LOL. That was my first thought too.
DMARC and SMTP at Yahoo, mail broken.
That people can't tell difference between cheap or expensive food or wine or that a $1000 audio cable sounds the same as 5 cent one?
Ah well it wouldn't be the internet without people bitching about what appears, to me at least, be a relatively minor website redesign (uh a bigger font and more white space basically?) of a site that's pretty much just a sequential listing of stories with links and comments anyway.
Yeah same here the only reason I have a Facebook account is for testing FB integration in mobile apps.
I'm a 104 year old man born in Antarctica currently residing in the North Sentinel Islands. I graduated from Columbine High School at the age of 1 and went to Miskatonic University in Arkham Massachusetts.
Actually the money is on SUSY (supersymmetric) particles, which from a mathematical point of view really "should" exist. Meaning it would be odd that the universe exhibits all these other symmetries, but not that supersymmetry. Basically it's one of those things that if you understand the math it totally makes sense there should be this whole other class of particles, otherwise it looks like a kludge if you don't. Obviously just because those two things fit neatly with each other, hey there should be these new class of particles and hey there's a bunch of matter we have not idea what it is, doesn't mean it's *right* but it's not like it's some crazy physicists are pulling out of their asses. I find the MOND stuff more kludgy, oh let's just tweak the model to fit, as opposed to, OK the particles can't be within this mass range, let's try to find to them them at some other mass range.
Guess they should have given up on the Higgs boson search 10 years ago, too? A negative results is not a "failure", it just constrains things a little more.
The most compelling evidence for dark matter is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_Cluster
Obviously we should always be open to alternate hypotheses, but at the moment dark matter is still the most straightforward explanation.
Listen, I'll be the first to point out or notice glaringly dumb science inaccuracies in films, but going after Gravity on this count is pretty ridiculous given that the filmmakers knew *exactly* what they were fudging into order to, you know, giving us two hours of decent thrills instead of 2 minutes of, OK they're all dead now, or 2 hours of them drifting in space dying of asphyxiation. It's fine to point out the inaccuracies in order to inform people about the actual facts, but implying they somehow should have gotten it absolutely right is dumb, and really, the hair not floating? Come one, suspension of disbelief anyone? Besides, who's to say in the universe of the film that all 3 stations weren't in the same orbit very close to each other from some inexplicably crazy reason.
Supposedly the FAA issued a NOTAM (Notice To AirMen) about this, but I haven't been able to find it. I wonder what it said, something like "watch for dumbasses crossing the runway"?
Yeah how is this either "news for nerds" or "stuff that matters"?
While the results are interesting, it looks like the 13 new solutions all involve 3 equal mass bodies with total zero angular momentum and coplanar. Of course, all the periodic solutions are probably special cases of some sort.
I mean, I can't stand the taste, how do you people even drink this stuff? The only way I can drink an alcoholic beverage is if it's watered so completely I can't even taste it. Not to mention I don't even understand the appeal, I have no desire to have my mental functions impaired in any way whatsoever, and I find *drinkers* of alcohol intolerable as well. I can understand drugs that might be mind expanding, like LSD or mushrooms or whatever, but this blacking out drunk, acting obnoxious, and waking up with a hangover I just don't get.