npts2020

Discussion of pi on another thread reminded me of this joke; Farmer Jedediah didn't want to send his son to college because of the expense and the fact he would lose the son's help on the farm while in school but his wife convinced him it would be worthwhile. After the first semester, the son is home and everyone is sitting around the supper table when Jedediah says, "So son, what kinda classes are ya takin' at that thar college?" The boy replies, "I'm taking French, Latin and math." The father says, "Ok, say something in French." The son says "C'est la vie". The older man just goes hmmph and tells the kid to say something in Latin so the Younger man says, "caveat emptor". Not knowing a word of either language, all Jedediah can do is shake his head and ask the boy to , "Say something mathematical." The son, chest swelling with pride at having answered his father's questions, blurts out, "Pi r squared." The farmer, raising his voice, says, "That's it! You are no longer going to college. Not only are you learning all kinds of useless stuff, you are learning wrong stuff. Everyone knows pie ain't squared, it's round. Cakes is squared."

I wonder what percentage of videos from somewhere like Newsmax or Fox contains misinformation?

Well, according to the UN, the world passed 8,000,000,000 in mid-November but quibbling about exact numbers kind of misses the whole point about the world being seriously overpopulated for the amount and type of resources being used by that population. It also avoids the question of what kind of lifestyle that number of humans can live sustainably.

Well, in the US, we are trying to make it impossible for anyone to come here...

Isn't it interesting (and pathetic) that in the "Land of the Free" we are constantly talking about banning things? I don't see where the spread of misinformation and propaganda is a legitimate concern in a country that allows its broadcasters on the airwaves to legally do the same. Seems to me it is all about getting rid of competition.

IMO the biggest problem in dealing with most global problems, especially climate change, is idolization of greed on a planet with 8,000,000,000+ (and growing) humans on it. No matter how much one has, individuals are expected to want more and more and more. This would be all well and good if there were unlimited resources but there seems to not be enough for all the world's citizens to live the lifestyle of an even relatively poor person in most "first world" countries, one of the reasons we are constantly at war (not just with the military) over resources. What happens when you double the numbers of humans in the next century, as some projections predict? Are we somehow going to magically have even more resources at that time? What is the lifestyle eight billion of us can reasonably expect to live if resources are distributed more evenly?

One thing that might be a "good picture" would be several people photoing or videoing the same event from different angles.

I didn't see diethyl phthalate on the list but can say from experience it eats up many plastics.

Or said, "Damn right, hoser".

Many, if not all, automatic transmissions in cars have beveled gears in the differential. Not sure if the size would be right but it should be plenty robust enough for whatever application you want it for.

Trouble is, the "health" care providers own the government (note the ACA which should have been called the health care and insurance industry profits assurance act) and the populace doesn't seem much interested in soshulism in health care.

^^^ I fail to see what is absolute about this. Maine (4) and Nebraska (5) combine for a total of 9 of the 538 Electoral College votes so could possibly have a 4 vote difference from winner-take-all, not enough to have affected the outcome of any Presidential election in history (even in 2000, a 5 vote difference because Maine went for Gore and Nebraska went for Bush).

Gerrymandering really isn't as relevant in Presidential elections since it goes by total votes in the state and not the precinct those votes come from, that's why Republicans never seem to win the popular vote for President

What makes you think energy came "from" anywhere? According to the laws of physics you can't create or destroy energy, only change its form. If you can show that to be wrong, it would be a fantastic boost for your argument, otherwise it kind of disproves your theory. The problem is, humans live a linear existence with a definite beginning (birth) and end (death) with most of the things familiar to us having a similar profile. When you get into the quantum or cosmic realms, things often don't act as we expect so I don't see how anyone can speak with confidence about a beginning or end to a universe that could turn out to be infinite

The case shouldn't even be heard. Any other judge would throw the case out for the plaintiff's lack of standing.

I don't know if there is an analogy for electronics but in mechanical engineering they will use something called a "sacrificial anode". The way it works is to have a more reactive material near whatever it is you don't want corroded. For example, on board large ships the main engines are cooled with seawater (very corrosive) so to keep it from rusting out the condensers, zinc anodes are attached where saltwater passes through and they rust preferentially instead of the inside of the contraption.

Unless the two fluids you are mixing have the same viscosity to begin with, I don't see how it is possible to have homogenous viscosity without also having homogenous mixing. Whether your program will predict the correct outcome or not is a different matter...

Been reading some interesting stuff about Jupiter's moon Io and nobody has posted here in a while so, here goes. Only a little bigger than Earth's moon, Io is the densest object, not actually a planet (Earth is densest), in the solar system. It is also the most volcanically active and has the least water of any bodies in our neighborhood. Surface temperature is about -130C but lava flows have been measured to over 1200C and may exceed 1700C (about 3 times the hottest temps on Mercury). The gravities of Jupiter and sister moons Ganymede and Europa can cause "tides" of over 100m. Since there is no water, those tides are of rock! The magnetic field of Jupiter can generate lightening discharges of 400,000 volts and 3,000,000 amps, discharging from the moon into the upper atmosphere of the planet. (is this the reason the moon glows when eclipsed by Jupiter?) The magnetic field of Jupiter ionizes and pulls about a ton of material from Io into space every second, creating a plasma torus around the moon, fueling auroras on the planet, and doubling the size one would expect Jupiter's magnetosphere to be. (IMO) Conditions there will be a survival challenge for any organisms, even the most radical extremophiles from Earth so it is unlikely humans will ever get anything other than raw materials from there and certainly not anytime soon

It seems like they are using single sheets of paper, so it may come down to how fast you can accelerate the plane without collapsing or severely vibrating the wings, creating drag. OTOH if you are going for MTA (maximum time aloft), my money is on the glider. I know for discs, there is a big difference between ones thrown for distance (WR just over 1100 ft ~336 m) and ones thrown for MTA (WR 16.72 seconds). Even if the golf disc thrown for a distance WR was legal for MTA (and you could run it down and catch it without breaking your hand), it wouldn't hover like a fastback (looks like the cheap frisbees they give away with advertising on them) or regular frisbee (IIRC WR frisbee distance is still under 500' 152m)

In the US, that is only true in the lowest courts, any appeals (if heard. Generally they aren't but when "property rights" are involved, you never know) are decided by a panel of judges, all the way up to the Supremist Court. It is usually at least 2 appeals before it reaches the Supreme Court

Damn!! And I always thought the courts were a branch of the government. How did I ever pass civics class?

Well, if I was dictator of the universe and in charge of solving the homeless problem, the first thing I would do is "slap some people up side the head" and tell them to have some regard for their fellow human beings. After that, I would see that those committing crimes like assault, bullying and theft are jailed (would need due process but since I am dictator off the universe, it is not necessary) and all others have a safe, clean place to get food, sleep and interact with staff running the facilities. That staff, at least some of it, should be qualified to determine the kind of help needed (psychological, medical, education, day care, change of venue, job, etc) by individuals and encourage them to seek out that help. Food service would be cafeteria style and housing would be simple (converted shipping containers, micro houses, or something else relatively cheap). Once somebody's problems have been addressed and progress toward their resolution has been made, they may move on to integrating into an actual neighborhood, hopefully, becoming a productive member of society. Of course, there are some few who will never get beyond the "soup kitchen" stage and even a few who will refuse any help but I would think it less expensive and better for all to just house those people rather than pay to incarcerate them for stealing food, peeing on the sidewalk or doing any of the myriad of other things homeless people do that we might try to criminalize. I realize the above is very simplistic but also believe it is the gist of what ought to be done. In the US of A we have something called "eminent domain". If it was considered vital enough, the government could confiscate any land/property it wants and give the owner "fair market value" (spoiler alert, I don't see that happening in the US anytime soon). Fair market value happens to be whatever the gov says it is so it wouldn't necessarily be that expensive.

AFAIK The biggest obstacle to Habitat building and remodeling more is funding so they may possibly be able to build enough to solve the housing problem in those cities but even if they (likely) can't, I was only pointing out there ARE other options for going about things. (If you agree that Habitat is neither a developer or arm of the government)

I'm confused, is "Habitat for Humanity" an arm of the government or a developer? I heard they once built a dwelling or 30 million or so.

A leadership PAC is just another PAC but is usually connected to a party or elected (or wannabe) official.. In general, it seems like non connected committees (the majority of PACs) is what is being referred to in this discussion. These PACs may only give $5000 to any given candidate and receive a like amount from each donor in a given year. SuperPACs may receive unlimited amounts of money and spend as much as they want. The difference is SuperPACs are not allowed to give directly to candidates or coordinate advertising with them. If you still have questions, I highly recommend the FECwebsite https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/registering-pac/understanding-nonconnected-pacs/ . There are lots of links to define terms being used and comparisons made. It is a shame more people aren't interested in understanding how their political process works.