Mandrake for me also, dual booted for about a year before switching to Ubuntu.
My first real task in linux besides installing hundreds of programs which i would never use, was renaming enormous amounts of images; something that i hated doing in windows could now be automated.
I think you make a nice point, but most of all I think you slipped in a better idea.
Set Theory.
A good class in set theory and introduction to finite math and proofs would be the best. I am a graduate student in mathematics, and I see many math majors without a good background in set theory. Also, getting an early start with induction and simple proofs in combinatorics builds mathematical maturity very quickly. Additionally, it is easy to get students interested in combinatorics because the problems are so easy to understand and fun once you do.
Obvious Halmos' Naive Set theory is the one of the standards. For introduction to combinatorics, the book by Jonsenbaugh is pretty easy and it covers and intro to proof. I really like the combinatorics book by Brualdi but it might be a bit difficult.
If you are super brave you could read the book by Lawvere on an introduction to category theory...
please don't misconstrue my explaination. Most phds have somewhere between 20-50 references and pages is the least important criteria. The six I speak of are what my work is based off of. Many other papers give important definitions examples or inspirations, but I won't read these, nearly extract the tidbit I need. Furthermore, I am currently in the first step of the PhD which is background literature review. I am taking a detailed survey of work done previously on quantized Schubert cell(my research area). Additionally many papers will be cited for their influence on the field and papers I am using, to provide a bed of expected knowledge for those wishing to read the PhD.
I apologize, I was acting pretty narrow-minded. In my first draft of my post I didn't even include the disclaimer first paragraph, but then i realized the possibility that other fields have more homogeneous techniques. I applaud you and am jealous that you are able to sift through that volume of material, even only reading 6 papers currently for my Ph.D., I find the amount of material enormous and ridiculously daunting.
Before I begin, let me mention that I am speaking about the mathematical world(one of the fields in which this paper was written). The following comments may not apply to other fields as I have no expertise.
First of all, as the other reply mentions, no in fact they are not peer reviewed. That being said, arXiv is a preprint server and thus the content is fairly respectable. Additionally, this paper is by two authors at MIT the third at Bristol (fairly respectable schools).
Second, in the modern mathematical community, an enormous amount of important papers are not published. This is not a result of dumb reviewers, in fact most journals have a system for preventing this sort of issue. Their system is simple, most papers are reviewed by two people, each an expert in the field. I cannot argue that sometimes the paper will be beyond the scope of the reviewer, but with the connectedness of the mathematical community at present day, it is highly unlikely. The reason many papers go unpublished now, is because of arXiv and other preprint servers. Older faculty members have no need to boost their publication count so the actual publication is unnecessary. Additionally, most papers are only readable by a small subset of the mathematical community, and they are contacted directly. Also, nearly all mathematicians at this point are familiar with arXiv and use it as their main source of current research, thus reducing the need of publication.
Third,
Also, I have read in my life thousands of published peer-reviewed articles
I am calling bullshit on this. I am currently in graduate school at a major university. There are several world famous professors here and one in particular is known for his ability to sift through papers extremely quickly. He doesn't read them, just skims to get the basic idea. He only gets through a paper a week maybe two. Assuming you are more consistent than him, and read two per week. And being more generous you blaze through 100 a year. You would be working at this pace for 20 years. While not impossible, highly unlikely. Especially since you mentioned that you "read" them not skim, and furthermore you are able to check them for trivialities, which takes considerable more time considering that you would have to evaluate the status of the paper.
We do movie Physics presentations at my school each semester and Fan4 was one of them last semester. The calculations were comical and we showed that for her to possess the needed gravity, she would have more mass than our planet in Alba's frame. Furthermore, she would of been attracting (with gravity) everything around her. As far as Physics, this movie was one of the worst.
I see your point and agree that the dark side might be a probable and useful location to land, it seems the mass of this question is equator or poles.
Responding to that its clear and almost decisive they will pick the equator again, as with the earth it is significantly more difficult to launch from non-equatorial positions. On liftoff, the rocked is already subject to all of the external forces of the earth and gravity is the most significant (duh). When launching from the equator we see significant difference because the forces are directly planar. If we were to launch from pennsylvania instead of florida for instance we would quickly be bringing a slew of new forces into play.
consider: Fext = m(dv/dt) + v(dm/dt) simple rocket equation, the external forces are equal to the mass times acceleration plus the velocity of the rocket times the changing mass. In basic rocked problems you see an equilibrium formed and its mg with some only the centrepital force of the earth. In PA you would be subject to coriolis, centrepital, and transverse.
Simply, lots more forces to slow down our rocket.
Now to consider this rocket from the poles is different. You lose centrepital entirely and everything converts to coriolis, which proves more potent and irritating. One way to think about it is this, we launch satellites from polar coordinates because they achive better orbits easier. This is because all the force is coriolis.
Well who decides this is simple, you. There are several schemes of philosphy which you may adapt to quickly assume your position:
Absolutist-never break a moral law no matter the circumstances. If wrong comes of your actions it is not on your hands because you acted justly, and "act so the maxim of your actions can be made into universal law" -Kant
Utilitarian-act to maximize good. Make your actions result it the best possible outcomes for all.
Virtue-act so that your virtuous character dictates your actions. Once developing virtues into your character you will be led to make the right decision, this often will not maximize good but will be based on how the virtuous person would act.
Care-adopting your moral role as to care for the subject, including making them comfortable and happy, this usually has an underlying search for maximized good.
I would classify these as the four most prominant positions to hold, and they are what dictates your moral action. They also dictate your "rights" and how they are to be respected.
Slashdot Mirror
Mandrake for me also, dual booted for about a year before switching to Ubuntu. My first real task in linux besides installing hundreds of programs which i would never use, was renaming enormous amounts of images; something that i hated doing in windows could now be automated.
I think you make a nice point, but most of all I think you slipped in a better idea. Set Theory. A good class in set theory and introduction to finite math and proofs would be the best. I am a graduate student in mathematics, and I see many math majors without a good background in set theory. Also, getting an early start with induction and simple proofs in combinatorics builds mathematical maturity very quickly. Additionally, it is easy to get students interested in combinatorics because the problems are so easy to understand and fun once you do. Obvious Halmos' Naive Set theory is the one of the standards. For introduction to combinatorics, the book by Jonsenbaugh is pretty easy and it covers and intro to proof. I really like the combinatorics book by Brualdi but it might be a bit difficult. If you are super brave you could read the book by Lawvere on an introduction to category theory...
I feel the arXiv system is a bit weak, but when I RTFAed, this is precisely what I thought of. I would love to see this be implemented with arXiv.
Or as a struggling student you work your ass off/put yourself in debt and hope things work out in the end. Not flaming just saying.
please don't misconstrue my explaination. Most phds have somewhere between 20-50 references and pages is the least important criteria. The six I speak of are what my work is based off of. Many other papers give important definitions examples or inspirations, but I won't read these, nearly extract the tidbit I need. Furthermore, I am currently in the first step of the PhD which is background literature review. I am taking a detailed survey of work done previously on quantized Schubert cell(my research area). Additionally many papers will be cited for their influence on the field and papers I am using, to provide a bed of expected knowledge for those wishing to read the PhD.
I apologize, I was acting pretty narrow-minded. In my first draft of my post I didn't even include the disclaimer first paragraph, but then i realized the possibility that other fields have more homogeneous techniques. I applaud you and am jealous that you are able to sift through that volume of material, even only reading 6 papers currently for my Ph.D., I find the amount of material enormous and ridiculously daunting.
Before I begin, let me mention that I am speaking about the mathematical world(one of the fields in which this paper was written). The following comments may not apply to other fields as I have no expertise. First of all, as the other reply mentions, no in fact they are not peer reviewed. That being said, arXiv is a preprint server and thus the content is fairly respectable. Additionally, this paper is by two authors at MIT the third at Bristol (fairly respectable schools).
Second, in the modern mathematical community, an enormous amount of important papers are not published. This is not a result of dumb reviewers, in fact most journals have a system for preventing this sort of issue. Their system is simple, most papers are reviewed by two people, each an expert in the field. I cannot argue that sometimes the paper will be beyond the scope of the reviewer, but with the connectedness of the mathematical community at present day, it is highly unlikely. The reason many papers go unpublished now, is because of arXiv and other preprint servers. Older faculty members have no need to boost their publication count so the actual publication is unnecessary. Additionally, most papers are only readable by a small subset of the mathematical community, and they are contacted directly. Also, nearly all mathematicians at this point are familiar with arXiv and use it as their main source of current research, thus reducing the need of publication. Third,
Also, I have read in my life thousands of published peer-reviewed articles
I am calling bullshit on this. I am currently in graduate school at a major university. There are several world famous professors here and one in particular is known for his ability to sift through papers extremely quickly. He doesn't read them, just skims to get the basic idea. He only gets through a paper a week maybe two. Assuming you are more consistent than him, and read two per week. And being more generous you blaze through 100 a year. You would be working at this pace for 20 years. While not impossible, highly unlikely. Especially since you mentioned that you "read" them not skim, and furthermore you are able to check them for trivialities, which takes considerable more time considering that you would have to evaluate the status of the paper.
Most of the previous comments have been far too elementary. I too am a math Ph.D. student and I understand what you are looking for as for while I was working in mathematical physics on loop quantum gravity. Here are some big ones; -classical mechanics has one resounding answer http://www.amazon.com/Mathematical-Classical-Mechanics-Graduate-Mathematics/dp/0387968903/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1226901309&sr=8-1 -for quantum theory and such use http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Physics-Stephen-Gasiorowicz/dp/0471057002/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1226901473&sr=1-1 -for GR and such http://www.amazon.com/Gravitation-Physics-Charles-W-Misner/dp/0716703440/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1226901528&sr=1-1 I dont know a good thermal book, but I am sure you can come up with one. By the way, there was a very similar ask slashdot during the summer from an astronomer asking for the same thing. good luck and I dont know what you research field is, but in general a great read if you are in algebra is the book on quantum groups by Majid. This has a nice physical perspective on the objects. http://www.amazon.com/Foundations-Quantum-Group-Theory-Shahn/dp/0521648688/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1226901678&sr=1-4
right, and North Korea can order polonium but not ipods
We do movie Physics presentations at my school each semester and Fan4 was one of them last semester. The calculations were comical and we showed that for her to possess the needed gravity, she would have more mass than our planet in Alba's frame. Furthermore, she would of been attracting (with gravity) everything around her. As far as Physics, this movie was one of the worst.
I see your point and agree that the dark side might be a probable and useful location to land, it seems the mass of this question is equator or poles.
Responding to that its clear and almost decisive they will pick the equator again, as with the earth it is significantly more difficult to launch from non-equatorial positions. On liftoff, the rocked is already subject to all of the external forces of the earth and gravity is the most significant (duh). When launching from the equator we see significant difference because the forces are directly planar. If we were to launch from pennsylvania instead of florida for instance we would quickly be bringing a slew of new forces into play.
consider: Fext = m(dv/dt) + v(dm/dt) simple rocket equation, the external forces are equal to the mass times acceleration plus the velocity of the rocket times the changing mass. In basic rocked problems you see an equilibrium formed and its mg with some only the centrepital force of the earth. In PA you would be subject to coriolis, centrepital, and transverse.
Simply, lots more forces to slow down our rocket.
Now to consider this rocket from the poles is different. You lose centrepital entirely and everything converts to coriolis, which proves more potent and irritating. One way to think about it is this, we launch satellites from polar coordinates because they achive better orbits easier. This is because all the force is coriolis.
-Bryan
Well who decides this is simple, you. There are several schemes of philosphy which you may adapt to quickly assume your position:
Absolutist-never break a moral law no matter the circumstances. If wrong comes of your actions it is not on your hands because you acted justly, and "act so the maxim of your actions can be made into universal law" -Kant
Utilitarian-act to maximize good. Make your actions result it the best possible outcomes for all.
Virtue-act so that your virtuous character dictates your actions. Once developing virtues into your character you will be led to make the right decision, this often will not maximize good but will be based on how the virtuous person would act.
Care-adopting your moral role as to care for the subject, including making them comfortable and happy, this usually has an underlying search for maximized good.
I would classify these as the four most prominant positions to hold, and they are what dictates your moral action. They also dictate your "rights" and how they are to be respected.