StringJunky

x

Yes. It seems there's quite a few variables to eliminate that I hadn't thought of. I think I'll give NASA a buzz and see if they'll try it in a freefalling environment , like the IS Station.

Yes, that's possible. I ought to try spinning it horizontally to negate gravity.

This maybe something or not, since my apparatus maybe too imprecisely setup, I was freespinning the front wheel on my new bike and noticed that, no matter which way the wheel started spinning, once it came to nearly rest it always turned a fraction the other way before stopping completely. Where does this slight reversing 'force' come from? It's almost like a recoil.

Indeed. This comes to mind:

Another category of upvotes, I forgot to mention, are the 'me too' upvotes. Used when a post, for whatever reason, doesn't warrant a post in response but where one wishes to show some sort of symbolic, positive acknowledgement or support. It is rather ineffecient, potentially detrimental or tangential to the present flow of conversation, to say "I agree", x number of posts up the road.

I vote for many reasons, not just on the quality of posts. I for one will upvote for: well-written and articulate; thoughtful; funny; helpful; exhibits humility ;clever ;novel etc. In short, that person has altered my thoughts/thought patternin some positive way to merit an upvote. Clearly, this lady is doing that for some people. I agree with CharonY, that if one is a prolific poster there post/vote ratio will go down. I have noticed this myself, as I post a fair bit more now than I did in the past. No big deal. To me, the cumulative total means nothing, but someone giving me a green one or red one for a particular post tells me something about how that particular post was received, and in this single context can be nice, or not. This is the likely reason for certain newcomers increases... people want them to stick around because they are contributing positively to the forum.

What's Obama's attitude to this situation?

You are too kind.

Yes, that is very possible. What a crock of s***. It won't be the first they've lied in the name of national security. It's an integral part of their MO. Note: My thoughts here are a reflection of UK security sevices as well. All the same principles apply.

They'll probably say 'No' on the grounds of national security. I don't think they should. Apple needs to sort it itself. To demand of the FBI would be hypocrisy. Consider, that Apple has pursued their case on the principle of corporate/personal privacy . The FBI are only doing their job and, naturally, they have secrets. It is in the interests of security that they withold this information; it is their abiding principle. It might seem strange, but one has to think of both sides and hope for some sort of equilibrium between the two, where both can function as intended. Neither are 'the enemy', after all.

When all's said and done, in the wider view, it's the best outcome because both parties have fulfilled their professional obligations to their respective dependent clients.. Apple has now got to plug that hole so that it can go back to the original situation.

I made a very rough guess it was something to do with the arrival time to each section of the interferometer, which should be different because the SOG is finite. It is almost natural to initially assume, as I did, that the whole equipment would be 'wallowing' in the wobble at the same time, leading to no detection.

Apple are probably hot on the trail of the vulnerability. Do you think it's a hardware vulnerability rather than cracking the encryption?

On the other hand, the internet allows one to access minds and information that one might not find in their locality...and up-to-date as well. I was a committed bookworm as a child, reading at least one a day. The only trouble was, the books I got from the library about science, in the 60s and 70s were at least 10 to 20 years out of date. Flemming, Curie, Koch, Pasteur et al were the most recent that I found there. Now, one can read about stuff that's just in planning phase. Amazing. I've done all those things that you lament are absent in modern youth, I am more than happy to drown myself in the internet now... input ...data! I find it quite shocking how many people now are looking at their devices or got headphones on in public, absent in mind from the life going on around them.

OK. Ta.

There has to be a 'wobble' in the rotation of spherical objects?

No problem.

I'll have a play with mine. You'll probably notice me messing with this post. Test 1 - default - rotation on - picture taken pointing down Test 2 default - rotation on - picture taken attached to a vertical surface. Test 3 - Web picture - portrait view Test 4 As test 1 but resized to 500pix and re-orientated in an editor It seems a phone doesn't alter the EXIF data of the image in camera. It has to be done with an external editor. I uploaded it to my laptop first then edited it I then uploaded from my laptop to SFN. I use Fastone Image Viewer... light and simple. In FIViewer, double click the image and push your cursor into the left side of your screen - a menu will pop. Menus are available on left/right/top of screen http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDownload.htm Are you doing it all from your phone, including uploading to SFN? If you have a photo editor in your phone, try altering to Portrait View and save it. Rotated photo in my phone camera editor: : Yes. You need to orientate it in an editor in camera or a laptop before uploading to SFN

I found a video of them in action. Jump to 1.27 to actually see it. The video url link in the above article just shows stills...disappointing. Isn't evolution wonderful? Definitely a 'wow' moment for me. To read about the transitional steps is one thing but to see such a step in action makes it really sink in. It looks like we crawled out of a dark cave and not the open sea or open watercourse, as I've always imagined before

Mental.

Can you post a picture? It doesn't have to be that one, but another done the same way. It's OK I remembered you already posted one. In future, try turning off the auto-rotate correction feature in you phone before taking a picture. You will also be able to fit the whole page in the frame.

From the horse's mouth:

It's likely that you took the picture in the wrong orientation to start with. Put it in a picture editor and turn it with the rotate function. Your phone has the ability to rotate the screen/picture, depending on which way you hold it.as you view it, making you think it's already in the desired orientation.

I thought I had an original thought then. <sulks>