That touches on a thought I've often had: if "ignorance of the law is no excuse", then I'd really like to see a physical copy of all the laws by which I'm required to abide - federal, state, and local. I'm sorta surprised no one's played this as a tactic - I would have expected some grandstanding politician to roll out wheelbarrows of paperwork to make a point.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. That makes more sense. I read TFA twice and did not get that meaning out of it.
No. It's height. Wave height = 2 * wave amplitude. Internal waves do not occur at the surface, but they can affect the height of the surface (i.e. you can "see" internal waves on a ship's radar as the changes in sea surface height match the crests/troughs of the waves). Like a surface gravity wave, the main motion/movement of a water particle in an internal wave is circular/orbital, although there is also some along-wave direction movement (Stokes drift).
Also keep in mind that tsunami waves caused by earthquakes are mostly internal, and only become large surface waves when the water becomes shallow, and all that displacement has nowhere to go but up.
Generally when talking about water, the definition of a wave specifies it is on the surface:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/wave"a disturbance on the surface of a liquid body, as the sea or a lake, in the form of a moving ridge or swell."
If you are using another definition of the word wave (such as that used by physics to refer to light, sound, etc.) when talking about water, you really should specify what you mean.
It's clear from the article they're using the latter meaning of "wave". The definition above is a visual description of what are generally caused by wind. You want definition 11 in your link.
One unexpected finding
... was the degree of turbulence produced as the waves originate, as tides and currents pass over ridges on the seafloor.
Watch the animation.
NASA was just messing around, you see, they had an experimental EM drive... and next think you know they accidentally the whole spacetime.
I watched the show! My favorite episode was the one where they encountered a space-time anomaly while someone was on the holodeck.
This brings us one step closer to DUI Telepresence Crown Victoria Figure-8 racing!
I'm assuming they resorted to this method after unsuccessfully adding {{OVERRIDE_GRADE_MODE}{SET GRADE='A'}} and variants into all their essays.
And I thought hail was bad!
How do you loose a pair of cities on an industry?
Unless you're talking about DRM, in which case the users are already f***ed.
So? It's not an oval racer. It's built to a performance envelope defined by a specific event. The factors that are important here are acceleration, downforce, and mechanical grip; not top speed. Looking at the sketch in TFA, it's clear by the presence of the front wing that they're targeting massive downforce, which eats into top speed by creating drag.
And here's the onboad video, which is pretty amazing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y20CLumT2Sg
260 kph in real units is only 160 miles per hour
Which is plenty fast for Pikes Peak. When Sebastian Loeb set the record with his 900-hp car, his maximum speed on course was 150mph.
with 1MW power, the 50KWh battery would be dead in 3 minutes at full throttle.. jeez.
Roughly equivalent to a gasoline car with a 2-gallon tank... lol. (1 gal=33KWh)
Do all these people posting 50kWh/1020kW 180s comments not understand racing? Or hybrid drive systems? Or Mountain roads? As TFA mentions, the Pikes Peak course contains over 150 turns, so you'll be off throttle or at partial throttle most of the time, especially with that much torque available, and regenerative braking will give some of it back.
Or perhaps the race car engineers that are building the race car don't know anything about the race they're building it for. That seems likely.
I'm done. I'll come back tomorrow. Laters...
Yeah, me too - I'm so dune with this nonsense.
This file will self-destruct in five minutes.
