Jump to content

ToadMan

NF Staff
  • Content Count

    2,536
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9
  • NF$

    2,723

Posts posted by ToadMan


  1. I'm seeing a really weird bug.

     

    If I come onto the page and have a PM, I click the little PM button and go and read the PM

    Then I click on the "View New Content" it tells me there is no new content.

    If I click on the link that says "The Board" to get back to the main page I see some forums indicating there is new posts. I then click the "View New Content", and get a list of new posts.

     

    It seems like the "View New Content" might be contextual in a way I don't quite understand and is none obvious.


  2. Steve Jobs, co-founder of Apple passed away today. It's kinda been weird to say that. Though he retired from being the CEO last month, and most everybody knew his health was failing, it's really weird for it to actually be true.

     

    It's really quite strange for me. I didn't know the guy, I never met him. I did pass about 8ft from him in the Apple quad one time. I've not been a devoted Apple follower my whole life, only really getting into Apple products in about 2004 (my second year of university). Even so, I still feel an oddly intense sense of loss.

     

    Apple will go on, and they will continue to create the kind of product they have always made. That really is the legacy.

     

    Anyway. A couple of links (noting that these main pages won't be valid in a few days):

    http://www.apple.com/stevejobs/

    http://www.wired.com/


  3. Yeah, that makes it a tough one. Basically I was suggesting analyzing the first derivative not the actual volumes. It's not important how much CO^2 is in the environment, all you need to really argue is that the amount is increasing at a rate greater than it is decreasing. Then by logic you can assert that CO^2 caused warming will result. Basically you are saying that it doesn't matter how big the bucket is, if the hole in the bottom doesn't drain faster than the tap fills, then the bucket overflows. That might make the problem even more interesting, because you can argue that human carbon velocity is directly proportional to population, and in some magic world, independent of the carbon removal rate. Then you can basically assert a human population ceiling.


  4. You are the retarded offspring of five monkeys having butt sex with a fish squirrel.

     

    Umm... but fish lay eggs.

     

    I kinda like the argument that everything in the universe is just the by produce of matter trying to reach the lowest energy state... while would imply that a lot of things are just local maxima (to much energy required to get out of the rut)...


  5. Actually that's an interesting question.

     

    What you would need to do is estimate the volume of O^2 converted to CO^2 as a result of humans breathing. I would balance that against how much CO^2 the existing forest cover is capable of removing. That would give a pretty good idea of if the situation is positive or negative feedback. Note that there is a built in assumption that CO^2 causes warming... and as we know, only 98% of scientists actually believe that, so it's far from concrete ;)


  6. It's not really worth it. Also, there is no such thing as an "air molecule"... I mean, air is a combinations of mostly nitrogen and oxygen. That being said, there are a whole ton of assumptions you would need and few of them can really be quantified. The resulting answer really has no value.

     

    If your intention was to be multiple choice, I would just go with the lowest number.


  7. Ships are in a fluid, and traveling over large distances. Missiles are in air, which acts like a fluid in some ways. They also travel great distances. I can't see the baseball thing being true... I'm going to do some math.

     

    ---

     

    Ok, so here you have it.

     

    Assumptions:

    The earth is a sphere (yes, I know it is an oval), with a radius of 6571km.

    If we split the earth vertically (pole to pole) then we get a circle. For any point on that circle the velocity of that point is proportional to it's position along the arc towards the poles, where the equator has a velocity of 465.1m/s, and the poles have a velocity of 0. If we take just the equator up, then this is a cosine function.

    A baseball leaves the bat at 35.9m/s (80.4mph)

    My baseball is going over the fence, so it covers 76.2m

    The baseball experiences no friction losses

    My hypothetical baseball diamond has home plate on the equator and the ball is hit going straight north.

     

    Given the above, the earth is spinning, and the baseball is considered to still have 100% of it's inertia from the moment it leaves the ground (is thrown). This means that in an absolute reference frame it appears to be going east at 465.1m/s

    The fence at 76.2m is moving 7.61x10-6 the speed of home plate, or 465.096 m/s

    In the reference frame of the baseball, the earth appears to be moving 0.004 m/s to the west.

    So for the baseball it takes 2.1s to clear the fence, which means that the earth appears to move 0.008m. For the person watching this would appear to be to the east (because the baseball is, at the fence, moving faster to the east than the earth).

     

    So the math says that this is about 1cm of distance... I can't really see how that would effect a baseball game in any significant manner...


  8. sorry. i didn't want to beat dead horses or shit on you toadman, just. the truth of the matter is a lot to comprehend and i would argue that locking the threads trying to decipher it, only hurts the hueman race

     

    we need all the help we can get

     

    I can agree in part. Discourse requires a discussion of ideas, with both sides willing to yield to logical evidence. When there is no yielding, or the discussion breaks down into either a) meaningless name calling and assertions, or b) iteration over the same set of poorly presented evidence, then there is little point. Given that the discussion had decayed into the later, it didn't seem meaningful to continue it. That discussion was doing anything but trying to facilitate comprehension.


  9. 11 in less than a month. Rounding sides with me ;).

     

    As for the typing comment, I find that if you aren't really trying to communicate an idea they tend to be more prevalent... specifically I take issue to rampant errors of carelessness. Does it make me unable to follow, no, I'm pretty capable of deciphering what you mean, but it is more annoying. Do I make errors? Yes, often. I'm pretty sure the previous sentence was a comma splice. However, I do try to make sure I'm clear.

     

    Whatever.

     

    If you really want to rant about this subject go ahead. (I've merged the original thread here, and it's therefore unlocked).


  10. In my defense I closed that thread because it was a circular argument... People had just taken sides and were lobbing stones... it was unlikely that anybody was going to be moved from their position.

     

    I would close this thread to... mainly because it's a duplicate. But also because 1) it appears that you have a juvenile monkey operating your keyboard; 2) Your really not presenting an argument to support your thesis (citation needed); and 3) it's been 11 years, can't we just move on?

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.