What I propose? They could use a system where the plane broadcast it's own position to ATC. They could also use some kind of communication signal between plane. Oh wait, I think some people already got that idea.
The speed of building is about 100% less than the speed of another airplane. (not completely 100% if you use the air speed, but close) I have missed the news about the MH370 colliding with another airplane. Could you point me to the article?
Just inform all the plane where the ADB-S was that there is a plane not visible by ATC in the area and that they need to take precautions. There is a lot of airspace where no radar information is available, I'm not sure when was the last time a collision occurs in these area. What's your scenario, exactly, if I take into account your previous comment? Someone takes control of a plane, deactivate the ADB-S on purpose, and then tried to take down another plane by colliding with it? Looks good for a hollywood movie.
Saying that there exist some non-baryonic matter is a theory. So they have fact (observations) and they manipulate the theory (by adding dark matter, dark energy to barionic matter to the model) to match the fact. Exactly what you were asking for. But if you have an alternate model to offer, go ahead, I'm sure astrophysicists would like to hear from it.
There are currently 136 February month in the record (1880-2015, included) As there is a high probability (according to you) that February 2016 will be one of the hottest or coldest on record (I assume you want to say that the probability is 1/137 for each possibility?)
If I offer the following bet: you give me 100$ is February 2016 is one of the 10 warmest in history, and I give you 100$ if February is one of the 40 coldest in history. Do you take this bet? (you can change to any month of 2016 or 2017, if you want. We can also bet for 2030 if you want, but then I will probably forget before the date)
The biggest difference is the reference. The GISS is the deviation with the mean measured between 1951-1980, and the satellite data use the mean between 1981-2010.
Which part of the statement "This October Was the Hottest Ever Measured" is the uah data supposed to completely "lack of correlation" with? When I look at the global temperature in the uah data (http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt , Globe column) and take only October (month=10), I see that October 2015 is indeed the warmer, with a delta of 0.57 degC with 1981-2010, where the previous warmest were 2012 and 2014 with 0.37 each.
It's relatively difficult to see that in your plot, as you give a plot with all temperatures, including October and the other 11 months of the year.
This is a great news for "climate skeptics". They will be able to use the 2015 (or maybe 2016, if next year still benefits from el nino) for the next five years in the following sentence: "2015 was an outlier", and if the next el nino is not as strong as the current one, they will be able to use 2015 in their favorite argument in the 10 years after that: "the warming stop in 2015. There is a flat line if you use 2015 as reference".
As you send more and more messages with the same pad, or if the pads follow any kind of predictable pattern, or god forbid, one of your pads is discovered through other means, the encryption is severely weakened.
Basically you are saying that you can break one-time pad if the system used is not one-time pad.
Similarly, since I'm not in the old west, I don't care if "high noon" is an noon, or 1, or 1 second after noon.
That depends, what is your definition of "day"? Is it one rotation of the planet, or/exactly/ 86400 seconds? That is what this debate boils down to.
Isn't a day exactly 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4.0916 seconds? That depends on your definition day, but that's the duration of one rotation of the planet;-)
You are right, a second is a second, a time is a time. The problem with the leap second is not a time problem. It's a date problem. Uniform second (TAI, GPS,...) are great to measure the time elapsed between t1 and t2. Non uniform date (UTC) are great to indicate a precise date. They don't have the same purpose, but both are useful to different problems and people.
Put a few giant thrusters around the equator or giant reaction wheels somewhere, and we could solve the earth time inconsistency by controlling the earth angular momentum. (note: if we use the reaction wheel option, we need also something to dump the accumulated momentum)
Just for correctness, GPS and TAI are "parallel" but not identical (the gap between the two is always equal to 19s.) Because TAI is computed using the number of second since the 1st January 1958 midnight UTC, where GPS is similar, but with 1980, and there were 19 leap seconds between 1958 and 1980. (in fact, 9 leap second, plus the initial 10 seconds shift in 1971 or 1972).
You don't need a digital timer to make a bomb. Why suspect that, and not a shoe or a bag or a pair of glasses? If they are school teachers and not bomb experts, how can they tell that a shoe will not explode?
Do you have anything that shows that a very successful real estate developer would be a very successful president? Because if we decide to chose someone very successful, why not go for a very successful sportsman and businessman, for example Jordan? Or why not try a very successful rock singer? Or a scientist which has got some Nobel price (other than the Peace one, maybe;-) )?
We don't have an unified theory in physics yet. Should we stop to send electronics in space until we get something which can handle both quantum mechanic and gravity?
I didn't know that Assyrian refugees in Finland were speaking swedish (you know, the people I was speaking about, in my message). But I wanted to point out the ideas of the same party about the fact that "who cares about swedish-speaking finns, let's just forget about this", and I wanted to try to understand how you could justify this idea with the "uncontrollable, Arizona-style flood of refugees who are not part of this culture and who do not feel restrained by the Lutheran moral code".
That's why the "true finns party" is asking for the end of the mandatory second language in school. They think Finns don't need to speak the language of these "arizona-style flood of refugees" who have been there only for... ever (or close) and speaks Swedish.
He is using several arguments: we could track terrorists (== people going to Syria), we could find easily people in natural catastrophes. I think he missed one of the advantages. If everyone, including children, has a gps chip, and the data about location is stored for a reasonable amount of time (let's say 50 years, but more is possible) we will be able to find possible pedophiles if a children complains, even 50 years later!
I don't see any problems to give to everyone the possibility to build software. That does not means that everyone will do software. Do you think we should make it harder for people to learn to cook (almost everyone has the possibility to learn this) to protect the job market of cooks?
Slashdot Mirror
What I propose? They could use a system where the plane broadcast it's own position to ATC. They could also use some kind of communication signal between plane. Oh wait, I think some people already got that idea.
The speed of building is about 100% less than the speed of another airplane. (not completely 100% if you use the air speed, but close) I have missed the news about the MH370 colliding with another airplane. Could you point me to the article?
Just inform all the plane where the ADB-S was that there is a plane not visible by ATC in the area and that they need to take precautions. There is a lot of airspace where no radar information is available, I'm not sure when was the last time a collision occurs in these area. What's your scenario, exactly, if I take into account your previous comment? Someone takes control of a plane, deactivate the ADB-S on purpose, and then tried to take down another plane by colliding with it? Looks good for a hollywood movie.
Saying that there exist some non-baryonic matter is a theory. So they have fact (observations) and they manipulate the theory (by adding dark matter, dark energy to barionic matter to the model) to match the fact. Exactly what you were asking for. But if you have an alternate model to offer, go ahead, I'm sure astrophysicists would like to hear from it.
There are currently 136 February month in the record (1880-2015, included) As there is a high probability (according to you) that February 2016 will be one of the hottest or coldest on record (I assume you want to say that the probability is 1/137 for each possibility?)
If I offer the following bet: you give me 100$ is February 2016 is one of the 10 warmest in history, and I give you 100$ if February is one of the 40 coldest in history. Do you take this bet? (you can change to any month of 2016 or 2017, if you want. We can also bet for 2030 if you want, but then I will probably forget before the date)
The biggest difference is the reference. The GISS is the deviation with the mean measured between 1951-1980, and the satellite data use the mean between 1981-2010.
So when you said before "complete lack of correlation", what you meant was "not 100% correlation", right?
Which part of the statement "This October Was the Hottest Ever Measured" is the uah data supposed to completely "lack of correlation" with? When I look at the global temperature in the uah data (http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt , Globe column) and take only October (month=10), I see that October 2015 is indeed the warmer, with a delta of 0.57 degC with 1981-2010, where the previous warmest were 2012 and 2014 with 0.37 each.
It's relatively difficult to see that in your plot, as you give a plot with all temperatures, including October and the other 11 months of the year.
This is a great news for "climate skeptics". They will be able to use the 2015 (or maybe 2016, if next year still benefits from el nino) for the next five years in the following sentence: "2015 was an outlier", and if the next el nino is not as strong as the current one, they will be able to use 2015 in their favorite argument in the 10 years after that: "the warming stop in 2015. There is a flat line if you use 2015 as reference".
2015 is the new 1998
.
As you send more and more messages with the same pad, or if the pads follow any kind of predictable pattern, or god forbid, one of your pads is discovered through other means, the encryption is severely weakened.
Basically you are saying that you can break one-time pad if the system used is not one-time pad.
Similarly, since I'm not in the old west, I don't care if "high noon" is an noon, or 1, or 1 second after noon.
That depends, what is your definition of "day"? Is it one rotation of the planet, or /exactly/ 86400 seconds? That is what this debate boils down to.
Isn't a day exactly 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4.0916 seconds? That depends on your definition day, but that's the duration of one rotation of the planet ;-)
You are right, a second is a second, a time is a time. The problem with the leap second is not a time problem. It's a date problem. Uniform second (TAI, GPS, ...) are great to measure the time elapsed between t1 and t2. Non uniform date (UTC) are great to indicate a precise date. They don't have the same purpose, but both are useful to different problems and people.
Put a few giant thrusters around the equator or giant reaction wheels somewhere, and we could solve the earth time inconsistency by controlling the earth angular momentum. (note: if we use the reaction wheel option, we need also something to dump the accumulated momentum)
Just for correctness, GPS and TAI are "parallel" but not identical (the gap between the two is always equal to 19s.) Because TAI is computed using the number of second since the 1st January 1958 midnight UTC, where GPS is similar, but with 1980, and there were 19 leap seconds between 1958 and 1980. (in fact, 9 leap second, plus the initial 10 seconds shift in 1971 or 1972).
It's also only 40 years after the first mission of ESA (maybe still ESRO?) to the moon. That's probably why the title contains "Headed Back".
You don't need a digital timer to make a bomb. Why suspect that, and not a shoe or a bag or a pair of glasses? If they are school teachers and not bomb experts, how can they tell that a shoe will not explode?
"Work to make ourselves free"? Arbeit macht frei?
Do you have anything that shows that a very successful real estate developer would be a very successful president? Because if we decide to chose someone very successful, why not go for a very successful sportsman and businessman, for example Jordan? Or why not try a very successful rock singer? Or a scientist which has got some Nobel price (other than the Peace one, maybe ;-) )?
We don't have an unified theory in physics yet. Should we stop to send electronics in space until we get something which can handle both quantum mechanic and gravity?
I didn't know that Assyrian refugees in Finland were speaking swedish (you know, the people I was speaking about, in my message). But I wanted to point out the ideas of the same party about the fact that "who cares about swedish-speaking finns, let's just forget about this", and I wanted to try to understand how you could justify this idea with the "uncontrollable, Arizona-style flood of refugees who are not part of this culture and who do not feel restrained by the Lutheran moral code".
That's why the "true finns party" is asking for the end of the mandatory second language in school. They think Finns don't need to speak the language of these "arizona-style flood of refugees" who have been there only for ... ever (or close) and speaks Swedish.
He is using several arguments: we could track terrorists (== people going to Syria), we could find easily people in natural catastrophes. I think he missed one of the advantages. If everyone, including children, has a gps chip, and the data about location is stored for a reasonable amount of time (let's say 50 years, but more is possible) we will be able to find possible pedophiles if a children complains, even 50 years later!
I don't see any problems to give to everyone the possibility to build software. That does not means that everyone will do software. Do you think we should make it harder for people to learn to cook (almost everyone has the possibility to learn this) to protect the job market of cooks?
This seems very affirmative. It looks like you have access to the absolute moral code. Could you give us a link to this document ? Thank you.