It's all about the decision of whether the speed of light is an absolute....a range that cannot be exceeded...in which case the projector's speed cannot be added to the light's speed....wave, or particle. Actually, that's correct, as far as it goes. The interesting bits happen because relativity states that there's no privileged frame of referenc
Jafo, Actually, while there are a couple of unique characteristics for an object travelling *at* the speed of light, the theory of relativity still holds. I had reframed I.R.'s question to take the case of an observer with a flashlight travelling at some speed close to the speed of light (since an object with mass cannot actually reach the speed of light. However if we want to actually consider the behaviour of some object that is actually at the speed of light, we can
Proper ice cream is chocolate
I.R. Lots of questions! According to the theory of relativity, no matter what your particular frame of reference, you will always measure the velocity of light to be 'c', or approximately 300 million centimeters per second. How fast you're travelling doesn't make a difference in this context. From your viewpoint, shining the flashlight would look just like it would if you lighted it at *a
Fuzzy Logic slaps IRB with a jellied eel That sounds disgusting. Is it raspberry jelly? IR: As for #7, maybe you should just ask for more money
At the very edge of the known Universe is a very, very, very large and tall brick wall The sign on this wall has an arrow pointing down, and says, ''This side up''. The lab experiment universe is an interesting concept. Given that the current probablistic viewpoint of entropy includes the assertion that it is statistically possible
I'm on the final stages of clearing the last hurdle after about 8 years of setback recovery. Caused by a bad relationship and a vast amount of debt. Spent all that time getting back to solvent and cleaning up the mess that went with it. I pretty much started completely over, moved to a new city, got a new job, and found quite a few wonderful new friends. The friendships tend to be the most important, you always need someone to help you over the rough spots (or at least cheer yo
treetog a professional skinner? I never saw that one coming For me, nothing as glamorous as that, I'm an EE by education, and a software developer/analyst (unix / windows) by trade. I get to like what I do, though, and that's cool
Looks like it wants to remove sql language elements. [Message Edited]
WinCustomize Forums
He says that like sanskrit is hard to read While I've had no trouble setting it up on my Linux boxen, I'd still say he has a point, at least as a first principle. Thing is, none of the current systems really meets the usability criteria entirely. Arguably, the Mac probably comes closest, but in some way that comes at the cost of greater difficulty in doing things substantially different
WinCustomize Forums
Just a note, don't necessarily rule out the Power Supply being bad. I had a system that did pretty much what you describe (brief bit of lights, etc., from the drives, no post, no boot), hooked up another PS, and all was working again. Another thing to try that I've seen work for a similar problem is to completely clear the CMOS memory associated with the BIOS (remove the battery and temporarily short the battery connections, replace battery; additionally, quite a few motherboards have a
Actually, I use both (not that I'm all that good ). Photoshop still gets the final nod, just because it can do quite a bit more, especially as regards to printing (which is what I do for the most part). I don't mind the right click interface, but gimp 2 (the development version) also has a standard menu bar on the image editing window. BTW, you can use PS plugins with Gimp (I don't know for
Here's a link to the development version of gimp, ported to windows. Much improved UI, and quite a few new features. Still under development, so may not be quite as stable, but it works well for me http://www2.arnes.si/~sopjsimo/gimp/unstable.html
Outsourcing offshore isn't going to cause a catastrophe in the US IT industry (although it probably will require readjustment). There's much more to the development process (as an example) than just the writing of code. Some parts of the process can be outsourced fairly easily, and some parts cannot. If you're one of those that can be easily replaced, that sucks, to be sure, but one can always adapt their job skills to compensate. Part of the arguments concerning offshoring are
I certainly think that there are some changes in the works, but I don't really think that those changes translate to a wholesale evisceration of IT jobs. There are jobs that can easily be moved around (wherever), and jobs that can't (or can't very easily, at least). Also, depending on what a specific company does, any salary reductions gained by offshoring can often be more than made up for by other factors, including communications. I'm very much a market oriented capitalist t
DC, Yeah, a couple of the threads I found about the animation seem to think the same thing, the longer hitting one has most likely been tweaked by someone. I'm not a huge fan of flash, by and large, but the little games like these can be pretty captivating
Had similar numbers from dendillons link (325 or so, max). Here's another link, this one gets more distance. So far 575 is my best on this one. http://www.meph.eu.org/pinguin.swf
Having continually used Linux since '93 (slackware and pre 1.0 kernel) and Windows since '90 (Windows 3.0) (and humbly claiming advanced to expert ability with both systems), I will still say that for the average desktop user, there is no compelling reason to switch from Windows to Linux. And that has *nothing* to do with any actual or perceived shortcomings in either platform. The main reason there's no reason for joe average to switch is that Windows is *good enough*. It comes already
Great series, definitely one of my favorites. I'm not so much bothered by the GI undertones (especially since the flagship team is only half military), but if there were actually a stargate in the US, it would definitely be a military or intelligence controlled operation, and we could only *hope* that it would be run even half as ethically as portrayed in the series. BTW, if you want to hear some MacGyver cracks, you should watch some of the outtakes <img src="http://images.sta
Twilight zone Outer Limits Thriller Star Trek Laugh In Bonanza Ed Sullivan Monty Python Flying Circus Dragnet Night Gallery I love Lucy Dr Who Barney Miller Watched most of these in original broadcast (old am i ) Will still watch them if they're on, and I'm at the TV.
Ah, contraction Can't really say for sure, the documentary I watched on the snowball earth didn't attempt to address that. I wouldn't think there would be much if any contraction, especially if the thickness of ice was essentially constant globally. Ice is less dense than the crust, and if it's pushing down equivalently all over, it would almost certainly have no substantial effect on either the di
jtb, Yep, heat is energy (actually, at some level, everything is energy [E=mc^2]). The earth gets energy from the sun as well (and it's important), but without the warming effect of the core, the climate on the earth would probably be much like that on the moon, either really hot, in the sun, or really cold, in the dark. IIRC, it's generally considered that the combination of inn
Nah, even if it was flat, I'd still fall over re surface area: If you get a new mountain range, that could translate into a small increase in surface area, but as a percentage of the total surface area of the earth, the increase would be infinitesimal, for all intents and purposes. The simple surface area of the earth is 201,061,760 square miles (calculated as a sphere with radius of 40
essencay, Some heat is transmitted away from the mantle, but most of the energy expended goes to moving the crust (convection currents in the mantle, for example), and so forth. The rest goes into the environment (atmosphere and ocean). It's also generally accepted that the heat of the core is largely responsible for the overall liveable temperatures we have. I've read (and this is from memory, so it could be wrong, I'll have to do some fact checking in a bit <img src="http://images.st
The general school of thought was that the core was pretty much entirely iron (being the most abundant element). Seismic data indicates that the density of the core is less than it would be if it were entirely made of iron, and the current viewpoint is that the iron in the core also contains some amount of less dense material, such as silicon, etc. Cooling would cause the earth to contract, but considering the pressures, etc., the magnitude of the shrinkage would be quite small as a per