Then what gravity is it in? Do something more than dismiss the argument and actually counter it. If you claim it is this magical constant, then how do you account for the changes in this constant for different locations on the planet? Also, how can you count the Sun's gravity acting on these objects as zero? It is still acting on objects even though their frame of reference is in free-fall relative to the Sun, yet you have no problem quantifying it as zero. I never claimed that the forces go away, just that their measurement is relative.
And why would it feel like "zero gravity (if you were in zero gravity with a ton of wind!)" (your words) if you were "inside of a jet" (my words)?
Oh great physics nerd at heart, do tell me: What is the force of gravity we feel on Earth? I bet I can guess your answer: 9.8 metres per second squared. Is that all that is acting on us? No, the Sun's gravity is also acting on us. Why isn't it figured in to the force of gravity on Earth? Because Earth is in a constant state of free-fall around the Sun, just like astronauts are when orbiting the Earth. Gravity is a relative force, measure by its perceived force within a frame of reference. If that frame of reference is standing in Helsinki, then it is 9.819 metres per second squared. If it is standing in Djakarta, then it's 9.781 metres per second squared. If the frame of reference is inside of a jet flying downward in a specific way to counteract the forces of gravity, then the perceived force for that frame of reference is 0 metres per second squared.
You need to pull your nose out of your physics book long enough to realize that your constant is a tool for your math. Gravity is not constant.
Don't get me wrong, I get more ticked off than anyone I know when I hear someone say that there is no gravity on the space station or something like that. But the fact of the matter is that and object in free-fall isexperiencing zero gravity. Don't let your knowledge of gravity get in the way of knowledge of relativity just to post some semantic crap.
It's like saying there actually isn't such a thing as centrifugal force. You may be technically right in that it is a result of inertia and that there is no "outward" force, but you have now changed the explanation of the event from something simple that most people understand into something much more wordy that more people will have problems understanding. All because you are ignoring the frame of reference.
Besides, your explanation claims their is no such thing as zero gravity, since gravity is universal. That's like saying you can't "get cold", since "cold" doesn't exist. You can only get less hot, but still hot to a degree. Semantics ignoring relativity.
"why did Blockbuster invest so much money (and shelf space) for bulky DVD cases when they could have just used pre-paid return envelopes back in the late 90s?"
Is that a serious question? If it made sense to do that, why haven't they started using the envelopes in stores now, since it would make even more sense now that they already use them for their Netflix "ripoff". DVDs come from the factory in those "bulky cases". They weren't repeatedly shipping these things all over the country, so it didn't make sense to get rid of the cases. And as far as rental stores were concerned, that case was perfect for displaying the movies, and the clear cases many stores used for actually containing the DVDs were also used for anti-theft devices. How many reasons do you need for them not using envelopes in the store?
And your CD comment is even more ridiculous. You are comparing selling a CD to renting a DVD. If people didn't get the case for the CD, they would either just buy it at the store or want it for cheaper, and I doubt they would've gotten that. It's not like your average consumer in the 80s and 90s had GBs on their computer to backup their music to for when their CDs got damaged due to being stored in envelopes. My roommate had Netflix for 4-5 months, and twice we received a DVD that had been cracked. This worked fine for Netflix, they just sent another one out. What if that had been a CD you had spent $15 for?
But isn't this obvious enough to deny the patent? The Netflix envelope is essentially the same as taping the two envelopes together, and removing one of them before sending it back. I would consider the business method here to be what the two methods have in common. What Netflix patented was the implementation of a business method, and allowing that is a slippery slope leading to a mess of ridiculous patent lawsuits.
Actually, where I've "got you" is where you bring up democracy, since that is not what our country is. It is a republic, with rules in place to stop democracy when its actions might undermine freedom. That is why you can't pass just any law to legislate popular opinion (like taking away all gun rights), like you could in a true democracy. It can be done, but you need more than a slim majority to do it.
"What? The land of the free? Whoever told you that is your enemy?" Know Your Enemy by Rage Against the Machine, 1992
Fourteen years ago people realized this. But still people will vote according to abortion rights and Social Security issues before considering their freedom. The general public puts up no resistance, so they are not free (as my sig explains).
And on top of all of that, we let the one person in charge of the elections head up the president's campaign in Ohio. If that isn't a conflict of interest, what is? Oh, I know: the one person in charge of elections in Ohio actually RUNNING for governor in an election he controls.
It is really sad how my pride in my home state has steadily dwindled down to nothing in recent years.
I won't try any reverse psychology bullshit on you, but I will tell you that you are wrong. I don't think anyone here has said that it would be funny to watch. They just made jokes after the fact. As far as how others might act if it was one of their close family members, I know I made jokes far worse than any here after my Grandma died. Granted, I wasn't making them to other relatives, so nobody took it personal. Then again, the internet is a pretty impersonal place.
Yeah, that no-fly zone is exaggerated, and my math shows it being more like 3.5% of the earth's surface area. As best as I can tell (using Google Earth), a circle that circumscribes the USA would have a diameter a little under 2900 miles. That frame of reference also goes to show that the no-fly zone could be a lot smaller and still easily enforceable.
The only way I can guarantee a win is when I go first and my opponent does not go for one of the corners with his first move. This might not be obvious, but I can guarantee I will win after just these two moves (mine and my opponents) when this happens.
You are so right. Damn America right to hell with its wide open plains and humongous open spaces. It also really sucks to live in a country that can largely control the rest of the world and has a per capita GDP fully a third larger than that of France. Not to mention that we only pay half as much for gas.
Not to say that France doesn't have anything going for it, just that it's stupid to say "I hate America" because you have to pay more for communication and entertainment services.
Fine, ignore his crossing the road comment and change it to travelling in a car. The number of deaths in those terrorist acts are fairly minor in comparison (it's the method that's scary).
Slashdot Mirror
Then what gravity is it in? Do something more than dismiss the argument and actually counter it. If you claim it is this magical constant, then how do you account for the changes in this constant for different locations on the planet? Also, how can you count the Sun's gravity acting on these objects as zero? It is still acting on objects even though their frame of reference is in free-fall relative to the Sun, yet you have no problem quantifying it as zero. I never claimed that the forces go away, just that their measurement is relative.
And why would it feel like "zero gravity (if you were in zero gravity with a ton of wind!)" (your words) if you were "inside of a jet" (my words)?
Oh great physics nerd at heart, do tell me: What is the force of gravity we feel on Earth? I bet I can guess your answer: 9.8 metres per second squared. Is that all that is acting on us? No, the Sun's gravity is also acting on us. Why isn't it figured in to the force of gravity on Earth? Because Earth is in a constant state of free-fall around the Sun, just like astronauts are when orbiting the Earth. Gravity is a relative force, measure by its perceived force within a frame of reference. If that frame of reference is standing in Helsinki, then it is 9.819 metres per second squared. If it is standing in Djakarta, then it's 9.781 metres per second squared. If the frame of reference is inside of a jet flying downward in a specific way to counteract the forces of gravity, then the perceived force for that frame of reference is 0 metres per second squared.
You need to pull your nose out of your physics book long enough to realize that your constant is a tool for your math. Gravity is not constant.
Don't get me wrong, I get more ticked off than anyone I know when I hear someone say that there is no gravity on the space station or something like that. But the fact of the matter is that and object in free-fall is experiencing zero gravity. Don't let your knowledge of gravity get in the way of knowledge of relativity just to post some semantic crap.
It's like saying there actually isn't such a thing as centrifugal force. You may be technically right in that it is a result of inertia and that there is no "outward" force, but you have now changed the explanation of the event from something simple that most people understand into something much more wordy that more people will have problems understanding. All because you are ignoring the frame of reference.
Besides, your explanation claims their is no such thing as zero gravity, since gravity is universal. That's like saying you can't "get cold", since "cold" doesn't exist. You can only get less hot, but still hot to a degree. Semantics ignoring relativity.
Adelphia no longer exists as a cable provider. They were acquired by Time Warner Cable and Comcast on July 31, 2006.
And you thought they were evil before!
Because when you say it, it sounds like you are referring to everyday RAM for your PC.
But I guess since one group already calls it that, everyone else is powerless to call it anything other than that, right?
What do you want them to call it? PCRAM? You don't think that will confuse anyone?
"why did Blockbuster invest so much money (and shelf space) for bulky DVD cases when they could have just used pre-paid return envelopes back in the late 90s?"
Is that a serious question? If it made sense to do that, why haven't they started using the envelopes in stores now , since it would make even more sense now that they already use them for their Netflix "ripoff". DVDs come from the factory in those "bulky cases". They weren't repeatedly shipping these things all over the country, so it didn't make sense to get rid of the cases. And as far as rental stores were concerned, that case was perfect for displaying the movies, and the clear cases many stores used for actually containing the DVDs were also used for anti-theft devices. How many reasons do you need for them not using envelopes in the store?
And your CD comment is even more ridiculous. You are comparing selling a CD to renting a DVD. If people didn't get the case for the CD, they would either just buy it at the store or want it for cheaper, and I doubt they would've gotten that. It's not like your average consumer in the 80s and 90s had GBs on their computer to backup their music to for when their CDs got damaged due to being stored in envelopes. My roommate had Netflix for 4-5 months, and twice we received a DVD that had been cracked. This worked fine for Netflix, they just sent another one out. What if that had been a CD you had spent $15 for?
But isn't this obvious enough to deny the patent? The Netflix envelope is essentially the same as taping the two envelopes together, and removing one of them before sending it back. I would consider the business method here to be what the two methods have in common. What Netflix patented was the implementation of a business method, and allowing that is a slippery slope leading to a mess of ridiculous patent lawsuits.
Actually, where I've "got you" is where you bring up democracy, since that is not what our country is. It is a republic, with rules in place to stop democracy when its actions might undermine freedom. That is why you can't pass just any law to legislate popular opinion (like taking away all gun rights), like you could in a true democracy. It can be done, but you need more than a slim majority to do it.
"What? The land of the free?
Whoever told you that is your enemy?"
Know Your Enemy by Rage Against the Machine, 1992
Fourteen years ago people realized this. But still people will vote according to abortion rights and Social Security issues before considering their freedom. The general public puts up no resistance, so they are not free (as my sig explains).
And on top of all of that, we let the one person in charge of the elections head up the president's campaign in Ohio. If that isn't a conflict of interest, what is? Oh, I know: the one person in charge of elections in Ohio actually RUNNING for governor in an election he controls.
It is really sad how my pride in my home state has steadily dwindled down to nothing in recent years.
Irony can't be surprising? Are you telling me that the dictionary is wrong?
I won't try any reverse psychology bullshit on you, but I will tell you that you are wrong. I don't think anyone here has said that it would be funny to watch. They just made jokes after the fact. As far as how others might act if it was one of their close family members, I know I made jokes far worse than any here after my Grandma died. Granted, I wasn't making them to other relatives, so nobody took it personal. Then again, the internet is a pretty impersonal place.
Yeah, that no-fly zone is exaggerated, and my math shows it being more like 3.5% of the earth's surface area. As best as I can tell (using Google Earth), a circle that circumscribes the USA would have a diameter a little under 2900 miles. That frame of reference also goes to show that the no-fly zone could be a lot smaller and still easily enforceable.
The only way I can guarantee a win is when I go first and my opponent does not go for one of the corners with his first move. This might not be obvious, but I can guarantee I will win after just these two moves (mine and my opponents) when this happens.
To further elaborate, the problem is that they embrace it and never grow out of it like the 14 year olds of yesteryear.
You are so right. Damn America right to hell with its wide open plains and humongous open spaces. It also really sucks to live in a country that can largely control the rest of the world and has a per capita GDP fully a third larger than that of France. Not to mention that we only pay half as much for gas.
Not to say that France doesn't have anything going for it, just that it's stupid to say "I hate America" because you have to pay more for communication and entertainment services.
That would have been non-non-non-non-non-non-heinous!
"Have mercy." is a complete sentence. The subject of the sentence is the implied ("you").
Fine, ignore his crossing the road comment and change it to travelling in a car. The number of deaths in those terrorist acts are fairly minor in comparison (it's the method that's scary).