...Until Ethan Hunt needs to get something from it.

Ah right, so it's actually:

1/0 = ÃS'
0ÃS' = 1

As for the utility, if there are situations where a plot or solve 1/x for every x is necessary, I imagine there would be situations where it should be workable even if [.'. x] includes 0 without the algorithm being deemed broken because there's no "if x != 0 then 1/x else ???" in it.

I'd like to understand why we can't do the same trick we do with sqrt(-1) on (1/0) and call it "zeplex". Example:

1/0 = Ê' (some applicable symbol)

A zeplex number is composed of a real part and a zereal part: a + bÊ'

Then:
Ê'/Ê' = 1
0*Ê' = 0

And so on.

It can't be just the asymptotic nature, because it doesn't seem to hold complex from being a valid concept. I.e.: http://www.wolframalpha.com/in...

What about when the doctor himself prescribes the antibiotics for a cold or flu against the patient's own judgement, without doing any test for bacterial infection?

Found this procedure: http://www.kime.net/directcc/d...

You could link the oldest one to the less old through their COM ports.

It may require access to Win 3.11 install disks tho.

This.

Because they were bound to be plugged in to recharge anyway. That way they're doubling as batteries for the building.

I present you... Non-US keyboards!

They do annoy the heck of me tho.

An electrical heater is not a system, it's just part of one. The system itself would at least involve the energy source and the transporting medium, where the losses continue to hold true the fact that there's no 100% efficiency in any system. If there were, Entropy would have no meaning.

If you take the isolated case of the heater as being 100% efficient because in itself it's able to convert 100% of its input energy into wanted heat (which itself is discutable, since there may still be losses through electro-magnetic emissions, vibrations, etc. that would not be captured by the room and transformed into heat, even though all that would be as negligible as contesting gravity acceleration as not being 9.8m/s^2 in most cases), you'd just as well pick a heat pump which, with the same amount of input energy, "produces" 3 times more heat.

Heat pumps are 300% efficient. Maybe we should use heat pumps instead of electric cars.

What I meant is that the fact seems to be "electricity is way more efficient than combustion" rather than "electricity is 100% efficient. Gas is not".

As far as my ignorance in the laws of Physics goes, it's simply impossible to have any system running at 100% efficiency because it automatically implies zero loss of energy.

Electric systems lose energy everywhere: conduction materials have impedance, motors have friction *and* generate inductive impedance, photons are created...

I think you may have gotten your fact wrong.

How about playing the evil guy to unite the Earth governments under a single goal and thus avoid the general destruction of humanity? Hmm, that sounds familiar.

Ok, I got it! Fight AGAINST the destruction of OTHER impressive things like the Great Wall of China, the Everest, Iguassu Falls and such, instead of DESTRUCTING a Manhattan-like city while fighting the enemy.

Thank you for putting into words what I have been feeling since I watched it.

What I kept from the film was interminable mass-destruction scenes with little care to a believable script. A waste of good character canon. I can't imagine why any significant number of (new) fans would look for any other merchandising or media after that.

Road maintenance is already a problem on many a government's budget. I have the impression that adding a complex system of energy delivery which includes encryption and selective power-up seems too complex.