Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.


Forgot your password?

Comment: any camera will do (Score 1) 569

by heitikender (#38169556) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Best Camera For Getting Into Photography?
It's not really camera, it's you. My friend is photographer and takes better pictures with Nokia 2110 that doesn't even have a camera than me with Canon Hypermax Red 4K Turbodigital Pro+. It's the moments to grab, not technology. No camera makes you a better (or worse) photographer. I found that iPhone 4S + Instragram works best for me.

Comment: Re:200 petawatts?! (Score 1) 575

by heitikender (#37945234) Attached to: EU Scientists Working On Laser To Rip a Hole In Spacetime
They really don't have to. Watt is joule/second i.e. power is energy/time. Because the time is so short (10 -9 of second), Power is so big (2*10 15 Watts). So, storage needed is power * time = 2*10 6 Joule, which is about the amount half-depleted car battery has. I don't know how much it is in Library of Congress units, though.

Comment: Re:leak the damn thing (Score 1) 264

by heitikender (#36892234) Attached to: Canadian Government Muzzling Scientists
I'm warning you - if I will still remember to follow this theme in the end of August or whenever that final paper will be out, and she still can't speak her mind, i WILL come back here and reply to you: "Ha! Told you so!" I agree on you, that bad science is worse than no science. Still, I wouldn't muffle anybody. It's like Barbra Streisand effect.

Comment: Re:Holographic movies (Score 3, Interesting) 86

by heitikender (#33298796) Attached to: Inside the Lab of One of the World's Last Holographers
On Causality You see, when you ask why something happens, how does a person answer why something happens? For example, Aunt Minnie is in the hospital. Why? Because she went out on the ice and slipped and broke her hip. That satisfies people. But it wouldn't satisfy someone who came from another planet and knew nothing about things... When you explain a why, you have to be in some framework that you've allowed something to be true. Otherwise you're perpetually asking why... You go deeper and deeper in various directions. Why did she slip on the ice? Well, ice is slippery. Everybody knows that-no problem. But you ask why the ice is slippery... And then you're involved with something, because there aren't many things slippery as ice... A solid that's so slippery? Because it is in the case of ice that when you stand on it, they say, momentarily the pressure melts the ice a little bit so that you've got an instantaneous water surface on which you're slipping. Why on ice and not on other things? Because water expands when it freezes. So the pressure tries to undo the expansion and melts it... I'm not answering your question, but I'm telling you how difficult a why question is. You have to know what it is permitted to understand... and what it is you're not. You'll notice in this example that the more I ask why, it gets interesting after a while. That's my idea, that the deeper a thing is, the more interesting... (Richard Feynman) If you know how, then you know why.

The biggest difference between time and space is that you can't reuse time. -- Merrick Furst