Hogslayer

Hate to burst your bubble, but that is exactly how global temps are measured; a bucket of water, not the air. There are other methods, and all are correlated (like troposphere radiation, etc) and that is where the disputes arise.

I was just wondering if anyone uses VB for traditional batch data processing. We have been experimenting with it, and it isn't going over well. No doubt that it is not the best language for this type of processing, but they won't embrace anything else either. It pits the traditional big iron people against the geeks who don't bathe, IMO. If anyone can give me examples of how it can be better than say COBOL, or can give me examples of why I should argue against it, I'd appreciate it. I'm not anti-VB, I just don't see any use for it in batch processing.

You still haven't listed DOS/VSE or MVS/OS390. Both put those others to shame. I work on DOS (the real DOS, not uncle Bill's). It puts those all to shame, and it was obsolete by 1985. The most recent version came out last month, and it handles files larger than common Eunuchs platforms, sorts faster too.

Ahh, see, he who waits can count on someone doing it for them, LOL! If you still need more detail, let me know.

Teleportation is way too far out there for my feeble mind. I have a problem with one part. Lets say we have a widget, and we want to send it to aman. Now, when it disappears, the space it occupied is going to have nothing in it. And the space where it is going will have something in the way. Now, I suppose you could have two sealed chambers, so that the contents are exchanged. We send aman the widget, along with the atmosphere in the chamber, and we get back fangerdoodle, and a new atmosphere. That adds some difficulty, sending a gas. But what about light traveling through the chamber? We could seal it, I suppose, and make it radiation-proof. But what about neutrinos and the like? And what about the surface of the chamber? I do like the idea of a bend in space, kind of like a stargate device. That's probably going to be a competing technology, and the market will decide which one becomes commonplace

No one? I would have thought this would be pretty simple

Condoms don't always work. I fathered 3 children who obviously chewed through the latex. Birth control pills are less effective. Diaphrams aren't any better. Vascectomies work well. I'd suggest that every young man get one at the age of 12. You can reverse it, and if you can't afford to, then you need to seriously reconsider your reasons for fathering a child at that time. I'm going to do my boys the favor of having it done at about that age.

Zarkov, if english is a second language, I'd say it is fine. Needs work, but way better than my Russian. I'll give you a point for language proficiency. Here's a basic primer for electromagnetic radiation regarding bodies in space. All objects with a tempurature (an absolute tempurature) emit electromagnetic radiation. The warmer the object, the more radiation it emits. Tempurature also dictates the mean concentration of those wavelengths (to be lay about it). And the shorter the wavelength, the more energy that is contained in that radiation. The technical relationship is demonstrated by the Stefann-Bolzmann equation. To see the curve, do a search and look for some graphs. It will be more clear than mere words. So the sun, which is super hot, emits a huge amount of electromagnetic radiation. In addition, that radiation is concentrated in higher wavelengths. The Earth is much cooler, and emits radiation in longer wavelengths, and much less of it. Now, the bulk of the sun's energy strikes the earth via UV wavelengths. Of course, some is also IR, some is visible light, some is microwave, you get the picture. The earth hasd a total energy budget, fed by the sun (lets leave out the minor contributors for this discussion). Some of that energy is reflected. Subtract that much from the budget. That would be a controversial subject, but 2% is not a bad number. Some would say more, some less. What is not reflected is absorbed. It is readmitted into space at a frequency determined by the tempurature of the Earth, ala Stefann-Bolzmann. I stress this, because it is the basis of the greenhouse gas theory. And it is undisputed, really. What you have is a large amount of UV radiation coming to Earth from the Sun. The earth absorbs nearly all of it and gives it off in the IR frequencies. Here is problem #1 with the greenhouse gas theory; if the atmosphere reflects that IR radiation back down to the Earth, it also reflects those same wavelengths back to the sun. And because the amount of IR radiation coming from the Sun is greater than that emitted from the earth, less energy is striking the earth, less is there to be absorbed. So if such a mechanism exists, it will eventually cause global cooling, not warming. Total energy budget is reduced. Before you start finding fault with this, there is much conjecture about whether energy is truly reflected by the atmosphere, or simply absorbed. But here is problem #2 with the greenhouse gas theory; in a greenhouse, the atmosphere is volumetrically confined, but with the earth, the atmosphere expands as per Boyle's Ideal Gas Law. This expansion causes almost instantaneous cooling. And increased outgassing to space as well. Thus, the atmosphere has a very profound regulating effect on the tempurature of the earth. And absolute tempurature is a measure of the total emission of energy, by reversing Stefann-Bolzmann. The atmosphere of the earth is not confined. It is part of the planet. If that was too long or too difficult to understand, I don't know what help there is for you.

If you lose your cookie or need to log in for some reason, you get a URL not found error unless you go to the home page and log in from there. Just throwing that out.

I've made the shift from night-owl to day laboror many times. For me at least, the secret is to turn the clock forward, not backwards. Force yourself to stay up later, and allow yourself to lay in bed later. This should move your clock forward about 4 hours a day, and after a weekend of adjustment, you should be both rested and in sync. IOW, if you get off at 7am Friday, stay up till 3, and sleep till 3 saturday. Stay up till 7 Sunday, and sleep till 7 Monday. Then you are back in sync for monday morning, with plenty of rest.

My experimenting days are long passed. I can honestly say that the only thing I actually learned was that as an enhancement to daily life, there is no substance that can substitute for the holy three: Risk, Reward and Recognition. It is a benefit in being a parent to have been there, done that. But how do you make a young person understand where you are coming from? I can honestly say that no one loses simply because they haven't experienced some mind altering chemical. Kind of like bungee jumping, it might be fun, it will certainly be unique, but you aren't going to be mentally stunted if you don't jump off a bridge with a rubber band tied to your ankle. If you have something to prove, prove it to yourself. No one else counts, in that respect.

Which is why I posted it here.

If IR wavelengths will not pass through the "greenhouse gas atmosphere", then they simply will not pass through. In either direction.

man, you act so dense sometimes! Be practicle! 1) you don't need a water source near the river, you need it in the desert! Your talking about an awful lot of work just for a prototype. 2) If these processes were occurring, they would have built stalagtites on the ceiling and stalagmites on the floor by now! Not to mention the scars of erosion on the interior surface! Study some geology of limestone caves! 3) No such endevor has been attempted, much less written about, in any archeological source. The closest anyone has come is the creation of ice in India in the summer, using solar heating. And that was pretty hit or miss. 4) Lets just postulate, for the sake of argument, that such phenomenon was both understood and harnessed. Why didn't the pharoah have an air-conditioned palace? 5) Please explain why an animistic culture would ever consider water, of all things, sacred. Necessary, yes, but so is food. But sacred? (edit: spelling of "ice")

Zarkov, you like simplicity, and I appreciate that. Consider the following problem; We know that all incoming enrgy to the earth is dissipated at a frequency in the near-IR spectrum. This is simply stefann-Bolzmann at work. The idea is that UV radiation enters the atmosphere, strikes the earth, is absorbed, and is radiated as near-IR. Sure. According to the greenhouse gas theory, certain wavelengths of IR are prevented from escaping, and serve to heat the atmosphere. Sure, okay. But, the same wavelengths which are prevented from escaping, are also now prevented from entering. And the amount of radiation in that spectrum is greater coming from the sun than the amount emanating from the earth. Thus, total input energy is decreased. In addition, there was a fellow named Boyle who gave us a mechanism for measuring and predicting the effects of increased energy within the atmosphere. We refer to it as boyles law. So this increase in energy is accomodated by an expanding atmosphere. The cooling effect is near-instantaneous even in human terms of time. So the atmosphere regulates energy absorption and dissipation in itself, and overall, more solar enrgy results in less absorption. So please tell me how anyone with any scientific leaning can repeat the term "greenhouse gas" without a snicker of contempt?