Comment Re:Only one to protect yourself (Score 1) 417
Wait, are you saying that if I married someone with HIV that I wouldn't get HIV??? If only I had known!!!
Comment Pele24 (Score 1) 340
Brilliant, now I can sue Hollywood for making scary movies. Combine that with my lawsuite against KFC for their "Low-Carb" diet making me fat and I'll be set for life.
Comment Re:Wonderful news (Score 1) 413
So you're trying to compare the Net welth of ~750 individuals to the anual spending habits of ~120 million people (40% of american population). Lets dig a little deeper.
Using your numbers from above the Avg net worth of these 750 billionairs is ~$1.87 billion. Now assuming $5 trillion spending each year the Avg spending per middle class individual is ~$41,667 per year. Multiply this out over a lifetime (72 yrs) and that individual spends ~$3 Million aka $0.003 Billion. Now I realize that spending does not equate to earnings, but I think you would agree that most middle class individuals spend close to what they earn in a livetime. However, just to be generous I'll assume that the middle class has a 25% savings rate(LOL). Tack that on to 3 Million and you get $3.75 Million ($0.00375 Billion).
Now I'm not sure what numeric system you're using, but looking at these numbers the "normal" wealth of the middle class is nowhere neer the wealth of these Billionaires over a lifetime.
Comment Maybe and Extra-Solar body. (Score 1) 257
Has anybody considered that maybe the planet itself did not originate from within the system who's star it is orbiting.
Submission + - New planet 'goes round star the wrong way'
Smivs writes: "BBC News is reporting that Astronomers have discovered the first planet that orbits in the opposite direction to the spin of its star.
Planets form out of the same swirling gas cloud that creates a star, so they are expected to orbit in the same direction that the star rotates.
The new planet is thought to have been flung into its "retrograde" orbit by a close encounter with either another planet or with a passing star.
The work has been submitted to the Astrophysical Journal for publication.
Co-author Coel Hellier, from Keele University in Staffordshire, UK, said planets with retrograde orbits were thought to be rare.
"With everything [in the star system] swirling around the same way and the star spinning the same way, you have to do quite a lot to it to make it go in the opposite direction."
Professor Hellier said a near-collision was probably responsible for this planet's unusual orbit.
"If you have a near-collision, then you'll have a large gravitational slingshot from that interaction," he explained.
"This is the likeliest explanation. But it might be possible you can do it by gradually perturbing the orbit through the influence of a second planet. So far, we haven't found any evidence of a second planet there.""
Slashdot Top Deals
A bug in the code is worth two in the documentation.
