What about it? Seems the previous government of Iraq - that under Saddam Hussein - lasted all of 6 weeks before it was completely obliterated and their military destroyed. And then a new government was set up with US involvement.
.
Unless you count the presence of terrorist activities to indicate a failed projection of sovereignty? In that case, go talk to Spain who's had problems with the Basques for hundreds of years. Or Great Britain with the IRA. Or France with any of the Corsican resistance terror cells... And on and on.
Bottom line: if sovereignty is simply the ability to successfully resist military attacks by another, then NO COUNTRY is sovereign outside the US.
Wonderful! Then there isn't a single sovereign nation outside of the US - not a single nation could actually stand up to the force the US can project...
.
And of course Monaco, Lichtenstein, Andorra, Malta, and the Isle of Man are but figments since they're not sovereign, either.
A Windows Mobile phone and a Celio Redfly get you a phone-OS based netbook, and it works REALLY well. For browsing and e-mail and other web-based work, it's a great platform, highly portable, lasts a LONG time (I get 7+ hours from my Redfly, regularly), is small, lightweight, and instant-on.
Hint: Europe != the World. Go to Eastern Europe, South America, Asia, and you'll find most people like Americans, and would love to live in America. It's just Western Europe that seems to be out-of-sorts. Never had a problem being an American in most of the rest of the world (you know, the 6 billion people who DON'T live in Western Europe or the USA).
.
And yes, I lived in Belgium (Sint-Pieters-Leeuw) for 2 years, Vina del Mar, Chile for 2 years, and for the last 3 years spend half my time living in China and Thailand.
.
Yet changing a stock head shot background from an office to a flag, and touching up skin is a hideous travesty of judgment. Glad to know the AP has standards!
Unless stated otherwise, output levels are referenced to 1 micropascal at 1 meter; it is up to the original article or poster to state their reference level if it is different. This is standard within the SONAR industry.
.
As far as a human having a problem, we very well would. Of course, I would ask you to point to the part where I referenced humans. Marine mammals are constructed a bit differently than humans, and their ears are designed to handle changes in pressure. Nice strawman though...
I guess you missed the part where I said it is the frequency of the signal and the sudden appearance of that frequency. But this is Slashdot and I know most people refuse to read more than a paragraph at a time...
No one really involved in the argument suggested it was the pressure.
I give you the GP's quote:
What kind of device potentially damages animals in a 50 mile radius? Really think about that, this would be equivalent to allowing sonic booms at 1000 feet altitude near cities... and to heck with the broken glass and ear drums
That is pressure.
The dead animals showed signs of decompression, meaning they surfaced in a hurry. If someone walked up to you and said "boo" you would jump. Fight or flight. If you are an air breathing mammal thousands of metres underwater and you decide to flee, there is only one direction - up. The rapid change in pressure is what does the damage. I find it hard to believe that a "real life SONAR engineer" would miss that distinction.
Ummm, and exactly WHERE did I dispute that? Nice strawman... You even used my own analogy to make your case.
Sorry, no... Pressure is logarithmic; in the case of SONAR it is pressure referenced to 1 micropascal. It scales at 20 log (ratio); so a factor of 2000 is just over 66 dB, added to the jet engine.
.
Oh, and that jet engine is measured in dB SPL, which is referenced to 20 micropascals, which means 0 dB SPL = 26 dBr (SONAR). So that jet engine is actually 176 dBr. Add in our gain of 66 dB and we are at 242 dB.
How much is that? A single atmosphere of pressure is approximately 219 dBr. Two atmospheres would be about 225, four would be 231, eight would 237, and sixteen would be 243 dBr.
So, if we could get 16 atmospheres of pressure underwater, we would have the same as 2000 times that of a jet engine at 30 meters, in air.
For every 10 meters of depth, you gain 1 atmosphere of pressure. So go down 160m and you're at the pressure level being complained about. Given that pretty much ALL marine mammals regularly dive to that depth and well beyond, I think we can safely say it's NOT the pressure that's the problem.
Yet another case of attorneys using the ignorance of the public to create an outrage, when in fact the data as presented is entirely within the normal behavior and environment experienced by the alleged victims (the whales).
how about test it on underwater divers... they signed up and it's safe for whales. We could try supreme court justices (with out air tanks though that might skew results)
What kind of device potentially damages animals in a 50 mile radius? Really think about that, this would be equivalent to allowing sonic booms at 1000 feet altitude near cities... and to heck with the broken glass and ear drums. The army has nothing that invasive, the air force has nukes or days of carpet bombing and supersonic aircraft, but they pick the same spots to train where there is minimal wildlife to harm and reuse it over and over.
I'm sure this is just a case of "boys with toys" making things bigger and louder because they can and pulling rank when asked to tone it down.
Well, there IS no device - short of a nuclear bomb - that would create the 50 mile radius damage you quote. Directed sound in water falls off at a rate of 20logR, meaning that at a distance of 10 meters you are down 20 dB; at 100 meters you are down 40 dB. At a distance of 10,000 meters - about 6 miles - you are down 80 dB.
An EXTREMELY powerful SONAR system might be capable of 250 dB ref 1 uPa within its beam angle. Meaning that at 10,000 meters and within the beam angle you would have a level of 170 dB. At that 50 mile radius? You would have 150 dB.
How much pressure is that? Considering that 10m of water is approximately 1 atmosphere (~193 dB SPL, or ~219 dB ref 1 uPa), that would be equivalent to having a ~15cm wave go over you.
Even closer, we see that at a range of 100 meters the level is down to 210 dB, meaning about the same as a 3m wave passing over your position underwater. How that damages an animal living IN the water in the open ocean I can't fathom.
I submit it is NOT the pressure at all; in fact, the pressure generated from the fluke of baleen whale is near 230 dB (and the pressure at 10m from an ocean freighter's prop is about 230 dB as well). If there IS an impact on marine mammals it is probably from the frequency and the sudden "appearance" of an audible frequency. In other words, like walking up behind someone and going "boo".
There is a tremendous amount of precedence for this hypothesis too; for example, blueback herring are highly sensitive to ~105 kHz signals and will scatter at the slightest noise in that range (which happens to be the third harmonic of the primary click range of bottlenose dolphins). You can blast those herring all day long with 230+ dB SPL at 200 kHz, or at 70 kHz without a problem, and get accurate biomass estimates; go near them with an ultra-low power (140 dB SPL) 105 kHz carrier and they scatter like leaves on the wind.
And yes, I was (for nearly 7 years) a real live SONAR engineer working in the marine and fisheries research SONAR world, and am still a practicing acoustician (20 years experience).
Your tolerance is amazing! Thanks for your stunning display of unity and coming together... Only five ad hominem attacks in two paragraphs. I'm sure Obama would be proud!
.
In 2004, 40% of whites voted for John Kerry; in 2008, 43% of whites voted for Obama. So, while a small change, more whites voted for Obama - percentagewise - than voted for Kerry. They've voted more for the black Democrat candidate than a previous white Democrat candidate.
Of course, the black votes were 11% for Bush in 2004, and 5% for McCain in 2008, showing a pretty dramatic change - in absolute AND relative measures - in the racial bias of this election.
So white guys increasing their vote by 10% for the black Democrat candidate as compared to the previous white candidate is racist. Blacks dropping their vote by 50% for the current white Republican as compared to 4 years ago is not racist.
Because your post made no sense... We see a majority of whites voted for Obama, yet we see 95% of all blacks voted for Obama. And it's the whites who were racially motivated in their voting patterns?
Truman ended his Presidential terms with a 22% approval rating, well below that of President Bush. And Democrats don't seem to have a problem holding him up as a shining example of a good President...
Yeah, but you are also forgetting one thing? How much HIGHER would McCain's percentages be among black voters had he not been white, or supposedly the reincarnation of Bush? Tons of black folks voted AGAINST him for no reason but the skin color of Obama.
Well, when I am in the US I see a lot of Canadian lumber, and Australian and Kobe beef is readily available, as well as lamb from New Zealand, fish from Chile and Asia, and cheese from France. Fruit from Chile, China, the Philippines.
I wonder how easy it is to buy American beef or apples in the EU? I know it's nearly impossible in most of Asia...
Let me guess... You live in the EU? I live predominantly in Asia and sell into the US and the EU. And as a source from Asia (China, South Korea, Taiwan, and Malaysia predominantly) the rules and regulations and taxation of the EU are EXTREMELY protectionist. Much more so than the US.
A lot of times I'd agree with you (the EU is HIGHLY protectionist) but in this case it doesn't work. Go to any cell phone outlet in Asia - look at even the Chinese-only or Korean-only cell phones. ALL have removable batteries. Samsung, Motorola, LG, Palm, RIM, pretty much everyone uses replaceable batteries. Except Apple.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess you've never seen the guy box... It's more of a clubbing, you see...
He's name is Nikolay Valuev, and he is a neanderthal.
Unless you count the presence of terrorist activities to indicate a failed projection of sovereignty? In that case, go talk to Spain who's had problems with the Basques for hundreds of years. Or Great Britain with the IRA. Or France with any of the Corsican resistance terror cells... And on and on.
Bottom line: if sovereignty is simply the ability to successfully resist military attacks by another, then NO COUNTRY is sovereign outside the US.
And of course Monaco, Lichtenstein, Andorra, Malta, and the Isle of Man are but figments since they're not sovereign, either.
A Windows Mobile phone and a Celio Redfly get you a phone-OS based netbook, and it works REALLY well. For browsing and e-mail and other web-based work, it's a great platform, highly portable, lasts a LONG time (I get 7+ hours from my Redfly, regularly), is small, lightweight, and instant-on.
And yes, I lived in Belgium (Sint-Pieters-Leeuw) for 2 years, Vina del Mar, Chile for 2 years, and for the last 3 years spend half my time living in China and Thailand.
The world is a LOT more than just the EU...
Obviously you don't travel much, otherwise you'd see the Canadians festooned with their flag on their backpacks...
Yet changing a stock head shot background from an office to a flag, and touching up skin is a hideous travesty of judgment. Glad to know the AP has standards!
As far as a human having a problem, we very well would. Of course, I would ask you to point to the part where I referenced humans. Marine mammals are constructed a bit differently than humans, and their ears are designed to handle changes in pressure. Nice strawman though...
I guess you missed the part where I said it is the frequency of the signal and the sudden appearance of that frequency. But this is Slashdot and I know most people refuse to read more than a paragraph at a time...
No one really involved in the argument suggested it was the pressure.
I give you the GP's quote:
What kind of device potentially damages animals in a 50 mile radius? Really think about that, this would be equivalent to allowing sonic booms at 1000 feet altitude near cities... and to heck with the broken glass and ear drums
That is pressure.
The dead animals showed signs of decompression, meaning they surfaced in a hurry. If someone walked up to you and said "boo" you would jump. Fight or flight. If you are an air breathing mammal thousands of metres underwater and you decide to flee, there is only one direction - up. The rapid change in pressure is what does the damage. I find it hard to believe that a "real life SONAR engineer" would miss that distinction.
Ummm, and exactly WHERE did I dispute that? Nice strawman... You even used my own analogy to make your case.
But this is Slashdot after all!
Oh, and that jet engine is measured in dB SPL, which is referenced to 20 micropascals, which means 0 dB SPL = 26 dBr (SONAR). So that jet engine is actually 176 dBr. Add in our gain of 66 dB and we are at 242 dB.
How much is that? A single atmosphere of pressure is approximately 219 dBr. Two atmospheres would be about 225, four would be 231, eight would 237, and sixteen would be 243 dBr.
So, if we could get 16 atmospheres of pressure underwater, we would have the same as 2000 times that of a jet engine at 30 meters, in air.
For every 10 meters of depth, you gain 1 atmosphere of pressure. So go down 160m and you're at the pressure level being complained about. Given that pretty much ALL marine mammals regularly dive to that depth and well beyond, I think we can safely say it's NOT the pressure that's the problem.
Yet another case of attorneys using the ignorance of the public to create an outrage, when in fact the data as presented is entirely within the normal behavior and environment experienced by the alleged victims (the whales).
how about test it on underwater divers... they signed up and it's safe for whales. We could try supreme court justices (with out air tanks though that might skew results)
What kind of device potentially damages animals in a 50 mile radius? Really think about that, this would be equivalent to allowing sonic booms at 1000 feet altitude near cities... and to heck with the broken glass and ear drums. The army has nothing that invasive, the air force has nukes or days of carpet bombing and supersonic aircraft, but they pick the same spots to train where there is minimal wildlife to harm and reuse it over and over.
I'm sure this is just a case of "boys with toys" making things bigger and louder because they can and pulling rank when asked to tone it down.
Well, there IS no device - short of a nuclear bomb - that would create the 50 mile radius damage you quote. Directed sound in water falls off at a rate of 20logR, meaning that at a distance of 10 meters you are down 20 dB; at 100 meters you are down 40 dB. At a distance of 10,000 meters - about 6 miles - you are down 80 dB.
An EXTREMELY powerful SONAR system might be capable of 250 dB ref 1 uPa within its beam angle. Meaning that at 10,000 meters and within the beam angle you would have a level of 170 dB. At that 50 mile radius? You would have 150 dB.
How much pressure is that? Considering that 10m of water is approximately 1 atmosphere (~193 dB SPL, or ~219 dB ref 1 uPa), that would be equivalent to having a ~15cm wave go over you.
Even closer, we see that at a range of 100 meters the level is down to 210 dB, meaning about the same as a 3m wave passing over your position underwater. How that damages an animal living IN the water in the open ocean I can't fathom.
I submit it is NOT the pressure at all; in fact, the pressure generated from the fluke of baleen whale is near 230 dB (and the pressure at 10m from an ocean freighter's prop is about 230 dB as well). If there IS an impact on marine mammals it is probably from the frequency and the sudden "appearance" of an audible frequency. In other words, like walking up behind someone and going "boo".
There is a tremendous amount of precedence for this hypothesis too; for example, blueback herring are highly sensitive to ~105 kHz signals and will scatter at the slightest noise in that range (which happens to be the third harmonic of the primary click range of bottlenose dolphins). You can blast those herring all day long with 230+ dB SPL at 200 kHz, or at 70 kHz without a problem, and get accurate biomass estimates; go near them with an ultra-low power (140 dB SPL) 105 kHz carrier and they scatter like leaves on the wind.
And yes, I was (for nearly 7 years) a real live SONAR engineer working in the marine and fisheries research SONAR world, and am still a practicing acoustician (20 years experience).
d00d, he spelled fail with "ph" - that makes it teh Internetz speak!
Your tolerance is amazing! Thanks for your stunning display of unity and coming together... Only five ad hominem attacks in two paragraphs. I'm sure Obama would be proud!
In 2004, 40% of whites voted for John Kerry; in 2008, 43% of whites voted for Obama. So, while a small change, more whites voted for Obama - percentagewise - than voted for Kerry. They've voted more for the black Democrat candidate than a previous white Democrat candidate.
Of course, the black votes were 11% for Bush in 2004, and 5% for McCain in 2008, showing a pretty dramatic change - in absolute AND relative measures - in the racial bias of this election.
So white guys increasing their vote by 10% for the black Democrat candidate as compared to the previous white candidate is racist. Blacks dropping their vote by 50% for the current white Republican as compared to 4 years ago is not racist.
Got it.
Source for stats: CNN 2004 election results.
So 44% of whites voting for the black candidate is racist; 5% of blacks voting for the white candidate is not racist.
Just want to make sure I understand how this works...
Because your post made no sense... We see a majority of whites voted for Obama, yet we see 95% of all blacks voted for Obama. And it's the whites who were racially motivated in their voting patterns?
Truman ended his Presidential terms with a 22% approval rating, well below that of President Bush. And Democrats don't seem to have a problem holding him up as a shining example of a good President...
Yeah, but you are also forgetting one thing? How much HIGHER would McCain's percentages be among black voters had he not been white, or supposedly the reincarnation of Bush? Tons of black folks voted AGAINST him for no reason but the skin color of Obama.
It's OK; I don't think your mistress reads Slashdot so neither the wife or the girlfriend should be a problem...
Well, when I am in the US I see a lot of Canadian lumber, and Australian and Kobe beef is readily available, as well as lamb from New Zealand, fish from Chile and Asia, and cheese from France. Fruit from Chile, China, the Philippines. I wonder how easy it is to buy American beef or apples in the EU? I know it's nearly impossible in most of Asia...
Let me guess... You live in the EU? I live predominantly in Asia and sell into the US and the EU. And as a source from Asia (China, South Korea, Taiwan, and Malaysia predominantly) the rules and regulations and taxation of the EU are EXTREMELY protectionist. Much more so than the US.
A lot of times I'd agree with you (the EU is HIGHLY protectionist) but in this case it doesn't work. Go to any cell phone outlet in Asia - look at even the Chinese-only or Korean-only cell phones. ALL have removable batteries. Samsung, Motorola, LG, Palm, RIM, pretty much everyone uses replaceable batteries. Except Apple.
someone's never been to the tennessee mountains.
Out here in the Western US, we call those foothills...