Tried to build this with my 3d printer. Something broke, and something seized, and to my amazement, it turned out to have 1:infinity gear reduction.
No information on bandwidth, signal strength, channel separation or anything else. Only that it "acts like a concert conductor".
How low can a scientific article sink, and still be the basis for a slashdot story? This must be a new low.
Current trans oceanic fibers do transmit multiple colors at high speed with amplifiers on the seabed and no regenerators. New installations carry 64 Tb/s per fiber. and often 64 fibers are laid. Some are left dark, but theoretical capacity for a cable is therefore 8192 TB/s bidirectional capacity
This might be up to 8 billion HD channels or everyone the entire earth watching different TV channels at the same time. Not sure how much more bandwidth is needed in a cable.
What arabs lack in sceitific strength, they have in life experience. Mars is a dry desert, and nobody knows dry desert better than arabs. NASA has to travel far, and no NASA engineer has any experience with climate similar to Mars.
Arabs just need to exit their door, and it is like being on Mars. Huge advantage over both USA as well as Europe, Russia and China.
What is the most complex item you can buy in your local store manufactures in an arab country?
A fiberglass boat is stronger. Fiberglass is orders of magnitude stronger.
I have a small setup on my desktop that encodes 8 bit per photon. It is called a spectrum analyzer together with a laser. It could probably encode a lot more if it was optimized for that, but lacks the sensitivity.
Not if you use a quantum critical airfoil. Se earlier slashdot article.
What about a windmill on the roof! The windmill spins as the car drives, and produces electricity to charge up the batteries. Modeartors: Please mod this comment up as 'funny'. And if you dont get why, mod it up as 'insightful', then dont moderate slashdot anymore.
Basic as a language is tedious, user unfriendly, and not problem oriented. Java is a lot better. My kids 6. and 8. grade took Stanfords CS101, and I was truly impressed with how fun it was for them, as well as what they could accomplice.
Everything is done right in the browser. Try it out for yourself. Khan academy has tried a "fun game" in java approach, but this is much less focussed and kids seem to tire of it as soon as they have made the limo break the sound barrier.
1. A lot of graphical processing, like finding traffic signs in urban environment (for automatic driving) to bluescreen manipulation.
2. Also building databases and doing datamining.
4. More programming; Digital media, analog, security etc
Nick Parlante is the teacher, and a great guy.
I actually read this book. Apparently you did not. The term 'survival of the fittest' is a misunderstanding of evolution as well as misquoting Darwin.
Herbert Spencer coined the phrase "survival of the fittest". Darwin used the term "natural selection"
Darwin never suggested "survival of the fittest". What does this even mean? 'Fittest' must mean ' most fit in a certain environment', but how is that measured? 'Most fit' must can only be meaured as the ones 'that survive'. So the statement can only mean "survival of the survivers" which is a trivial obsurdity.
The intel Pentium M from 2004 with 130nm had a die size of 87mm2, and 140 million gates, or 35 per '130nm tile' so this make the current 14nm 10% the density relative the the technology size, not 1%
Intels continued tick-tock development is at this time only a play to the gallery. The 14nm core actually only has 1 component per 321 '14nm tiles'. This is 1% the density from 10 years ago. The performance has not improved very much over the last generations either.
Maybe it is time for Intel to use their enormous resources to go in a new direction and become competitive in a new world. Otherwise they will tick-tock themselves into fighting a sub 10nm battle with no enemies except Moore's law.
This selection is only within existing genetic variation. Evolution requires mutation as well. As commented elsewhere, if you sterilize everyone with black hear, everyone will be blond in a generation. That is not evolution.
I respectfully disagree on all your points
- Small pixels reduce sensitivity, not dynamic rage, but the whole point with the isocell sensor is to increase sensitivity in a small pixel. Because photons are discrete, your dynamic range can be no better than 10*log(photon count/pixel). To get 10 bit dynamic range you need 10e3 photons/pixel.
- The megapixel game is not meaningless. I use a large printer, and with a 25Mpix sensor, the result is a lot better than with a 10Mpix sensor. The print actually has a resolution of 12 000 Mpix!
The quantum efficiency, QE, of most backlit sensors ranging from the best DSLR to the Samsung is all around 10%. (Human eye and astronomical cameras can be up to 100% i.e. detect single photon.)
10% QE is about 5 picoLumens per pixel sensitivity, and here is where the sensitivity comes in. 1 lux= 1 EV = 1 lumens/m2 = a bit more than bright moonlight. Assume you have an f1 lens. now you will need 5 nanoLumens/pix for 10bit DR.
A 7mm lens will give you 3.8E15 photons/s, so each of the 16Mpix will get 2.38E8 photons, or 2.38E7 LSB. This should equal 24bit dynamic range. This is with a lot of generous assumptions like an f1 lens, no statistical noise, no thermal noise etc, but still enough photons to give good dynamic range in the darker parts of a photo.
This should give some insight into some of the fundamental limits.