks with all of the speed of ISDN ha ha. And what did PC have during that time period? The Macs came with networking standard and it was pretty simple to setup and get working. A bit later you could get ethernet.
Cute little useless Newtons Can you say a bit advanced for its time? And for its time the technology was not there to make it great. Only so much you can do in so little RAM, etc.
Servers that could never rise above simple workgroup needs. I suppose that was not its market?
I'm tired. The PPC? It was waaaay ahead of whatever Intel offered and had potential to stay that way. But Motorola and IBM totally dropped the ball on that one. Sorry if Intel stock made you $$, but it was true. Many of the Apple koolaid drinkers kept claiming that the PPC was more advanced than Intel's offerings long after Intel left PPC in the dust - they were hopeful and it was possible for a while for PPC to catch up and surpass. But it did not. Thanks goodness for Apple's sake that Steve Jobs made that controversial move to Intel.
Also light behaves in a non-linear fashion which opens the possibilities for speeding up certain types of calculations (logs etc)
to connect parts in the chip that are furthest away
or
some of the computing / logic is performed in the light domain before it is translated back to electron domain.
seven days!
Good.
Florida names it correctly: the "theory of evolution" ( http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=theory Theory: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world ),
and not the "hypothesis of evolution" (which many people incorrectly interpret "theory" as meaning - http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=hypothesis Hypothesis: a proposal intended to explain certain facts or observations
but me without mod points
Quantity (1) Siberian Tiger (excellent condition, near extinct) $400,000.01
tragedy all around.
You don't want to press any buttons you're not supposed to.
(LIke the big red "turn Warp Core Containment Off" button)
Wait -
Except this time the winning format is made by Sony.
Wait -
Except this time the better format looks like it's winning
Wait -
I'm soooo confused! :-)
Obviously a program with labels such as "Frodo" Sam" "Gondor" must be doing something Lordly with rings
and if you have labels such as "string1" "string2", then the program must be solving some particle physics problem involving string theory.
Need I add :-) :-) :-) ?
Ha, what do you want ? That was expected.
What the RIAA should do is throw us all off guard and say
"you're right! fair use! we're wrong, you're right! here take our ill-gotten gains and here have our Samauri sword and please please please be swift and merciful!
Then everyone would be completely confused, erase their file sharing software and run to Wal-mart to buy CDs.