0 to 100MPH in 5 seconds is not crappy. The Tesla has no transmission, and since nobody really needs to go faster that 132MPH for a street legal car the top end speed IMHO is pretty meaningless.
Our Model S had an intermittent Tire Pressure Sensor issue. Tesla's mobile service came to our house and replaced an antenna used for the system and we have not had that issue since. This car probably had the same minor issue and the tire pressure was probably OK. Its the only issue we've had with the car after 8 months BTW.
Extraordinary claims should always require extraordinary proof. There should be no shortcuts either. My current mathematical model is based on Minkowski space but with six spacial dimensions instead of three plus time. I do appreciate your consideration and skepticism. I'll post a link here in a while (probably a month or two at the rate I'm going as this is a hobby) to the math and several webGL visualizations. Frankly the hardest part of this work are the actual experiments to corroborate the model. I'll leave you with one more passing related aspect of this theory that should definite make you chuckle, e=mc squared becomes e=mcf where f is the speed of gravity:-)
This is by far the best advice I've gotten; hopefully a horde of other Slashdotters will take an interest in this field. I've already done much of the initial groundwork you've recommended.
Publishing this work for me would be daunting because I would have to convert a substantial amount of computer simulation code to algebraic notation, and that's not my idea of fun, whereas WebGL animations are.
Its interesting that you advised testing the model using the solar system. That's where I'm at now in order to apply this theory to verify that the math agrees with the Voyager anomaly observations.
Where this theory gets even more interesting for me is at the small scale because it unifies gravity and the strong force.
Thanks for the response. It's difficult to get meaningful dialogue on this subject.
How would you recommend a person outside academia present a rigorous mathematical model?
Newton assumed an invisible force (like some kind of magic cable) transmitted instantaneously, and that has been ruled out experimentally. Its clear that mass and acceleration are the same thing that deforms space and produce what we perceive as gravity; I like how you describe this as the soul of relativity. I apologize if my brief comment implied dropping back to Newtonian three dimensional gravity.
An alternative approach is to apply Maxwell's math to gravity, with the critical changes being primarily related to the observation that gravity is non-polar and electromagnetism is polar.
What you said about gravitomagnetism, The Weyl tensor and curvature of space defined by GR is a a lot of food for thought.
Changing our view on the nature of space can explain what we observe. Einstein tried to show the way when he described gravity as the deformation of space.
By changing our assumption and considering space as two three dimensional fields, electrostatic and gravitational that are superimposed upon each other we can easily reconcile what we see. The galactic center has a stronger gravitational field than the outer edge of the galaxy and gravitational space is compressed relative to electrostatic space. When we use light as a yardstick we fail take into consideration that the galactic gravitational field is compressed where the galactic electrostatic field is not.
This is the Electro-Gravitic theory of space and provides a clear explanation for dark matter, dark energy without resorting to anything we have not already proven experimentally or incredibly complex math that defies human understanding.
There is no dark matter. Changing our view of the nature of space can however explain what we observe. Einstein tried to show the way when he described gravity as the deformation of space.
We incorrectly deduce that there must be unseen mass because the outer edges of galaxies move at a rate that implies missing mass. We use the doppler shift of light to measure the speed of the stars in the galaxy. We assume that the speed of light and the speed of gravity are the same as they pass through the usual three dimensions of space. In a theoretical vacuum this may be true, but we live in a universe filled with matter and charged particles.
By changing our assumption and considering space as two three dimensional fields, electrostatic and gravitational that are superimposed upon each other we can easily reconcile what we see. The galactic center has a stronger gravitational field than the outer edge of the galaxy and gravitational space is compressed relative to electrostatic space. When we use light as a yardstick we fail take into consideration that the galactic gravitational field is compressed where the galactic electrostatic field is not.
This the Electro-Gravitic theory of space and provides a clear explanation for dark matter, dark energy, refraction and the unification of the strong force and gravity without resorting to anything we have not already proven experimentally or incredibly complex math that defies human understanding.
I agree, ADA has awesome data type and range checking and has many other features that promote reliable code. I think Boeing uses it for the 777 fly by wire systems and it would be a good choice for vehicle automation. Didn't Ichbiah say that we really only needed two languages, ADA and lisp? (that alone would start a good flame war) I'm only suggesting that a computer language many associate with the federal government will attract heat from many quarters these days;-)
Military drones do it. Low earth orbit communications latency is probably OK in a pinch. Maybe that's why Google is putting internet connectivity in whole cities and in balloons.
Here is the future I see. Everyone will use the mobile device to order transportation just as you might with Uber. You'll sit in a private vehicle watching Google advertising during your journey. The fleet of vehicles will be managed by humans who can intervene in unusual circumstances of all kinds. The vehicles will be extremely safe and in the (unlikely) event of an accident, another vehicle will be quickly dispatched to complete your trip. Yes, the code will have to be very solid, but I have a feeling companies like Google and Tesla are capable of making this a reality. As is now the case for motorcyclists, the danger will really be from human drivers, not software glitches.
Re:It was already a dangerous site to visit ...
on
PHP.net Compromised
·
· Score: 1
Comparing.net to PHP is not a fair or accurate comparison, one is a scripting environment and the other is compiled.
Comparing PHP to Classic ASP would be more accurate.
If you consider Sharepoint, Microsoft has had a fairly comprehensive collaboration system that works well with MS Office for years. Its pricey but has achieved a fair share of enterprise deployments.
Its like we used all our storage except for 1KB, so we plugged in a new usb drive at the last minute. Our government program needs to be more efficient and we need more capacity. Given a choice, I'd start with the tax code - its a big bowl of spaghetti.
The world has always been free to do what it wants. In the past, the US was a logical choice because of the size and stability of our economy. It seems to me that anybody who really believes in free trade would welcome a worldwide currency. I think the US would be fine with purely capitalist markets setting the exchange rates - would everyone else be OK with that?
I'm certainly not a staunch defender of this thing, but there's hardly a barrel of a gun to anybody's head. People who don't participate face a small additional fee - something like $95 or 1% of their income.
Something you are hashed with a device unique ID can be changed. They would also need your device and your PIN or password to access your data. I'm not necessarily defending the iPhone, but suggesting a way to save the convenience of fingerprint scanning. If your phone is lost or stolen, have it bricked or wiped remotely. Also, don't store anything sensitive on a device that's easily lost or stolen.
If your fingerprint is hashed with a well protected device unique ID, that eliminates anyone from easily hijacking your finger print identity and you get a new code when you register a new device.
Good authentication is generally based on 3 things - something you are, something you have and something you know. Chip and PIN is have and know. Mag strip cards are have and know (how to write your signature but seldom checked); eCommerce is just know and shipping location. Apple is the first of I'm sure many to include all 3, you have your phone, you're identified by fingerprint and you know your PIN.
As a second layer of biometric protection, the phone camera could take your picture and perform facial recognition when you scan your finger. This has the added advantage of snapping a pic of a would be thief and allows merchants to prove the identity of the purchaser. Security and loss prevention reduces cost for everyone.
As always, if you want privacy, use cash.
I met a guy who built homes by pouring concrete into Styrofoam forms with rebar. After that it was brick veneer or siding outside and the usual stuff on the inside. He said they also tied the roof using the same materials they do in hurricane prone areas. He said homes like this had been hit dead on by tornadoes and other than broken windows and superficial damage were essentially unharmed. This building technique also make a very energy efficient home.
I respectfully disagree. Whether anybody likes it or not, when JavaScript support was added to browsers (a really long time ago) the browser became a platform. Great web based apps are harder to do than native apps. Well designed web based apps work on all platforms and do not require client side installation or support. The cost of distribution and maintenance of web based apps is dramatically lower and that reduces cost. Centralized code management makes change management much more effective and that can increase quality. As for security and safety, I think having no data stored on a client and all data stored on centralized servers managed by professionals is a tremendous advantage in every respect.
Slashdot Mirror
I actually think its one of the most profound anti-war stories I've ever read.
0 to 100MPH in 5 seconds is not crappy. The Tesla has no transmission, and since nobody really needs to go faster that 132MPH for a street legal car the top end speed IMHO is pretty meaningless.
Just looked at our Tesla's tires. They are P245/45R19 98V tires which according to Tire Rack are rated to 149MPH
Our Model S had an intermittent Tire Pressure Sensor issue. Tesla's mobile service came to our house and replaced an antenna used for the system and we have not had that issue since. This car probably had the same minor issue and the tire pressure was probably OK. Its the only issue we've had with the car after 8 months BTW.
Extraordinary claims should always require extraordinary proof. There should be no shortcuts either. My current mathematical model is based on Minkowski space but with six spacial dimensions instead of three plus time. I do appreciate your consideration and skepticism. I'll post a link here in a while (probably a month or two at the rate I'm going as this is a hobby) to the math and several webGL visualizations. Frankly the hardest part of this work are the actual experiments to corroborate the model. I'll leave you with one more passing related aspect of this theory that should definite make you chuckle, e=mc squared becomes e=mcf where f is the speed of gravity :-)
This is by far the best advice I've gotten; hopefully a horde of other Slashdotters will take an interest in this field. I've already done much of the initial groundwork you've recommended.
Publishing this work for me would be daunting because I would have to convert a substantial amount of computer simulation code to algebraic notation, and that's not my idea of fun, whereas WebGL animations are.
Its interesting that you advised testing the model using the solar system. That's where I'm at now in order to apply this theory to verify that the math agrees with the Voyager anomaly observations.
Where this theory gets even more interesting for me is at the small scale because it unifies gravity and the strong force.
Thanks for the response. It's difficult to get meaningful dialogue on this subject.
How would you recommend a person outside academia present a rigorous mathematical model?
Newton assumed an invisible force (like some kind of magic cable) transmitted instantaneously, and that has been ruled out experimentally. Its clear that mass and acceleration are the same thing that deforms space and produce what we perceive as gravity; I like how you describe this as the soul of relativity. I apologize if my brief comment implied dropping back to Newtonian three dimensional gravity.
An alternative approach is to apply Maxwell's math to gravity, with the critical changes being primarily related to the observation that gravity is non-polar and electromagnetism is polar.
What you said about gravitomagnetism, The Weyl tensor and curvature of space defined by GR is a a lot of food for thought.
Can you comment on this idea?
Changing our view on the nature of space can explain what we observe. Einstein tried to show the way when he described gravity as the deformation of space.
By changing our assumption and considering space as two three dimensional fields, electrostatic and gravitational that are superimposed upon each other we can easily reconcile what we see. The galactic center has a stronger gravitational field than the outer edge of the galaxy and gravitational space is compressed relative to electrostatic space. When we use light as a yardstick we fail take into consideration that the galactic gravitational field is compressed where the galactic electrostatic field is not.
This is the Electro-Gravitic theory of space and provides a clear explanation for dark matter, dark energy without resorting to anything we have not already proven experimentally or incredibly complex math that defies human understanding.
There is no dark matter. Changing our view of the nature of space can however explain what we observe. Einstein tried to show the way when he described gravity as the deformation of space.
We incorrectly deduce that there must be unseen mass because the outer edges of galaxies move at a rate that implies missing mass. We use the doppler shift of light to measure the speed of the stars in the galaxy. We assume that the speed of light and the speed of gravity are the same as they pass through the usual three dimensions of space. In a theoretical vacuum this may be true, but we live in a universe filled with matter and charged particles.
By changing our assumption and considering space as two three dimensional fields, electrostatic and gravitational that are superimposed upon each other we can easily reconcile what we see. The galactic center has a stronger gravitational field than the outer edge of the galaxy and gravitational space is compressed relative to electrostatic space. When we use light as a yardstick we fail take into consideration that the galactic gravitational field is compressed where the galactic electrostatic field is not.
This the Electro-Gravitic theory of space and provides a clear explanation for dark matter, dark energy, refraction and the unification of the strong force and gravity without resorting to anything we have not already proven experimentally or incredibly complex math that defies human understanding.
I agree, ADA has awesome data type and range checking and has many other features that promote reliable code. I think Boeing uses it for the 777 fly by wire systems and it would be a good choice for vehicle automation. Didn't Ichbiah say that we really only needed two languages, ADA and lisp? (that alone would start a good flame war) I'm only suggesting that a computer language many associate with the federal government will attract heat from many quarters these days ;-)
Military drones do it. Low earth orbit communications latency is probably OK in a pinch. Maybe that's why Google is putting internet connectivity in whole cities and in balloons.
Probably because ADA was a government design by committee thing... I hope the federal government won't be programming our cars.
Here is the future I see. Everyone will use the mobile device to order transportation just as you might with Uber. You'll sit in a private vehicle watching Google advertising during your journey. The fleet of vehicles will be managed by humans who can intervene in unusual circumstances of all kinds. The vehicles will be extremely safe and in the (unlikely) event of an accident, another vehicle will be quickly dispatched to complete your trip. Yes, the code will have to be very solid, but I have a feeling companies like Google and Tesla are capable of making this a reality. As is now the case for motorcyclists, the danger will really be from human drivers, not software glitches.
Comparing .net to PHP is not a fair or accurate comparison, one is a scripting environment and the other is compiled.
Comparing PHP to Classic ASP would be more accurate.
If you consider Sharepoint, Microsoft has had a fairly comprehensive collaboration system that works well with MS Office for years. Its pricey but has achieved a fair share of enterprise deployments.
Every time I look in the mirror, I can see More gray hair and estimate that I'm getting older.
Its like we used all our storage except for 1KB, so we plugged in a new usb drive at the last minute. Our government program needs to be more efficient and we need more capacity. Given a choice, I'd start with the tax code - its a big bowl of spaghetti.
The world has always been free to do what it wants. In the past, the US was a logical choice because of the size and stability of our economy. It seems to me that anybody who really believes in free trade would welcome a worldwide currency. I think the US would be fine with purely capitalist markets setting the exchange rates - would everyone else be OK with that?
I'm certainly not a staunch defender of this thing, but there's hardly a barrel of a gun to anybody's head. People who don't participate face a small additional fee - something like $95 or 1% of their income.
Something you are hashed with a device unique ID can be changed. They would also need your device and your PIN or password to access your data. I'm not necessarily defending the iPhone, but suggesting a way to save the convenience of fingerprint scanning. If your phone is lost or stolen, have it bricked or wiped remotely. Also, don't store anything sensitive on a device that's easily lost or stolen.
If your fingerprint is hashed with a well protected device unique ID, that eliminates anyone from easily hijacking your finger print identity and you get a new code when you register a new device. Good authentication is generally based on 3 things - something you are, something you have and something you know. Chip and PIN is have and know. Mag strip cards are have and know (how to write your signature but seldom checked); eCommerce is just know and shipping location. Apple is the first of I'm sure many to include all 3, you have your phone, you're identified by fingerprint and you know your PIN. As a second layer of biometric protection, the phone camera could take your picture and perform facial recognition when you scan your finger. This has the added advantage of snapping a pic of a would be thief and allows merchants to prove the identity of the purchaser. Security and loss prevention reduces cost for everyone. As always, if you want privacy, use cash.
They are already mandating that here in 2014.
I think this might be it: http://www.premereforms.com/index-2.html Also, this isn't the interlocking nold system, but shows the basic concept. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GkwY4umDtw
I met a guy who built homes by pouring concrete into Styrofoam forms with rebar. After that it was brick veneer or siding outside and the usual stuff on the inside. He said they also tied the roof using the same materials they do in hurricane prone areas. He said homes like this had been hit dead on by tornadoes and other than broken windows and superficial damage were essentially unharmed. This building technique also make a very energy efficient home.
I respectfully disagree. Whether anybody likes it or not, when JavaScript support was added to browsers (a really long time ago) the browser became a platform. Great web based apps are harder to do than native apps. Well designed web based apps work on all platforms and do not require client side installation or support. The cost of distribution and maintenance of web based apps is dramatically lower and that reduces cost. Centralized code management makes change management much more effective and that can increase quality. As for security and safety, I think having no data stored on a client and all data stored on centralized servers managed by professionals is a tremendous advantage in every respect.