i dont know who the original poster is, but i was actually on the CUAUV team, and was actually at this competition. UF absolutely deserved their victory, their submarine performed phenomenally well, and was incredibly light and tiny. a job extremely well done by them. as for sour grapes, none of us on the team have absolutely any hard feelings. we're in this for the fun, for the engineering, and to advance the state of the art. not to buffer our egos.
"...went disastrously wrong, igniting
highly inflammable propellant and detonating missile and torpedo warheads."
hmm...prehaps their first mistake was using that damned inflammable propellant, it's always going around and igniting. Prehaps if they had used flammable propellant, all of this could have been avoided...typos baby, wohoo!
I live in pittsburgh, and on the local news today, they had a story about this very project on location at the cmu robotics lab. they showed the prototype, and sure enough, on the large solar panel, there was a big black round radio shack logo, i dont see how this is efficient solar panel space management, but regardless, it was there.
I'll admit this does sound interesting, but i have a few questions. The article wasn't quite clear on his model of the electron as "bubble". Does he mean that this "bubble" it's self is a charge(essentially the electron)? I find this very strange, and it makes me wonder how a model of multiple electrons in one orbital would look? If they had just stayed when they said "two dimensional disks", i could have handled it a little better, because that would be just like the rings around saturn or something, but prehaps i comletely misunderstood their wording. Furthermore, if the article meant that the "bubble" was simply a model with every point on the bubble representing a possible space for the electron to occupy, wouldn't that be the same thing as the traditional model of an s orbital(which is just a sphere)?
Also, i would like to know more about how he will go about collapsing hydrogen's ground state orbital. I realize that im having trouble with this since im used to the traditional particle and enegery wave models, which only allow the electron to occupy certain energy levels, with s being the ground state. Anybody with a physics or chemistry background able to explaint this to me? This somewhat brings me back to this idea of bubbles, if the bubble is representing the electron, does everything inside of the bubble also represent the space avaiable to the electron? This even further confuses me since as you add further orbitals, such a s p orbital, it would consume the s orbital, and if everything inside of the bubble can be occupied, that means that the p and s orbitals would become one and same. man...too much thinking, prehaps too little on my part.
It's a shame, i was really hoping that he would be back, at least in a cameo, for the next bond movie. Q was always one of the constants in the bond movies, even when they weren't so great(George Lazenby!). You could always count of Q for his pantented "Oh grow up 007!". Well, the bond movies surely will be lacking from now on, but his contribution is greatly appreciated. We will miss him
Slashdot Mirror
i dont know who the original poster is, but i was actually on the CUAUV team, and was actually at this competition. UF absolutely deserved their victory, their submarine performed phenomenally well, and was incredibly light and tiny. a job extremely well done by them. as for sour grapes, none of us on the team have absolutely any hard feelings. we're in this for the fun, for the engineering, and to advance the state of the art. not to buffer our egos.
"...went disastrously wrong, igniting highly inflammable propellant and detonating missile and torpedo warheads."
hmm...prehaps their first mistake was using that damned inflammable propellant, it's always going around and igniting. Prehaps if they had used flammable propellant, all of this could have been avoided...typos baby, wohoo!
I live in pittsburgh, and on the local news today, they had a story about this very project on location at the cmu robotics lab. they showed the prototype, and sure enough, on the large solar panel, there was a big black round radio shack logo, i dont see how this is efficient solar panel space management, but regardless, it was there.
I'll admit this does sound interesting, but i have a few questions. The article wasn't quite clear on his model of the electron as "bubble". Does he mean that this "bubble" it's self is a charge(essentially the electron)? I find this very strange, and it makes me wonder how a model of multiple electrons in one orbital would look? If they had just stayed when they said "two dimensional disks", i could have handled it a little better, because that would be just like the rings around saturn or something, but prehaps i comletely misunderstood their wording. Furthermore, if the article meant that the "bubble" was simply a model with every point on the bubble representing a possible space for the electron to occupy, wouldn't that be the same thing as the traditional model of an s orbital(which is just a sphere)?
Also, i would like to know more about how he will go about collapsing hydrogen's ground state orbital. I realize that im having trouble with this since im used to the traditional particle and enegery wave models, which only allow the electron to occupy certain energy levels, with s being the ground state. Anybody with a physics or chemistry background able to explaint this to me? This somewhat brings me back to this idea of bubbles, if the bubble is representing the electron, does everything inside of the bubble also represent the space avaiable to the electron? This even further confuses me since as you add further orbitals, such a s p orbital, it would consume the s orbital, and if everything inside of the bubble can be occupied, that means that the p and s orbitals would become one and same. man...too much thinking, prehaps too little on my part.
Id really like to hear what you guys think.
It's a shame, i was really hoping that he would be back, at least in a cameo, for the next bond movie. Q was always one of the constants in the bond movies, even when they weren't so great(George Lazenby!). You could always count of Q for his pantented "Oh grow up 007!". Well, the bond movies surely will be lacking from now on, but his contribution is greatly appreciated. We will miss him