Wrong. The phenomenon know as "windchill", and is represented by "windchill factors" and such, has nothing to do with evaporation. It is the effect of forced convection on heat removal, the windchill tables were generated by examining the removal of heat from a dry cylinder. Evaporative cooling is an entirely separate phenomenon.

Does your space suit need to only provide pressurized air, or must it be a parka too? This is an important question for designing and wearing the darned things.

According to the actual paper (TFP) on Mars (at -60 C) the subjective temperature in still air is equivalent to only -8 C on Earth. This is because the air is too thin to remove much heat, wind or no. BTW -- "still air" is actually only an ideal limiting case of windchill, when air speed is zero and you are yourself are not moving. Genuine still air is a very rare in the open in nature.

It looks like Mars is something like a happy medium in terms of air pressure for a really, really cold place. In a hard vacuum the loss of heat from your body through radiation alone is a problem, getting rid of the heat your body and equipment produce is a problem in orbit. On Mars the air is thin enough that it has limited ability to remove heat, enough to prevent over-heating, but not too much. Space suits use evaporating water to dump heat form the suit.

I always thought that they should build Boomer retirement communities out of all those VHS tapes that were sold to them during the 80s and 90s. Where are they now?

Now if only this were true rather than what it is - a lie.

Hitler actually relaxed gun laws, making them much easier to get.

Despite the poorly written lead-in sentence to that Wikipedia article, "rent seeking" is not limited to political lobbying, that is merely a common example of rent-seeking. Regulatory capture, in which regulators expect to be rewarded by industry after they leave their regulatory role is rent-seeking via quid-pro-quo, not lobbying, for example. It is the act of obtaining wealth by gaining control of a limited resource, not through productive activity, is rent-seeking, no matter how it is carried out, so yes, patent troll portfolios are rent-seeking without being any king of stretch.

Excellent summary! Here, here!

In what sense would you have 'proved' gravity by walking outside? Did you "prove" Newton's law of universal gravitation? Unless you did some rather difficult to perform experiments when you walked outside then you did not. You could just as easily assert (with equal validiity) that you proved Aristotle's ideas that it was just the natural behavior of stuff to move toward the center of the Earth (with no equations providing any predictive value).

Proving evolution these days is really quite easy. The evidence is truly vast, all you have to do is look at the immense amounts of genomic data about the whole "tree of life". The systematic changes in genes as you move down through the phylogenetic tree proves evolution at a level of probability far exceeding any physical theory (indeed, no physical theory is ever likely to come close.).

To continue this conversation you really, really need to give at least one example of this "fact" you claim exists, otherwise it cannot be usefully discussed.

I notice the appearance of the word "relatively" now linked to "disadvantageous mutations". What do you mean by that?

Notice that the citation of "sickle cell anemia" above (and other cases of genetic diseases due to having two copies of a gene that confers advantage when present only once) do not support your claim at all. They are advantageous on average, and thus spread until an equilibrium is achieved (if such an equilibrium exists). Similarly harmful genes that only show up after reproduction ceases can spread through random drift since there is no selection mechanism removing them.

Sounds possibly similar to a gravity gradiometer, which is used for navigation in submarines. It measures the gradient of the local gravity field (its "slope") and with a gravity map you can map out your course, just as you could with a topo map of the Earth's surface.

Actually the use of "seeded" makes perfectly good sense, and is in fact a very evocative phrasing - that the control will continue to grow and spread as the 'seed' sprouts and reseeds among the sociopaths.

You, though, are quite a nasty jerk.

I did not notice that my brother had logged in and switched identities since earlier. I am actually "careysub"

True - but it showcases the underlying problem rather well. Do you have links to any of those studies of actual blanket costs and performance?

No, the tritium fusion process does not produce excess neutrons exactly as I said, and yes, as I said, there are reactions that cause neutron multiplication (I did not treat this at length though, I just mentioned the best multiplier known). The multiplication in lithium is not large, and it is not clear that it can cover all the losses and end up with breeding break-even. I note that recent EFDA's (the European fusion consortium) recent press releases on the subject merely claim that they believe the problem to be "soluble". This PPPL study from 2010 estimates a net breeding ratio of exactly 1.0, which means fusion plants will require fission plants to breed their start-up tritium inventory.

Now if your post had contained actual information, instead of made-up stuff.

CBO analysis shows that despite all the economic events that transpired after Bush's election, the U.S. Federal Budget would have remained in surplus (more than a trillion dollars) right up until the time of the Bush economic meltdown that began in 2007.

Legislative changes - the bills the Republicans passed and Bush signed - spent the entire surplus, and trillions more.

"Free market" as it is bandied about today has no defined meaning within economics - it is a general concept, usually employed as a political slogan. As Investopedia says Just like supply-side economics, free market is a term used to describe a political or ideological viewpoint on policy and is not a field within economics..

It is in the government's interest to introduce market forces into its acquisition system to create competition, and efficiency incentives, and avoid cronyism. This is what the bidding process does.

His explanation also falls apart about the over-spec'd trivialities.

A PC OS vs a Mac OS is a major difference in how the computer behaves, what software you can run on it. Such a requirements difference in a RFQ could easily be sustained.

An arbitrary monitor refresh rate cannot be shown to be a functionally meaningful requirement. A contract with such a provision would be laughed out of court if a losing bidder were to challenge it. If a bid request is steered to one vendor without a substantial, valid reason it is illegal.

In a world where you only wrote your own code from scratch for your own use would that be true.

Very, very few developers live in that world. Most work is done by software teams which maintain and extend legacy systems, where a legion of programmers have come before you. Any feature that any of those programmers use/used, and has not yet been stripped out of the code base, you are indeed forced to use as well.