Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Doesn't get it (Score 1) 287

So why not, instead of teaching these 11 year olds computer programs i.e. clear, concise, logical instructions to machines, we teach them to give clear, concise, logical instructions in general? If an 11 yo has a mind that is wired to program, it's going to be impossible to stop him, if it isn't you'll probably turn him off for life; unless by programing your talking about Logo which the kids would love, but learning a Lisp dialect at that tender age could very likely make learning procedural languages more difficult later in life.

Comment: Re:They are just going to end it all. (Score 1) 147

Dude If that thing spawns an "Earth eating black hole" living next door to it would be like about Mars. What everybody forgets is a blackhole has conservation of mass, charge and angular momentum, so a blackhole whizzing around the LHC ring would act pretty much like every other thingy whizzing around with the same mass, charge and angular momentum. Even if the blackhole escaped the ring, it would only be a blackhole as long as it's energy was high enough to maintain it's event horizon; that energy is dependant on it's velocity, which is a vector involving speed and direction! Yeah that's right a quantum blackhole can un-blacken if it collides with another particle and loses energy, it can un-blacken through Hawking radiation and it's only black if your close enough to it's direction of travel.

Comment: Re:Which string theory? (Score 0) 147

Imagine a "theory" with a bunch of adjustments. So many adjustmentrs that no matter what happens, there is some adjustment that canm be made such that it "retroactively) predicts it. That is string theory.

The big problem with string "theory" is that it predicts everything and so, nothing.

String toolkit might be a better name. It is just that, a bag of parts and tools that might one day be used to construct a theory that predicts something in particular.

So your saying that Climatology is a sub-discipline of String Theory?

Comment: Re:a microscopic black hole won't hurt you (Score 1) 147

Close but the Schwartzschild radius solution only applies to non-rotating bodies and any particle I can think of that is subject to relativistic mass increases also have spin, a closer fit would be a Kerr–Newman metric, however I'd assume that these solutions ignore external gravitational fields, which might be valid approximation over interstellar distances, it might not be valid in Earth's atmosphere for cosmic rays or inside the LHC. Perhaps a real physicist could chime in with a more learned point of view.

Comment: Re:Eventually - but the lies do real damage meanwh (Score 1) 397

by budgenator (#49782705) Attached to: Can Bad Scientific Practice Be Fixed?

Mann, I think he honestly believes his stuff, but is on some kind of a Narcissistic-Messianic complex; so you can't really blame him for being who he is. Hansen, man oh man you have to give him props for turning off the Air Conditioners during congressional testimony on global warming, definitely an A+ for theatrics and he's been arrested at environmental protests, I'd have fired him, but I respect him.

In 2011, Gleick was the launch Chairman[5] of the "new task force on scientific ethics and integrity" of the American Geophysical Union.[6] ... In February 2012, Gleick admitted to unauthorized distribution of documents he had obtained from The Heartland Institute under someone else's name, and took a voluntary leave of absence from the Pacific Institute; he was reinstated following an investigation.[8] ... a two-page 'Strategy Memo', had been forged.[43] Gleick denied forging the document. ... Gleick described his actions as "a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics" and said that he "deeply regret[ted his] own actions in this case" and "offer[ed his] personal apologies to all those affected". ... Peter Gleick

Gleick, chairing an ethics committee while committing pretexting, copyright infringement and possibly forgery!

Comment: Re: Maybe science went off the rails... (Score 1) 397

by budgenator (#49782411) Attached to: Can Bad Scientific Practice Be Fixed?

Nice try but like most warmists you are too mired in "open mindedness" and political correctness that you fail to engage in any active mindedness. This allows any charlatan to shovel in any crap they want, take a look at Global Carbon Emission by Type to Y2004.png, the source data can be found at http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/ndp0..., and see if the numbers still look like a "fuckton".

Comment: Re: Maybe science went off the rails... (Score 1) 397

by budgenator (#49776871) Attached to: Can Bad Scientific Practice Be Fixed?

Not true. CO2 started to climb around 1800. Temperatures started to go up around 1900. https://futilitymonster.files....

The funny thing about that is an anthropogenic influence on global temperatures has only been possible since 1950, so the temperature rise earlier than 1950 weakens the anthropogenic case and strengthens the natural variation case

Comment: Re:Eventually - but the lies do real damage meanwh (Score 1) 397

by budgenator (#49776071) Attached to: Can Bad Scientific Practice Be Fixed?

He was a Gastroenteritis, a Medical Doctor looking to market a competing measles vaccine, in short the Anti-vaxers believe that "Big Phara" is out to get profits above their children's welfare, based on the results obtained by "Big Pharma" out to get their profits at the expense of their children and lost his license to practise as a result of his avarice.

Neckties strangle clear thinking. -- Lin Yutang