Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Curious (Score 1) 174

I read quite often that galaxies are moving away from each other at increasing speed.

In fact faster than light.

While special relativity constrains objects in the universe from moving faster than light with respect to each other when they are in a local, dynamical relationship, it places no theoretical constraint on the relative motion between two objects that are globally separated and out of causal contact. It is thus possible for two objects to become separated in space by more than the distance light could have travelled, which means that, if the expansion remains constant, the two objects will never come into causal contact. For example, galaxies that are more than approximately 4.5 gigaparsecs away from us are expanding away from us faster than light. We can still see such objects because the universe in the past was expanding more slowly than it is today, so the ancient light being received from these objects is still able to reach us, though if the expansion continues unabated, there will never come a time that we will see the light from such objects being produced ‘'today (on a so-called "space-like slice of spacetime") and vice-versa because space itself is expanding between Earth and the source faster than any light can be exchanged.

So that's confusing to me, wouldn't their mass increase as well and possibly lead to a massive attraction then collapse of the Universe back to the point prior to the Big Bang?
Or is it just the distance not the velocity relative to each other.

Comment Re:Don't get your hopes up. (Score 1) 114

I would attribute that to inadequate familiarity with the subject area.

Because you have a historical view, you can't see what's happening to you in this time, the things that happened under Bush opened a Pandoras box of nastiness for the future.

That won't be obvious for most until quite a few years have passed.

Comment Re:Worst presidents since 1980 (Score 2) 114

I thought you indicated that was a horrible ruling.

No I said "don't get your hopes up" that's all I said.

One of the Judges stated

In her dissent, Sotomayor argued that the reasonableness of a search or seizure should instead be determined by evaluating "an officer's understanding of the facts against the actual state of the law."

Others, presumably in the know, have stated this allows a violation of the 4th amendment at anytime by allowing the officer to claim ignorance.

So while the case was minor, the implications of the decision are not.

Of course you would know this if you actually read the wiki, instead of spending your time reading into what I stated, and did your due diligence.

Comment OK (Score 3, Interesting) 29

Whatsapp is owned by Facebook, Facebook can not be trusted, Whispersystems is Moxie Marlinspikes gig, so has Moxie sold out? Possible but not probable so I'm going with "additional code" added to the package once the Facebook Balut's get their slimy claws on it.

What's a Balut?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Slashdot Top Deals

After any salary raise, you will have less money at the end of the month than you did before.

Working...