We consider both dry-bulb temperature (T) and wet-bulb temperature (TW), specifically their daily maxima averaged over 6 h, denoted by Tmax and TWmax, respectively. Whereas the general public can easily relate to the concept of T, TW is not a widely used and understood concept. It is the temperature an air parcel would attain if cooled at constant pressure by evaporating water within it until saturation. It is a combined measure of temperature and humidity, or âmugginessâ(TM). Like all living species, human survival is partially a function of the environmental temperature. 35ÂC is the threshold value of TW beyond which any exposure for more than six hours would probably be intolerable even for the fittest of humans, resulting in hyperthermia. In current climate, TW rarely exceeds 31ÂC.
If you like sci-fi, you like Star Wars. If you like soap operas, you like Star Trek.
don't you have that backwards?
No, Star Wars Episode I, II, and III got that backwards. They should have been titled Star Trek I, II, and III.
This interview with RT does a good job of illustrating many of John McAfee’s views: "This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated." http://i.imgur.com/KuYENGO.png
For a guy who got rich from making security software for personal computers, this sure is one major campaigning fuck-up, if you pardon my French.
Given what I expect your age is, maybe you just haven't learned much yet.
Given that you don't know me at all, your expectancy of my age should be roughly between 18 and 65. Not really an age range within which one has little opportunity to learn much.
If you managed to reach temperatures sufficient to bring this field back into its inflating state, you would effectively hit the “reset” button on the Universe, and cause inflation to resume, resulting in the Big Bang starting all over again.
Would such a temperature have to be above or below the Planck temperature? If an object were to reach the temperature of 1.41 x 10^32 Kelvin, the radiation it would emit would have a wavelength of 1.616 x 10^26 nanometers (Planck length). Beyond that, if there's even a beyond, is the behaviour of matter even predictable at all?
The site been blacklisted by Twitter, Facebook, and major email providers as malicious/spam.
I shared the site on my timeline of FB. Works fine.
We're here to give you a computer, not a religion. - attributed to Bob Pariseau, at the introduction of the Amiga