text:
Pediatrician warns about Whooping CoughUPDATED 4:57 AM EDT Jun 19, 2013
A Greenville pediatrician issues a warning about Whooping Cough and tips to protect your family.Video Transcript
AFTERNOON/EVENING THUNDERSTORM EACH DAY. [D5]WHOOPING COUGH-INTRO AFTER A STUDENT AT PALMETTO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WAS DIAGNOSED WITH WHOOPING COUGH... SCHOOL OFFICIALS SOUNDED THE ALARM. BUT TONIGHT... WE'RE HEARING FROM A LOCAL PEDIATRICIAN... WHO HAS A WARNING FOR EVERY PARENT. NEWS FOUR'S ANGELA RODRIGUEZ HAS THE STORY. ANGELA- THIS IS HIGHLY CONTAGIOUS? IT SURE IS... THE T-DAP VACCINE WAS NOT REQUIRED AS A PREREQUISITE TO ENROLL IN SCHOOL... UNTIL THIS UPCOMING SCHOOL YEAR. ACCORDING TO DHEC, THE NEW REQUIREMENT IS FOR STUDENTS ENTERING 7TH GRADE... BUT BY LAW, YOU CAN OPT OUT. DOCTORS SAY THE BEST THING YOU CAN DO TO PROTECT YOURSELF... IS GET VACCINATED. THAT GOES FOR PARENTS TOO. DOCTORS ATTRIBUTE THE RECENT RISE IN PERTUSSIS CASES... ALSO KNOWN AS WHOOPING COUGH... TO AN INCREASE IN FAMILIES OPTING OUT OF THE VACCINE... AS WELL AS FAMILIES... FORGETING TO FOLLOW UP ON BOOSTER SHOTS. :40 it's not epidemic at this point but we are always suspicious when children, adolescents have coughs that linger on and on and on DOCTORS AT THE CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER SEE WHOOPING COUGH A HANDFUL OF TIMES A YEAR. THE ILLNESS PRESENTS MUCH LIKE THE COMMON COLD... C2 5:09 it's droplet spread, so if someone coughs and you're in that area, you can be exposed to it. WHOOPING COUGH USUALLY TAKES SOME TIME TO DIAGNOSE. AND CAN LAST ANYWHERE FROM 6 TO 10 WEEKS. C2 4:04 adults can have such a violent cough, it can crack a rib DOCTORS SAY THE BEST DEFENSE... IS THE T-DAP VACCINE. c1 2:31 if a child is properly immunized, the risks are much lower BABIES ARE THE MOST VULNERABLE... BECAUSE THE FIRST VACCINE ISN' T ADMINISTRED UNTIL A CHILD IS 2 MONTHS OLD. AND CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 1... SUFFER THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF COMPLICATIONS. PREGNANT WOMAN ARE ADVISED TO GET A T-DAP SHOT BEFORE THEY DELIVER. AND... DOCTORS ARE LEARNING... AS CHILDREN AGE... THEY CAN OUTGROW THEIR IMMUNITY. BOOSTER SHOTS IN MIDDLE SCHOOL AND BEFORE COLLEGE ARE HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. SO FAR THIS YEAR.... DHEC HAS CONFIRMED 79 CASES. IN 2012, 230 CASES WERE REPORTED.
More Video
CommentsThe views expressed are not those of this site, this station or its affiliated companies. By posting your comments you agree to accept our terms of use.blog comments powered by Disqus
Latest from WYFF 4
Advertising4 Your Information


text:
Scenes from 'October: Ten Days That Shook the World' (1927), directed by Sergei Eisenstein, starring Vladimir Popov, Vasily Nikandrov, and Eduard Tisse.
Created in honor of the 10th year of the Union's existence, Eisenstein's work recalls the events of the revolution and overthrow of the provisional government. The film notably depicts the leader of the provisional government, Aleksandr Kerensky, as an incompetent and incapable leader as well as Eisenstein's use of the 'intellectual montage' where he employs various objects as allegories to the plot events.
Tags: Russia Russian USSR Soviet Union Movies Cinema Film soviet cinema Sergei Eisenstein Eisenstein 1927 1920's 20's Vladimir Popov Popov Vasily Nikandrov Nikandrov Eduard Tisse Tisse
- peregrinusexpectavi reblogged this from zolotoivek
- what-was-e-schatology reblogged this from ava-marx and added:
dropped the ball on this one - above commentary is aces.
- ava-marx reblogged this from what-was-e-schatology and added:
Yes yes yes yes. As much as I love Eisenstein as an aesthetic innovator, this has always bothered me tremendously. As...
- pdxrain likes this
- thesoviette reblogged this from what-was-e-schatology and added:
Although I do love October, I would have to agree with the misogyny point: remarkably, women in Eisenstein— and...
- eatthebourgouisie reblogged this from ceborgia and added:
Yet argueably Eisenstein was mysognistic in his approach to film… and regarded woman issues as less important than that...
- penguinist likes this
- imperialscythia likes this
- nodamncatnodamncradle reblogged this from ceborgia and added:
Relevant to your interests. yeah you.
- lunarfarts likes this
- ceborgia reblogged this from what-was-e-schatology
- zubuzubu reblogged this from zolotoivek
- peregrinusexpectavi likes this
- edwardnortonamstrand reblogged this from zolotoivek
- ignissacer likes this
- writingecstacy likes this
- newweirdeurope reblogged this from what-was-e-schatology and added:
that's so cool. I've never seen that Mosfilm has yt channel with full films. Now I kno what I'll be doing all day
- newweirdeurope likes this
- winterinmymind likes this
- diariodeinvierno likes this
- tsotchke reblogged this from what-was-e-schatology
- thedevilsguard likes this
- benicetoafriend reblogged this from zolotoivek
- zolotoivek posted this

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Skip to content
In association with
"The R1 accelerates like it has a racing engine; it has V-twin levels of torque down low and screaming four-cylinder power up top"
By Michael Neeves -
First rides & tests
19 January 2009 06:00
Senior Road Tester, Michael Neeves is at Eastern Creek in Sydney to ride the much anticipated Rossi-inspired 2009 Yamaha R1.
Here are his first impressions, check out MCN on Wednesday for a full report. We think he likes it...
Don't get too caught up on how the new R1 works, with its crossplane crank and irregular firing order, which is the same as Rossi's factory YZR-M1 (it's not a 'big bang' motor - we'll explain all in this week's MCN for the techies among you), all you need to know is the new engine has transformed the R1 into one of the best sportsbikes I've ever ridden.
And that's praise indeed when you consider just how good the current Honda Fireblade is.
Sitting on the new R1 for the first time, the rear is higher and the front lower than the '08 bike and the riding position is more compact, a good sign that the R1 means business around the track.
Revving the engine for the first time, it's hard to comprehend just how quickly the rev needle dances around the dial; it spins more like a two-stroke 500cc GP machine than a litre-sized road bike.
Out on the technical left-handed circuit of Eastern Creek, the way the R1 leaps out of corners is incredible.
As soon as you're ready to accelerate the Yamaha surges forward like it's powered by an industrial-strength electric motor, it's just seamless, instant torque and power and impossibly easy to control.
During our initial sessions the R1 was equipped with road rubber and it was very easy to overcome rear grip, but such is the confidence and feel you have with the engine, slides are easy to catch and control.
With the stickier tyres fitted later on I was treated to the full R1 experience and I'm left gob-smacked.
Honestly the R1 accelerates like it has a racing engine; it has V-twin levels of torque down low and screaming four-cylinder power up top.
The howl from the engine at full throttle is exactly the same as Rossi's M1; it's like your very own MotoGP bike for the road. I can't wait to hear it with race pipes fitted.
A new chassis helps the R1 to feel much lighter than the old one and steers much quicker and more accurately and as always for Yamaha, the handling is nice and neutral, although probably not as 'pointy' or fast steering as the Fireblade.
Yamaha have managed to give us the best of both worlds with the R1.
Its new, ultra-short stroke engine revs incredibly quickly for maximum acceleration and the crossplane crank and irregular firing order give it heaps of bottom end power for maximum drive as soon as you feed on the power.
It's unbelievably good around the track, is still exciting to ride and it should be even better on the road.
I was shaking after my first ride on the new R1, it's so different, so exciting and so damn good.
In a stroke it makes every other sports bike out there seem a bit old and wheezy. Impressed isn't the word.
Upload stories, photos or videos direct to the site, or email firstname.lastname@example.com.
Or call us on 01733 468842 (+44 1733 468842)
Add your comment – First ride: 2009 Yamaha R1
Sign in You must be signed in to submit a comment.
I think I'll stick to riding through London than risking it down william nichole and having the taxi's jump red lights. ALL my bikes have had loud cans, and if you ask me, the amount of "pigs" I drive past in London, they don't seem to care too much. Finance deals on new bikes are usually over 36 months at 0% if you time it right, and with the power of the pound, we pay them off sooner rather than later without having to starve.
As for tracks, we have Donnington, snetterton, Brands hatch, Cadwell Park all within a days ride - hop on a boat for an hour, and you have Isle of Man TT - legal speeds are unlimited, and every car on the road is bike aware. Bored of the UK, no problem, week end trips to France, Spain are do-able without taking leave - from our jobs that are not BE and still available to the fairer skinned folk.
Sure, you have sun light - and if you live long enough to see the next day, you feel a sense of accomplishment, the women do look after themselves a little bit better than most here - but once you bagged your hottie, the reast don't feature anymore. You have 10ft walls with electric fenses, bars in the windows and consider only Durban or Capetown as the choises for December holidays.
Enjoy it bru - I'll think of you next week when I'm doing track days around spain Jerez, Valencia, and Guadix for less than you pay for petrol to Capetown alone.
04 February 2009 12:59
I feel like it's '98 all over again! All this excitement and the buzz of that original bike seems to be repeated with this. Yamaha have moved the goal posts again.
However this time it's slightly tainted by the fact that Yamaha have botched the looks so badly. Yamaha has always had the best designed bikes but now they've done something that I would expect from Suzuki by slapping on a pair of beastly exhausts! So irritating when all this time I was waiting for an R6 crossed with M1 but instead they've given us this bug eyed animal. Think I will stick to my 08 screamer with it's lovely sleek lines.
What a shame because I really wanted to like this bike!
02 February 2009 14:11
i don`t care how good it is........cos it`s one of the ugliest,badly gelled looking bikes i`ve ever seen.......how the fuk did someone put those cans on the back and everyone in the design department go oooohhhh yeah they look great?????......the only way a bike looks good now with the dustbin emission exhausts is if it`s slung in the bellypan.....and suzuki have proved that they can make that look shit as well
24 January 2009 19:59
Bring on the new Gixxer
I reckon Suzuki have got a few tricks up their sleeve with the new Gixxer Thou! We'll find out in a few weeks!!!
21 January 2009 18:30
Sounds good but I will wait till the road test against the best of the rest. Cant see it being quicker on the road against the Blade with new abs. He said it struggled with grip on road tyres so what use is that on crappy UK roads.
21 January 2009 09:44
Save money by comparing quotes. It's quick and easy
With over 18,000 products, MCN shop is the best place to buy your biking kit
Motorcycle Cover | Cheap Motorcycle Insurance | Moped Insurance | Scooter Insurance | 125 Insurance | Work Experience
Car Magazine | Empire | FHM | Parkers | LRO | Today's Golfer | Zoo
Bauer Consumer Media Ltd (company number 01176085, 1 Lincoln Court, Lincoln Road, Peterborough, England PE1 2RF)


text:
- Musician's Friend Best Selection, Price & Service. Guaranteed.
Need Help? Call our Gear Heads at 800-449-9128Private Reserve Guitars 866-926-1923
Need Help? Call our Gear Heads at 800-449-9128
Results 1 - 11 of 11 matches
Sweet acoustic tone, powerful projection, and advanced electronics for plugged-in performance.
This redesigned acoustic-electric guitar features tasteful, simplified aesthetic touches. The guitar also...
Our product catalog varies by country due to manufacturer restrictions. If you change the Ship-To country, some or all of the items in your cart may not ship to the new destination.


text:
Upload Photo
Toast & Tapas
Toast & Tapas Neighborhood Bistro is now affiliated with Toast & Co. in Huntington. While the Huntington restaurant doesn't serve dinner, the Syosset locale does. Then, on Friday and Saturday nights, it also features a tapas menu — actually, small plates, not the traditional Spanish bar snacks — as well as live music.
10 big sales this weekend The 10 best Cheap Eats restaurants on LI Toys R Us top 15 toys for 2014 Kidsday meets "The Maze Runner" author James Dashner 25 fine dining reviews, from Italian to sushi 10 things we love about apple picking Dragon Boat Race Festival come to Port Jefferson 16 can't-miss fall activities for families Kidsday reporters interview author and "Survivor" host Jeff Probst 49 recent restaurant closures on LI 101 new stores on LI 25 Cheap Eats to try on LI


text:
I was one of many journalists on the call last week when CEOs Steve Ballmer and Mark Hurd trotted out a new $250 million partnership between Microsoft and HP. I mean, there were a lot of journalists -- including folks from the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, BusinessWeek and other notable, long time tech pundits.
All Information Management articles are archived after 7 days. REGISTER NOW for unlimited access to all recently archived articles, as well as thousands of searchable stories. Registered Members also gain access to:
- Full access to information-management.com including all searchable archived content
- Exclusive E-Newsletters delivering the latest headlines to your inbox
- Access to White Papers, Web Seminars, and Blog Discussions
- Discounts to upcoming conferences & events
- Uninterrupted access to all sponsored content, and MORE!


text:
Top Chef New York: Super Bowl Showdown
We're going to try to resist all of the football puns swimming around in our minds right now and just tell you that we thought last night's Top Chef was fun. And we actually learned a few things about food. (Imagine that.) Have you ever crusted something with oatmeal?
Note: We reveal the winner and loser, below...
For once, the advertiser-sponsored quickfire was a success. Here are our thoughts on that, plus the head-to-head competition against former contestants...
1. We are so coating something in oatmeal soon. The Quaker Oatmeal challenge was actually enlightening. Jamie's oatmeal-and-coconut-coated shrimp and Hosea's oatmeal-coated wiener schnitzel both looked crunchy and tasty.
2. Best quote of the night was... "Jeff is a good chef, but he can't quiet the creative monkeys." --Carla. Hilarious and true (and prophetic, given the end of the episode).
3. Dessert is the new black. Stefan won the quickfire with desserts, in the same way he saved his team last week with desserts. And they say Top Chefs never know how to make dessert...
4. We're guessing Fabio's never been to Green Bay, Wisconsin. Poor guy. He went up against Spike from Season 4, with ingredients based on the Green Bay packers: venison and cheddar cheese. He seemed so defeated, so frustrated that the gimmicks of the show were getting in the way of his cooking, and we felt for him. At the same time, blaming overcooked venison on the wait time was no excuse. If you know there will be downtime before the judges eat it, cook it less.
5. Neither Jeff nor Josie made ceviche. Josie's hot shrimp dish looked good, but why call it ceviche? And Jeff got all uppity about his technique and craftsmanship, but he poached his shrimp before he tossed it with the vinaigrette.
6. 20-minute gumbo!? Carla won—and beat crazy (and yet talented) Andrew, no less—with a gumbo that she made in 20 minutes. Gumbo is usually something that takes a while, especially to get a nice, dark roux. She infused her broth with crawfish bodies, which was smart, and we loved her confidence, tackling that dish. So maybe she is the dark horse?
7. Cioppino is now on our radar. We learned something! We weren't familiar with this fish stew, but Jamie's version with olives, basil, and a big piece of toasted sourdough bread looked really fresh and yummy. Plus, we applaud her for doing a dish other than a seared something over a bed of something involving corn.
8. Can we replace Toby Young with Scott Conant? Conant was such a good judge. He was thoughtful, complimentary, and yet stern. Whereas Toby Young said basically nothing about food for the whole episode. There was something about dispensing with utensils while watching football...
9. Flavorful trumps pretty every time. Jeff cared a lot about presentation and precision, which is nice when you sit down in a restaurant and want your food to look delightful. But artfulness doesn't make up for blandness, which is why he went home. We'll take a bowl of gumbo over a sangria sorbet anytime.
What did you think of last night's episode?
Episode 1: Ethnic Foods Galore
Episode 2: Hot Dogs and Angry Chefs
Episode 4: Lights, Camera, Kathie Lee Gifford
Episode 5: Make Your Own Sushi at a Bridal Shower?
Episode 6: And a Martha in a Pear Tree
Episode 7: Pop, Pop, Fizz, Fizzle
Episode 8: E-I-E-I-O (and Really Good Chicken)
Episode 9: Restaurant Wars!
(Images: Bravo)
19 Comments
i agree about the great ideas re: using oatmeal in cooking, EXCEPT for fabio's (i think it was his?) oatmeal-encrusted zucchini. that looked really unappealing to me.
i can see why jeff ended up going home, but i have to say i'm not fond of leah. her food seems to be pretty unimaginative and her attitude is always defensive and whiny.
I felt it was an choice at the end based more on personality. I felt Fabio has clearly proven that he cannot cook very well and he stays because Jeff isn't much of a personality.
I'm also so tired of Hosea harping on Stephan.
It was good to see past "all stars" get beaten, even though I think this is a weak season as far as the chefs go.
Cest La Vie.
Right after the show ended last night, I had two thoughts. I can cook a steak and salad just as well as Leah ... but why in the world is, like, she, like, on, like, the show, like, still? Every time the judges ask her a question, it's "You know, like, I just like, wanted to like, do something ... simple???" Gargh!
And Toby Young oh my god why did you wear those glasses. KILLING ME.
I was thinking about Mark Bittman's recent comments on NPR, touting the goodness of savory oatmeal; Carla's dish included some of the elements he recommended. Not just encrusting something with oatmeal, but cooking up a pot of oatmeal and making it savory. I like using oats in crusting batter, but sometimes, their taste can be overwhelming.
The cioppino I've had has always been more of a lusciously chunky tomato-based soup, like a clam back tossed into a tomato bath. Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see much tomato in Jamie's dish.
Carla's statement rang true, but Fabio still had all the zingers. It was crass, but "If they're gonna give me monkey ass filled with fried banana, I'll come up with something anyway" especially cracked me up. I was bummed at the prospect of his being eliminated, even though he deserved to be on the block. I promised myself I'd finally cancel extended cable if he had to pack his knives.
I think Fabio might have made a worse dish but Jeff was such a downer. He was so pissed about paper plates :) I am tired of the 20 minute meals though - enough! Is this Top Rachel Ray or Top Chef??
Jeff was frustrated-no doubt. He knew in every challenge what he was doing wrong. This shows that it's not as simple as people think to--think simple, especially when you have been trained to think in a complex way. Jeff is from the Ritz or the Four Seasons? I don't remember which but he is a product of his environment. Nothing is ever "whipped up" in a few minutes and sent out to the customer. 4 star hotels will test and prove dishes before they make it on a menu. They'll look pretty, they'll be standardized and many people will think that they are somewhat soulless for lack of a better word.
Josie really "whipped something up" and Jeff did as much as he could given the time that he had--and it ended up over-engineered. He lost because hers tasted better. Simple.
In my opinion Fabio should have been kicked off for preparing bad food. There was no excuse for those eggplant tubes and the venison dish was just a muddy mess. Everyone has a bad day but those dishes were just a mess.
Jamie's shrimp impressed me the most out of the episode but her "cioppino" was a stretch. If she wanted to build something around sourdough, she could have done a crab chowder or something. I think some of these winning dishes were just the luck of the draw.
And Toby has really proved his ignorance on this one by saying whoever got Wisconsin was doomed. Why? Fabio at least knew that cheese and game are regional ingredients but he keeps trying to plug things into his pigeonholed style and they don't translate.
Fabio again invokes monkey ass. In Italian, is it a
saying or is F just find monkey ass super-funny?
Obvs, supposed to read "does F just find monkey ass
super funny"
I freaking love Fabio.
I just kept expecting Jeff to pull something out of his hat to wow and amaze the judges at any time, and it just never seemed to happen. He sort of has the same problem as Carla, in that he says things like "I could never do that kind of a ceviche ; I just couldn't." His ego got in the way of his cooking. Carla's appreciation for soulful cooking almost got her kicked off last week. I agree that Fabio, technically, should have gone home, as far as taste goes. Jeff's didn't taste bad, it just wasn't as good as Josie's.
With that said, I love Fabio and am so glad he didn't get axed, because he wants to win the show for his "mama." How cool is that? That Italian knows how to appeal to women.
Another thing, how is Leah still in this competition? Whenever they give the little blurb about what she's making, it doesn't even sound good.
No way!
Best quote of the episode was Fabio: "I'm 30 years old and I have to sleep in bunky beds."
Bunky beds?!?!
Okay, yeah, that bunky beds line had me rolling, too. I wish he had a cooking show.
Toby Young has got to go. He adds a moronic analogy or stupid reference to every comment in an effort to show us how witty he is. He's the Dennis Miller of food critics. Lame and tedious. Go away, Toby.
Another thing, how is Leah still in this competition? Whenever they give the little blurb about what she's making, it doesn't even sound good.
I think Leah and her dishes are pretty boring too. I presume she is still in the running b/c of the potential for drama with Hosea. Stupid.
I was excited to see Andrew again because he gave me my favorite TV quote of all time - "I have a culinary boner right now."
Stephan with Andrea last night was soooooo cute. I love that man, everyone thinks he's an ass but he's a good cook and he knows it, nothing wrong with that.
I'm so glad Carla won. I could taste the love through the TV and I'm happy the judges could finally taste the love too.
Jeff deserved to go home. He's a good chef but Carla was right. Less is more, Jeff. He was never going to make it all the way. Fabio should have gone home for overcooked venison and giving WI a bad name. I'm from WI, we have good food here. Why do you think everyone is so fat? I did want Jeff to go home more than Fabio because I am a girl and I LOVE his accent!
Toby Young was mild last night (but a welcome break, as with his constructive praise always come his arrogant evil). No matter how much she drives me to drink (with those goober facials and side comments), Carla presented well last night. A flavorful gumbo in 20 minutes? Even I saw the love. *shudders* I saw a LOT of extremely loose interpretations of said "dishes" last night. I've certainly never heard of a hot ceviche.
A lot of players this season have stayed in simply because their mistakes have been milder than others - though originally I really thought Carla would go out before Eugene.
hyperRevue - I think the "bunky beds" comment elicited the biggest laugh I've had all season, especially since I was thinking that very thing as I watched him roll over against what looked like "kid-gates" on the bed. I know it's space-efficient to put these guys in single beds but REALLY?
I think the producers are cutting out some of Toby Young's comments. In response to the backlash. I mean...they can't really fire him until the season is done really. They can just simply not show as much of him.
What a weak group of "all stars" to go up against and only barely win. I mean...if they really got the good chefs from previous seasons, this would be no contest against the weak group this season.
@art: Jeff is from the Dildo (oh I mean Dilido) Beach Club. That cracked my roommate and I up whenever that popped up on under his name. Won't be seeing it anymore.
Nikita - I'm a writer and would love to quote you for an article for a paper. I'm hoping you'll read this and email me! firstname.lastname@example.com.


text:
Candidate's Resume
I've extensive experience in coustomer service industry. While studyng, I've worked in the summers and weekends at bars, hotels, restaurants and pubs, dealing with costumers of many different nationalities in high pressure environments. I am a friendly, self motivated and reliable person. My other jobs include working in retail sales, lifesaver, child/youth worker, hostess and model.
I've graduated in Architecture from the University of Venice and I've worked in architects' studios and taken study trips to Berlin and Holland.
More Hospitality, Travel & Tourism candidates:


text:
Midsomer Murders
FAITHFUL UNTO DEATH - PART ONEEpisode Guide »
An investigation into a crafts center's finances turns sinister when the owner's wife disappears.
Vermont transplant and Guster frontman Ryan Miller seeks out far-fetched friends across the state! Available exclusively online.
Check out winning Vermont entries to the 2014 PBS Kids Writers Contest!
Tons of videos and games for children from PBS!
PBS Kids - Tons of videos and games for children from PBS!
Educator Resources - Lesson plans, online courses, and videos for teachers and parents.


text:
125th Anniversary of Frank Lloyd Wright's Studio
Design News
2014 marks the 125th anniversary of Frank Lloyd Wright's home and studio, and the 40th anniversary of the Frank Lloyd Wright Trust. Big celebrations are happening around the country for "Legacy Year," including an exhibition at the MoMA and the opening of the balcony at his Oak Park studio to the public for the first time in over 40 years.
• Legacy of Frank Lloyd Wright to be celebrated nationwide | The Editor at Large
(Image credits: via The Editor at Large)
2 Comments
Hooray. Love FLW. Was my first introduction to what good architecture consisted of.
Thrilled this Frank Lloyd Wright home will be relocated to a safe location to be appreciated my many.


text:
Travel blog
When I'm not painting miniatures I have another passion and that is for wildlife and travelling. Here you can read all about my trips to far off countries including Kenya, India, and Botswana, as well as birding trips closer to home.
Copyright © 2004 Jo Dale. All rights reserved. Please read the FAQ for acceptable use policy. Browsing any part of this site will constitute implicit agreement to abide by my acceptable use policy.


text:
Now Playing : Spyder Bloodlines
Buy Online: Shield
Select a Size
Choose a Color
Online Retailers:
Click Here to search for a dealer in your area.
Buy Local: Shield
Searching for stores...
Found: 0 stores
Men's Body Measurements
Men's International Size Conversion Chart
Men's / Accessories / Neck Gaiter
- Colorways 824 and 320 are Bryte
- NEW light weight power stretch fabric, with embroidered logo
- Body - Stretch Shiny Micro Fleece
Hats. Gloves. Baselayers. Socks. AS the keepers of warmth and the stoppers of wet, these are the unsung heroes of the mountains. And while a jacket and a pair of pants may be the leading stars in on-slope performance, the accessories are what make it an encore. That's why Spyder applied the same attention to detail, construction, and technology to its accessories that it brought to its other product lines. When dressing for success, there's no sense in stopping at halfway there.


text:
stepenice za potkrovlje
Zalf a Italian furniture making accompany has grow out with its extant dwell collection and it is zip inferior than stunning. Noted for lineament and is idolized for music, Zalf has a really inner and totally synchronal arrangement in all their collections. Intelligently premeditated and beautifully crafted shapes are hallmarks of Zalf.
Please savour experience reside arrangement ideas our photos below from Zalf which state a ravishing chain of ultramodern assemblage of living domicile furnishings that can be fit in your recent place interior. By these stunning render beneath, my imaginativeness runs on throwing a company or fitting ornamentation out with all my intimate friends piece watching a pic.
Contemporary living, electroneutral glasses and recent fixtures accentuate the melody of the live to move you a homely experience participate. With inhospitable necessities strategically set in the flat, one can savour the benefits of unchaste experience. Zalf offers pleasing options for your match experience position. Please visit their computer here.


text:
How To Make Creamy Grits
See how easy it is to make the quintessential Southern dish.
Video Transcript
1. To cook grits, combine half-and-half (or another liquid as specified in the recipe), salt, pepper, and other seasonings in a Dutch oven, and stir well. (This recipe for creamy grits calls for half-and-half, but you can also cook grits in either water or broth.)
2. Bring the mixture to a boil, and gradually stir in quick-cooking grits.
3. Return the mixture to a boil; cover, reduce heat, and simmer, stirring occasionally, 5 to 7 minutes or until thickened.
4. Add cream cheese, Cheddar cheese and hot sauce, and stir until the cheeses melt.
More Videos from MyRecipes
Tools & Features


text:
I'll only note as to this last comment by you. Pathetic. I'll give my scenario just this one last time.
A, B & C are at common rest and have laid out a test course.
The course consists of miles markers equal distance and in opposite direction from the rest location.
A and B are launched to go out to the last mile marker and signal they are prepared for the test. When C gets both their ready signals he transmits a launch you craft light signal. When A & B receive that signal Which is simultaneous to C, then they accelerate according to plan with equal rate because their craft are identical and are equipped with precisoin accelerometer controls.
According to plan when trhe both cross mile marker number 1 lyr they throttle down and go inertial at 0.6c, setting their clocks to "0". They instantly transmit to C a Start your clock light signal which happens to also be simultaneous to C..
When C receives those signals since C knows the distance involved and the speed of light he knows to pre-set his clock for the delay in receipt of the signals such that he sets his clock to 1 year so his start "0" conforms with the amount of time by his clock that has passed since they set their clocks to "0".
Since they launched simultneously to C and have an equal velocity to C and were equal distance from C they will pass C simultaneously after (1.6666 years) 1 year and 8 months or 56,764,800 seconds by C's clock.
At the moment they pass they each transmit to the other a digital signal saying what their clock accumulated time is. They also transmit what they computed each others clocks should read according to relativity.
At the juncture the test is over and all clocks are stopped for comparison. The entire test has been conducted only during inertial relative veloicty, has been simultaneously synchronized at C.
They can delerate and return to C for comparison but that is not necessary. C has all the test data. and A & B have the same data.
What is found is that the physical accumulated times are:
C = 56,764,800 seconds
A = 45,411,840 seconds
B = 45,411,840 seconds
This is in complete agreement with the predictions of the common rest frame.
A & B according to SR believe their relative velocity to be 0.88235c not the logical 1.2 based on .6c in opposite directions to C.
Based on that A predicted:
C = 45,411,840 seconds (this assumes SR's ludricrus assumption that A will see 0.6c to C and not have a dilated clock, even though it is traversing 1 lyr in 1.44 years by his clock which would compute to be 0.6944c not 0.6c.?
B = 12,885,884 seconds.
B predicts the same results for A and C.
But the ONLY valid prediction is the one that is made reference to the initial common rest frame and NOT any made while in motion.
Further it remains to be proven that A & B would compute 0.6c when they are seeing mile markers pass in 0.8 times as fast as they should or they would think they are going 0.75c regardless if the lesser accumulated time is due to TD or LC.
I do hope you got itv now because I WILL NOT repeat it again.
DO NOT come back with but A & B don't thik the other started simultaneously because what they think is irrelevant to the issue. The defacto simultaneous starting time of clocks is.
In contrast to your assertions that my view is silly consider this folks.
If A or B use any legitimate thoughtvprocess (assuming they actually see 0.6c not o,75c that I argue) then they mightvwell conclude that since I see C approaching at 0.6c and B approaching at 0.88235c then B must be moving 0.28235 relative to C hence B will have accumulated 54,455,123 seconds.
Hmmmm. Silly concept indeed.
Last edited by MacM; 08-02-09 at 11:41 PM.
It's harder (much, MUCH) harder for me to get a job in academia, particularly as I'm doing physics, and the pay compared to working in the private sector, with good number and analytic skills, is terrible. People go into academia to do something they love, if money were the driving factor we'd all be bankers.
08-03-09, 04:12 AM #663Originally Posted by MacM
Methinks phyti has made one correct statement and one incorrect statement. Light motion is independent of source motion and will be a 'law' cast in the reinforced stainless steel on the level of the 11th Commandment, at least for the purposes of this discussuon -- we will use this commandment to illuminate the error of the not so deep and abject dismay of the supposed 'downside'.
Take two perfectly parallel planes separated by a known distance. Along each length of the planes are absorber-light-emitters (ale) that were deposited in arrays allong the both lengths of the 1000 meter long planes arranged so the ale in the upperarray, ale-up-n is stationed exactly over a paired ale, the ale-down-n. The up-down separation of the ale planes is 100 meters and along each array the ale separations are 10 wavelength (or whatever works best) of the pulse.
The planes are rigidly attached to a structure that includes a data gathering computer-processor connected to each ale-n pair. The inertial frame system (IFS) begin moving in a direction parallel to the length of the1000 meter long planes. When the IFS is moving inertially and ale-up-1 emits a pulse, that pulse cannot reach ale-down-1 as the IFS moves ale-down-1 out from under the on coming pulse and is then absorbed by, say, ale-down-5. The process is repeated when the ale-down-5 emits a pulse aimed at ale-up-5, which has also moved by the time of the pulse arrival. Thre computer calculates the various emission and arrival times of the pulse as the observers see the pulse apparently moving along the array opposite to the IFS motion and just before the end of the array is reached when the pulse would seem to crash in to the wall the process repeats the cycle where the pulse starts over at ale-up-1. The system keeps a running measure of the IFS absolute velocity measured wrt to the trajectory of the emitted pulse moving pi/2 radians wrt the plane array motion -- this is guaranteed by the 11th Commandment, is it not? Of course there are three orthogonal planar arrays that maintain an input of data to the simple addition and division calculation.
Do any of your bottom lines insist on an actual physical stream of 'ghost pebbles' as an acceptable substitution for your downsided and nonextant markers? Said another way, would being able to calculate the exact position of your past origin and being able to navigate your way back home, would this blow your skirts up?
Now pomder the visual of all the diagrams of Michelkson-Morley experimental set up and projected light trajectories. Do you notice that pulse directed transverse to the frame motion is carried along by the moving MM structure? MM made a mistake. They should not have looked for wave shifts they should look back up the down trajectory. The triangular path of the MM experiment effectively must add a velocity component parallel to the frame direction of motion which would result, if true, a total speed of c' where c' > c. There are only two things you must always remember, and MacM can readily verify the first: Remember the Alamo, and of course, remember the 11th Comandment.
Well I've received several more replies but won't continue to post every one.
All total so far I've received 12 replies. (2) believe in Lorentz Contraction as a real physical process. One of those was not a physicist however.
The Dr that does surprised me in that he sent a rather lengthy message and he has been reading my material for a while and states he agrees with many of my views but that it is LC and not TD that causes relativity. (Billy T's view).
We are having a continuing discussion via e-mail.
As much as I'm sure it irks some here I do occassionaly get contacted by physicist, and other scientifc people that have read my material and generally like it. I can't think of anyone that has been a 100% convert but even if I am only 10% right SR is in trouble.
Here is the last one from a Dr Whitney:
************************************************** *******
I think you are right. I did my PhD thesis in special relativity, and I have been thinking about it ever since.
More than 40 years later, I am sure SRT was founded on a postulate that in fact conflicts with Maxwell, and I trust Maxwell.
I believe experimenters who claim to confirm SRT are delusional.
************************************************** *******
Last edited by MacM; 08-03-09 at 09:33 AM.
I have tried several times to follow even your first paragraph below (only the first sentence do I understand, but from rest think you really mean "plates" not planes as planes do not have length - They extend to infinity in all 2D directions. So assuming you mean plates, are these plates 1000 by 1000 rectangles? (you say "along BOTH lengths") Perhaps you really meant two Line segments 1000m long and parallel? Which way is "up" if that is the case? (one end is up or one line is above the other? If two closely spaced line segments does it matter which way is "up"?) Please try to more exacting in your discription. Even MacM is more exact, but leaves one to guess at some things in his latest scenario, such as is mile marker 0 at C? or elsewhere? and other questions, like where did his numbers come from? (What values were put into what formulae.)
Last edited by Billy T; 08-03-09 at 08:15 PM.
To MacM (on your post 661):
I am nearly sure that A & B went out from C in opposite directions* initially and that the 0 lyr marker is at C so will assume that and take A's POV for the following disussion:
C is rushing at A at 0.6C and B is rushing at A (assuming you are correct with you numbers) at 0.88235C
I doubt that for A, B started his accumulator running at the same time as A did (that is C's POV of what happened).
But if we just focus on time dilation it does not matter much. Quoting from my post 658: Time Dilation is not concerned with what the clock is telling as the time. For Time Dilation it does not matter if one said it was 16:43 when the other said it was 3:15. Time Dilation is only concerned with how many ticks it makes compared to the how many ticks one in another frame makes. Lets avoid synchronization problems and assume they were not even telling the same time in the original frame C.
Using your numbers from C's POV, the time dilation for C of A (or B) was (45,411,840/56,764,800) = 0.8 or in words C's clock ticked 5 times while A ticked only 4.
I know you don't believe in reciprocity, but you have to at least state what SR states when saying what SR states and not:
"A predicted: C = 45,411,840 seconds (this assumes SR's ludricrus assumption …"
You had just said above that that A's clock was showing: A = 45,411,840 seconds in this text of yours:
"… What is found is that the physical accumulated times are:
C = 56,764,800 seconds
A = 45,411,840 seconds
B = 45,411,840 seconds …"
So correctly stating what SR states (That for A, C's clock ticks only 4 time for each 5 ticks of A's own clocks –Reciprocal time dilation is the SR position.), SR predicts A's predictions should be 80% of A's own, 45,411,840 seconds, or 36,329,472 seconds, not what you falsely state would be "SR approved" predictions. You cannot give MacM's SR prediction that there is no reciprocal time dilation as if it were the accepted SR prediction.
Why do you say A predicts C has accumulated the same time A has? SR states C is time dilated for A.
I am not sure what you are trying to show with your newest scenario, but you should not say SR predicts A will see the same accumulation as A when SR states that time dilation is a reciprocal effect of their (A & C) equal 0.6 relative velocity just because YOU don't think this SR is correct or believe in this reciprocity.
PS it would be nice in exchange for my comments if you would make some critical comment on my post 612 instead of just calling it BS. That does not give you even credit for understanding that a tiny 1m movement that took 100 years forces MacM's SR to switch in case 2 to C as the CRF instead of P as the CRF when clock b did not move at all on the table top during that 100 years (case 1). Because the relative velocity of frames C & P is 0.6C, this tiny motion on the table top in case 2 (so slow a human cannot even see any movement in 8 hours) causes MacM SR to calculate the time dilation of the two cases with very different speeds inserted into the formula. (One speed is ~0.6C greater than for the other case.) yet the time dilation is for the final inertial states, a million years after both clocks left the table top.
*You stating : "A and B are launched to go out to the last mile marker and signal they are prepared for the test." is confusing as they really, I think, went out to two different markerS 2 Lyr separated.
Last edited by Billy T; 08-03-09 at 09:53 PM.
- Posts
- 213
Billy T post 630
I meant to answer sooner but got behind.
For one cesium clock to change it tick rate the energy difference
between these two energy levels would need to be changed; but cesium in
one inertial frame has exactly the same energy levels as any cesium atom
in any other inertial frame. Thus ALL cesium clock in ALL inertial frame
ALL define the exactly the same second or tick" at the same intrinsic
rate, regardless of the past history such as in what other frame they
once accelerated away from.*
emission of light! The clock rate appears the same to each owner because
they have slowed by the same factor. It's similar to the idea of length
contraction, if your ship and its contents (including your ruler)
contracted to half, you would still measure the same length. Viewers
outside not moving with you will observe the dilation.
The amount of this time dilation of ALL clocks resting in frame C
depends ONLY on the relative velocity of frame C & B, for example the
speed at which their two XY coordinate system origins are separating.
When relative velocity is used, one observer is usually assumed at rest,
when in fact that cannot be determined. The example in 656 shows using
the same relative difference in speed, is inconsistent.
MacM, I think, and QQ I am sure, and many other erroneously think that the existence of time dilation means the clock has had some physical
change to make it tick at a different rate.
timekeeping. The muon experiments and gps correction procedures verify
it occurs.
I guess one could take the point of view that your rocket ship has contracted and you do not know it because your meter stick has contracted the same amount, but it is very strange, abnormal way to think, and requires infinite flexibility as the 50% contraction (wrt frame A) and the 50.0001% contraction (wrt to frame B) and the 50.0002% contraction (wrt Frame C) .... Etc. for a zillion other frames are all happing at the same time.) This seems to me to be a very silly and self contradictory POV - How can my rocket ship actually contract by a zillion different factors at the same time?
I much prefer the POV that it does not contract at all in my reality. It only contracts (by one factor) in A's reality and (by another factor in B's reality)... Etc.
Thus such a false analogy, which changes the essential constant speed for all observers of a light wave into a water wave does not show anything about light waves.
People on the Earth surface are amazed to find that most of them make it down from 100,000 feet to the surface whereas in the lab, if traveling tiny fraction of C, speed of light, most have decayed before they can travel 10 feet. This FACT can be understood by two different POVs when Standard SR is applied:
From Earth's POV, time is passing more slowly for the high speed cosmic ray produced muons.
From the muon's frame POV, Earth has a very thin atmosphere to pass thru, less than 10 feet thick.
What do you think of post 612? Does it not show that standard SR computes exactly the same time dilation, TD, for clocks a & b at the end of the scenario, when they have both been inertial for a million years for cases 1 & 2, which have IDENTICAL conditions for the last million years? Does it not show that MacM's SR computes two different TDs (one for case 1 and the other for case 2)? Recall that the ONLY difference between cases 1 & 2. is that slightly more than a million years before the time this TD is calculated for, clock b moved so slowly on a table that human watching for an 8 hour day could not even detect the movement just by looking (Probably a physicist could if a mirror were mounted on clock b to make it part of an interferometer.)
The scenario of post 612 (modified to be more general than an earlier verson which had the table mounted on Pluto so that new frame is still called "frame P") is designed to show how an insignificant motion forces MacM's SR to use the earlier initial launch frame C as the last CRF in case 2 (the slow move of b on the table top case.) Instead of have frame P as the last CRF (in case 1 where b does not move at all on the table top) I.e. MacM's SR uses the velocities wrt the last CRF and gets very different TDs for the same current conditions (which have not changed in a million years) because frame P is moving wrt Frame C at 0.6C. (this makes the velocities inserted into the TD equation very different in the two cases. (They are ~0.6C higher in case 2 than in case 1)
MacM never even tries to tell how the clocks remember what happen a million years earlier. I.e. in the present era the two cases have the identical condition, unchanged for a million years, yet somehow the clocks know / remember whether these identical condition are final state of case 1 or the final state of case 2.
Perhaps you have an idea how the clocks could remember what happened on that table top a million years earlier? So that the TD of clock b wrt to tick rate of clock a in case 1,TDba1 and be different from TDba2 even though the conditions are the same now (and for the last million years) for both cases.
What do you think? Does this not show that MacM's SR is nonsense?
[QUOTE=Billy T;2331251] Time Dilation is not concerned with what the clock is telling as the time. For Time Dilation it does not matter if one said it was 16:43 when the other said it was 3:15. Time Dilation is only concerned with how many ticks it makes compared to the how many ticks one in another frame makes. Lets avoid synchronization problems and assume they were not even telling the same time in the original frame C.
Bullsh__. tick rate time duration is displayed time and when clocks that were synchronized come together subsequent to having had relative velocity and only one is displaying less time then relative velocity clearly was not the cause of dilation.
If clocks were synchronized a million years ago then their collective accumulated time is their memory.
If they were never synchronized a million years ago or one hour ago then their displayed times tells you nothing.
1 - A recent study found ansitrophy in the muon dilation data and used that to compute the solar system motion among gallasies and came up with the same general 300km/sec figure that has been done using other methods.
The conclusion of that was that muon time dilation was better described by considering it's motion to the CMB than to the earth. i.e. - some absolute motion.
2 - GPS uses what is called the ECI (Earth Center Inertial) frame of reference to compute velocity affects of orbit. It is not a relative velocity between surface and orbit. The ECI forms what is effectively an absolute rest frame. That is you cannot claim the orbiting clock is at rest and the ECI has motion. It precludes the reciprocity of SR's mere relative velocity view.
In other words SR is not used in GPS. Further there are arguements both ways thatv SR is and is not used in GPS. "The NOT's are correct".
Some argue that SR can't be used because orbit is a rotating frame and is under constant acceleration, hence is non-inertial.
But others point out that orbit is a form of free-fall acceleration and normal gravitational free-fall is inertial.
I personally see orbit as inertial but SR is not used because taking orbit velocity vs surface velocity as being realtive velocity of the clocks only yields -5.8us/day and the correct value is -7.2us/day; which is the result of taking the difference in gamma of orbit to the ECI and gamma of surface to the ECI.
That is you must use a common rest frame and compute respective dilation of each's absolute motion to that frame.
You cannot use SR or relative velocity between clocks.
Although A cannot deny that C's counter is displaying more ticks than A's own accumulator is, A understands this part of reality (for All in As frame) that C both added the number of seconds that light requires to travel one Lyr to his counter (God only knows why from As reality.) AND started counting clock ticks before A did. This is why C recorded 56,764,800 seconds when A recorded 45,411,840 seconds. Cs clock was running slower than As clock was, so if C had actually accumulated during the same interval as A accumulated 45,411,840 seconds, and did not ad an arbitrary number of seconds to the total, then As accumulator would be displaying 36,329,472 seconds.
You keep refusing to consider the scenario of post 612 which does not need any simultaneous events in different frames nor does it need to synchronize any clocks. It only COMPUTES the time dilation, TD of clock b wrt the tick rate of clock a, or in my compact symbolic notation: TDba for two almost identical cases, 1 & 2. These cases ONLY differ by a small move of clock b on a table top in case 2 and zero movement on that table top by clock b in case 1. (Movement is so slow it is not even detectable by human watching for 8 hours!)
None the less that tiny movement forces MacM's version of SR to use velocities wrt the original CRF, called C, in case 2 and wrt to a CRF, called P, in case 1 in the equation used to compute TDba but as the relative velocity of the frame P wrt C is 0.6C, the velocities inserted into the TD formula are very different and two different TDs are computed, called TDba1 and TDba2, to distinguish them as they are not the same when MacMs post 93 version of SR is used for the calculation.
The real conditions when these TDs are calculated for, are identical (and have been for last million years). I.e. clock a has been in inertial frame A and Clock b in inertial Frame B for a million years; but despite these identical conditions NOW, a million+ years after both clocks left the table top, which is still fixed in frame P, and both clocks "went inertial," MacM's SR computes TDba1 for case 1 and the different TDba2 for case 2.
Standard SR never has different results for identical current condition as it only used the current relative velocity in the calculation formula for TD. That velocity (and everything else) is the same for the IDENTICAL conditions that have existed for a million years for case 1 and case 2. Somehow, which you refuse to describe, in MacM's SR the clocks "remember" whether these long identical condition are the result of zero or very slow motion on a table top a million+ years ago.
Last edited by Billy T; 08-04-09 at 11:41 AM.
MacM, calling my "recital" of your post 93 "bull shit" or saying: "you are acting like a real dumbass." is NOT a replying argument with facts. It is only name calling." Can you not do better in your replies to the arguments presented in post 612?
It is especially foolish of you to call my recital of your post 93 methodology BS, unless you can point to some place in post 612 where I did not follow your procedures of post 93 exactly to conclude that two different time dilations result for the identical final conditions of case 1 & case 2.
I.e. for these identical conditions, case 1 computes TDba1 which differs greatly from case 2's TDba2 because a million+ years earlier, in case 2 clock b moved so slowly on a table top that humans could not even see it move if watching it for an 8 hours day.
That tiny, undetectable by humans in a day of watching, movement does however force MacM's SR to use different CRFs for the two cases and corresponding very different velocities are inserted in the formula for Time Dilation, yielding the different calculation results TDba1 and TDba2.
Last edited by Billy T; 08-04-09 at 11:50 AM.
For example, perhaps there are two observers in Frame A, at different stations along the line of clock b's motion thru the coordinated grid fixed in A, which are one of A's miles apart. Call these to stationary in A observers A1 and A2.
When clock b passes by A1, that observer notes both what his local clock is displaying and what clock b is displaying on a piece of paper. (The people in frame B are known to be very careful about their clocks. They, like the people in A make tests every day to be sure that all the clocks in their own frame are properly synchronized.)
Likewise observer A2 writes down what his own clock and what passing clock B are displaying as clock b passes on a piece of paper. These papers are mailed to SR's TC (Time Center) for examination. Here is what that exam revels:
The difference between displays (A2 - A1) for A frame clocks is 1000 seconds.
The difference between displays (A2 - A1) for B frame clocks is 800 seconds.
So the A frame's SR time center report 746, states that for the 746th time SR preditions of time dilation in the frame moving wrt to us in Frame A have been confirmed.
Now exactly the same thing was being done in frame B. When those frame B papers arrived at Frame B's SR's TTC (Time Test Center - they have a slightly different name in frame B.) and were and studied the TTC issues the TTC report TTC 746 and it too concludes that SR has been confirmed again. I.e. that frame A, which is moving wrt the TTC, has clocks that are running at only 80% the rate of the cesium clock in Frame B.
The TTC unkindly adds a footnote to its report telling that the "Jerks in Frame A" at the TC did not know how to properly synchronize their own clocks and cites the fact that at the same instant when properly synchronized frame B clocks were all showing 12 Noon, only one clock in all of frame A was showing 12:00:00 for day 8563. (Far from it, another clock of A was also showing 12:00:00 but telling it was day 8564, etc.) "Those Jerks at the TC don't even know what day it is! One clock telling a different day from another at the same time!" The first draft of Report TTC 746 stated.
Fortunately for inter frame relations, the editor cut out the harshest part of that footnote out before the report was published and replaced Jerks everywhere in the report with the people.
Much of MacM's problem with standard SR comes from his belief that if the start and stop accumulation time events were simultaneous for observers in fame C, then they MUST be simultaneous for observers in all other frames too as his common sense tells him that must be the case. What follows from only the fact that the speed of light is same for all inertial frames and that physic is the same for them also (namely standard SR) violates MacM's common sense so he rejects what mathematically follows from these two facts.
Last edited by Billy T; 08-04-09 at 11:58 AM.
However, it is irrelevant. The relevant issue is that when they pass by C "Simualtaneously" the digital transmitted data shows that all those different perspectives A to B, B to A, A to C, B to C, are not supported by emperical data. What they saw was an illusion of motion. The reality is what their accumulated times demonstrated.
Now I had them transmit data as they passed. I could just as well stopped their clocks, and had them turn around and come back go into a common conference room and set their clocks side by side on the table. The data would be the same and it shows that compared in a common rest frame "Subsequent to having had relative velocity" what the reality of the clocks were and it is NOT what moving observers see.
End of discussion. The rest is not at issue. As to simultaneity of the test it is done properly according to SR by using a light signal to A & B transmitted from C simualtaneously to launch and by equal acceleration, hence inertial velocity and equi-distance of A & B from C the tranmission of simultaneous light confirmation signals from A & B back to C. The fact that they are receive simultaneously by C verifies they were transmitted simultaneous.
The only thing you haven't commented on is the fact that I based A & B prediction on receeding velocities not approaching velocities. I realized that after posting but since it doesn't alter the conclusion or outcome I hadn't bothered re-doing the calculations. That is their view be it + / - relative velocity do not match the emperical data.
Now as to pissing around with your scenarios I have no intention of doing so since you have repeatedly ignored and declined to properly respond to the issues raised.
Regardless if you support time dilation or Lorentz Contraction as being the physical reality there is one inescapable consequence behind apparent time dilation.
A moving observer will be unable to sense or measure either his clock being dilated or his meter stick being foreshortened. Therefor having made a trip:
Given rest distance is 1lyr between Y & Z locations. A launches from Y toward Z at t=0 for both A & B where B is located on Z.
A flies by Y at 0.9c and a start test light signal is transmitted to B at location Z. Upon receipt of the singal B knows A has been in route 1 year. That means he will fly by B after another 0.1111n years according to B. That is B will record his trip time as 1.11111 years.
But according to A he will have taken only 0.484 years to make the trip. Having gone 1 lyr in 0.484 years he has no option but to conclude he was going FTL at 2.06c! v = ds / dt = 1 lyr / 0.484 yr = 2.06c.
Now address this issue.
Last edited by MacM; 08-04-09 at 02:27 PM.
I cannot accept that POV. I state, as I understand SR to state that the rocket does not contract in the reality of the rocket guy by all these different amounts (nor BTW does his cesium clock tick at different rates in his reality). Instead the reality for A is where the rocket contracts 50% and the reality of B is that it contracts 50.0001% etc. I do not accept multi-contractions for one frame as reality. You can if you wish.
Basically my comments were that the reason why in A's reality C recorded more ticks, even though in A's reality C's clocks were running slower or Time Dilated, was due to two things:
(1) C added extra ticks, or started his accumulator with the counter not at zero.
(2) C in A's reality, C stated accumulation before A did. They all three only terminated accumulation simultaneously. You set the scenario up so that in C's reality A & B did start simultaneously but in the reality of both A & B, C committed the two "sins" (1) and (2) just mentioned.
I do not like to get into these simultaneity arguments (or discuss the fact that only one clock in each frame can be synchronized with one in another but not All the clocks in two different frames can be synchronized together) so I focused on computation of Time Dilation, TD, not measurement of it. There is the standard method of SR theory and there is the MacM method of post 93, which inserts the velocity wrt the last CRF in to the computation formulae.
I have only the scenario of post 612, not your dozens even with cars and airplanes. I have responded to all I could understand. You have not responded to post 612 except to call me names and say it is BS. I know it is embarrassing that the extremely slow move on a table top fixed in frame P of clock b in case 2 forces you to drop frame P as the last CRF and used Frame C as the last CRF and insert velocities that are greater by ~0.6C into the formula for case 2. (That was the intent of the scenario.) The only difference of case 2 from case 1 was that in case 1 clock b did not move on the table top so slowly that humans could not detect any motion even watching all day long, yet that tiny undetectable speed of b while on the table top, in case 2, forced use of very different velocities in the calculation of TD a million years later when both clocks a & b had been inertial for a million years. I.e. for case 1 your post 93 procedure computed TDba1 and for Case 2 it computes a very different TDba2. Standard SR only uses current relative velocity, not ancient history and gets TDba1 = TDba2 as for the last million years the actual current conditions of the two clocks have not only been identical, they have been unchanged.
You never tell how the clocks in the identical final state conditions (resulting from either or both case 1 and case 2) remember which case lead to these same, for both cases, identical conditions so that in MacM SR, TDba1 is not the same as TDba2.
You never present any arguments of any kind - only state it is BS and / or call me names. I know you hope this scenario 612 will "just go away." Trust me - it won't, not until you comment on it, try to point out the error, etc. as I have on several of yours.
Last edited by Billy T; 08-04-09 at 05:01 PM.
Just like I have said you cannot claim relative velocity causes physical change otherwise you will get a zillion different [hysical tick rates for a clock or now if you assume the physical affect is contractions a zillion different lengths.
Maybe you are starting to realize that relative velocity doesn't really cause physical change.
Yet a resting observer sees him require 2 hours or computes was going 50 Mph. SORRY trhere is no alternative to this conclusion. I've been screaming about this now for several years and you seem to be starting to see the point.
This has NOTHING to do with MacM's fantasylnd physics as James R likes to say in an effort to mitigate my posts, it is a simple unavoidable fact using standard SR physics.
One or the other MUST be physically real because emperical data has demonstrated time and again a desynchronization of a clock that accelerates away from a resting click that were synchronized at common rest.
Which you still have not done.
Given that either time dilation (clock tick rate or distance via length contrction MUST provide a physical basis for emperical data indicating a moving clock accumulates less time how do you justify ignoring that the moving observer MUST compute a higher relative veloicty?
v = ds / dt and the observer cannot sense or detect either gamma condition above. All he knows is how far he went in time by his clock (tm). All the resting observer knows is it took him longer to make the trip (tr). When gamma = 2.0:
vm = ds / tm = ds/0.5 = 2.0
vr = ds / tr = ds / 1.0 = 1.0
- Posts
- 213
Originally Posted by phyti
scenario in post 624:
--B's dilation is different from A's, but you can't determine if it's more or less by the apparent rate.
I don't follow your logic here. YOur statement seem contridictory to SR. Explain.
to the earth, i.e. the earth is static, you get td1. If you include earth speed,
then it's v2 relative to the sun, and you get td2, and so on. In this progression of using larger ref. frames, eventually you end with the entire universe. If you considered the universe as static (since there would be nothing else to reference relative motion), then the cosmic background of light emissions would be the the closest thing to a fixed frame.
Follow along for a bit. Assume light emission does leave a marker
in the form of a radioactive particle that is not affected by anything else. Photons are emitted at random locations within a sphere 1 lyr in diameter. The markers can be detected and the distances from any one to all the others can be measured. The interesting property of the markers is they don't move, i.e. they represent a fixed frame. Now expand the sphere to include all events in the universe. If you could measure the speed of an object relative to a marker, it would be equivalent to measuring the speed relative to light speed. That object speed would yield the actual td. Until there is a method to do this, we only have relative td. For slow speeds and large mass ref frames, the relative td is probably close. Since I'm not convinced of 'expansion' of the universe as currently presented, it is not included here.
Originally Posted by phyti
--appear to be ticking slower than C.
And emperically can be shown to be actually dilated.
C has the most. (one leg vs. two)
Originally Posted by phyti
--A and C are converging, A and B are diverging. Per the rules of physics, the motion of an object does not alter distant physical processes! The A clock ticks at one rate, B and C receive signals at different rates, thus the appearance of A is different for each.
If ten people surround a house, each will have a different picture of the same house.
I have no objections to claims that each appears dialed to the other. The issue is strictly about who will be permananetly dilated physically when there is no longer relative veloicty.
However, James R and others here have argued that "What you see IS the physical reality" and that is why I'm here beating the bushes.
motion. It's how things appear, but you need additional information to
conclude what's physically real. A coin held at an angle appears
elliptical, but we can explain it away using geometry.
Originally Posted by phyti
Here is an interesting example:
A calculates (apparent) speed of B using v = (b-a)/(1-ab),
where a and b are the speed of A and B respectively relative to a fixed
rest frame.
case 1
a = 0 and b = .5c
A calculates the speed of B as .5c, which gives gamma = 1.15
The relative speed in the fixed frame is .5c.
case 2
a = .4c, and b = .75c
A calculates the speed of B as .5c, which gives gamma = 1.15
The relative speed in the fixed frame is .35c
Uou have not stipulated vector but it appears a and b are comoving. and you are applying a form of Velocity Addition. I have to ask what is the point relative to the issues raised?
Thus td is not a function of relative speed.
I contend the idea of Velocity Addition is Ad HOc in the fisrt place. It's sole purpose is to insure veloicty never exceeds c because that is part of the theory. It is merely theory that nothing can go v>c.
In case 2 of the previous example, A calculated the relative speed of B as .5c, when in fact it was .35.
Similar Threads
By Gustav in forum SF Open GovernmentLast Post: 04-24-08, 01:27 AMReplies: 7
By Orleander in forum Site FeedbackLast Post: 10-27-07, 11:45 PMReplies: 16
By Vern in forum Physics & MathLast Post: 05-05-07, 12:24 AMReplies: 43
By MacM in forum Physics & MathLast Post: 02-28-06, 03:20 AMReplies: 345


text:
Categories > Celebrities > My Chemical Romance > Hugs
Even of the same blood, yet -1 Reviews
HE made me feel like dirt, but I can't hate him for that. I am dirt. What else can I accept?
"I don't want to be here." I whispered to him, hugging his arm. I felt like dirt again. I really do like Frank but running to my brother's side after such a... misdeed as it were, made me feel like a little complaining hypocrite. I couldn't trust anyone it seemed, else I'd get to wrapped up, too taken advantage of. What can I do though? Anythign I love is tainted, so do I just pretend it's not all bad and cling to what I have? It seems I must. Forget that I'm a hypocrite and just go with it until I actually know my true feelings about it all.
"Are you two okay?" Shane asked sympathetically. I nodded, eyes blazing as they met his.
"You want to go home?" Gerard suggested to me.
"Yeah." I sighed defeatedly, tightening my grip on his arm.
"Hey guys, we're leaving now." Gerard announced. He left my side to kiss then whisper to Frank. He returned and took my arm.
For so many reasons, it felt my heart was going crazy, waging war within my head.
GERARD: I had no idea what to say. Neither of them seemed hurt but what exactly had even happened?! I was too concerned for them to be too angry at Frank and Mikey.
Mikey sat opposite me in my room. I love them both, but if he really hurt Frank... I'd have no choice but to punish him for such a thing! To lay a finger on him... For Frank to lay a finger on Mikey too... It would be a nightmare, and not for just me.
"As much as I admire you sticking up for me..." I played Mikey's hand in my own, stroking his knuckles, "You know I won't tolerate you two fighting." I stared at his knuckled intently as if the situation was spelled out across them.
"Yes, I know G." Mikey sighed, his hand trembling in mine.
"So, how much....what did you do?" I asked wuietly, unsure if I wanted to know exactly what.
"N-not much. I kicked him and he hit me on the back. That's all... I know it's stupid but he can't go around being so.... Ignorant of what you share! You really need each other."
It was sweet, really, though undenyably wrong in parts.
"You hurt him?" I let go of Mikey's hand fast. I crouched but Mikey just put his hand on my cheek, as if petting me like an animal. I wanted to pounce, to strike, but Mikey had domesticated me by that one touch.
"Please understand GeeBear. We both love you the most anyone can love. It must be a consolation that we fell out briefly over you." His hand curled around and cupped my chin. He smiled sincerely, a naughty curl to his lips. I was being so submissive all of a sudden.
This made me think of when I had advanced on him. It made me think... Would love be as effective as violence in teaching Mikey a lesson?
Could I, instead of simply attacking him, break Mikey down with an acid-laced, forbidden, kiss? Surely it could hurt more, yet still be deemed humane.
After all, love is one of human's most sophisicated poisons. It can both confuse and allure. And it is just as fun to strike with lips than switchblades. Forcing yourself - utter dominance, unquestionably so. More humane too. And so... How to put it... Delicious?
Though knowing me, I'd simply forget the malice and threat in it all. Or just pass it off as messing with him.
The power over me he had at that moment scared me when I was partly angry with him. When I'm angry, even a little, I'm in control. Not today Mikey, will I be your pet when you've done soemthing I should be screaming at you for.
I was in the perfect position too...
"Mikey, you hurt my Frankie. That's terrible." I muttered in a tone of shock as if it just hit me. I flipped my submissive position entirely. Mikey wasn't to have the power when I should be biting his head off.
Mikey nodded gravely.
"I can't stand for such a thing, Mikes. What will make you understand... All these years I've hit you and yelled... How can I get you to understand these things.... Tell me, little brother, what can bring us together and tear us apart?"
Mikey blinked. He looked bewildered.
"Ummm... I'm not sure." he spoke slowly.
"Well. Instead of a bruise, I can give you something worse."
Mikey cowered and sat there while I rose up threateningly.
I struck, fast and precise, latching my lips to his of the same blood once more. He tried to wrench me off but I clung to him. I saw his eyes go teary, as wide as they were.
I tore off and got up.
"I can do far worse Mikey. Or would you prefer the switch' next time?" I didn't wait for an answer from him. It's sad to say but I should really keep him on his toess more, at least when I get paniced like so it feels like that. God how my opinion can change in a moment...!
MIKEY: School felt like so much more of a chore, especially with such hard-wearing weekends. I was always thinking about Gerard, then Frank, and occasionally Shane. Questions whirled around in my head painfully, constantly. I raffled through Frank's notebook, just wanting to understand him more. Being more close... Still upset about the previous incident but I felt that I couldn't ditch a frien for a misunderstanding, if it was to be classed as that.
I couldn't help but replay that time in the bathrooms. His lips, telling me what to do and our bodies softly nudging. It made me shiver and my stomach churn but I couldn't stop thinking about it becausse it was something I'd never have happen to me before. Not someone that wasn't - You know, Gerard.
I had really wanted Frank once. Nothing else to it but desire and lusty-goodness. Now Gerard had made a point of sexually (not anything to do with sex though) punishing me as opposed to beating me. Though I think his Shane-hate is starting to blow-over...
Anyway, I prefer beating though. It is something I deserve and is less scary. He should only kiss me when he loves me properly, not as cruel punishment! It cut me up to think Gerard would use something so good as a punishment.
And how cruel he can fucking be.....! He knows somehow that I....really, really like him. Bastard.... I love both those bastards! I'm so hopless!
GERARD: Mikey's acting odd. He seemes so far-off. Usually he'd tell me what's going on but he's told me nothing out-of-the-ordinary.
I found him in his room, sitting at the window, rested his head on his folded, slender arms. He had what looked like a notebook on his lap, open. He remained quiet until I mentioned my date with Frank. We went to a restaurant, just the two of us.
"Hmm?" Mikey turned his head sluggishly. I explained how Frank insisted on me and Shane becoming closer. And obviously Frank won me over with a his persuasive personality. He said that he and Mikey should meet up and me and Shane meet up. Mikey shuddered.
"Shane's going to a small gig near here and asked if I wanted to go. How about we all go?" Mikey turned to face the window again.
"Oh, yeah. That sounds fun." I was a little scared by Mikey's weird, quiet mood.
He seemed happy enough at the gig though. It was only $10 and the band was pretty good.
Shane and I had little heat between us too, though it was Frank I focused on.
"Gee! Can you come over tonight?" Frank looked up in my arms. "So we can..." he grinned devilishly.
"We'll see, sugar." I wasn't too keen on getting up late on Friday - early morning driving lesson... I kept Frank otherwise budy by stealing risky kisses and racking up the beer count via Shane's driving license.
"Ger-rard!! Come to mine!" Frank pleaded when Shane stopped at his door.
"Frankie, I can't..." I played ith his fingers thoughtfully, trying to clear my mind of any hot stuff I'd be missing.
"Asshole." I could see the smile Frank had when he said it. He grabbed my hair and pulled me in for a teasing kiss. Oh god, why did it have to be so damn good? It was far longer than an average kiss goodnight. My hands found thier way under his shirt and I ached to have to say goodbye for my stubborn attitude.
"Hey! Stop making out, me and Mikey feel left out." Shane whined like a girl. As usual then.
Frank blew me a kiss and left the car. As we left I saw Frank point at me, then his crotch, then shake his head, mocking anger. I gave him the finger, but with a grin on my face.
I caught Mikey's hand being softly taken by Shane. He wouldn't let go of Mikey it seemed and I groaned, hoping they'd hear. Mikey's too easy.
And Shane is not innocent.


text:
All free guest memberships include a free photo personal ad, free browsing, free matching, and the events calendar.
Subscribing members access live chat, message boards, Mingle Mail, and more!
To browse through thousands of photos and start meeting other singles, click here.
Hey!! My name is JaQuon. I living in Birmingham, Al mostly my life. I full-time student at Fortis Institute majoring in Electrician. So I want share a little bit about myself. I love to make girls laugh ,so you like guy with sense humor well here i am ladies. I enjoy going out and just have fun. I am very romantic person I just love plan some special event for someone so I show much she means the world to me. My mean goal is to find someone that can love me for who I am and I definitely will love her for who she is, also do whatever I can to make her happy. I definitely have a strong testimony of the Gospel of Jesus Christs. I know that that Pres. Monson and is a Prophet, seer, and revelators. I also know that the Book of Mormon is the word God it testify of trustfulness of our Savior Jesus Christs. I'm very grateful to member of his true and living church. It such a honor and blessing for me to have priesthood authority to go and do Father work by serving brothers and sisters around me. So I look for woman that live high standard and have strong testimony of the gospel. She also should be temple worthy because that my goal in the future to be sealed with someone at temple for all eternity. I love my family very much and grateful that they are apart of my life.
Copyright © 2014 Spark Networks® USA, LLC. All rights reserved.
Privacy | Terms of Service | Cookie Policy
Spark Networks USA, LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Spark Networks, Inc., a NYSE MKT Company (LOV).


text:
Pets Inc.: Rescue Animals
Event Name: Pets Inc.: Rescue Animals
Event Date: 8/26/2013
Event Description:
Time: 4:30 PMAges: All agesDescription: Join us as we host Pets Inc., a non-profit organization that saves and finds homes for animals in the community. Come learn about the work they do and watch a short film. animals. Children will have the opportunity to pat rescue pets. Registration is requested. Call 785-3519 for more information.
[ return to the main page ]


text:
In 1930, an alarming one in 10 children did not reach the age of 20. By the year 2000, that rate had dramatically declined to one in 100. According to the Department of Justice, 82 percent of child abductions were by known family members, 11 percent by friends or acquaintances and often connected to a custody dispute. Only about 2 percent are considered legitimate stranger abductions and the suggested risk of abduction is about one in six hundred thousand children.
To put the risk in perspective consider the following. When compared to abduction, there is a two times greater risk of dying from influenza, a four times greater chance of dying from heart disease, a 17 times greater chance of dying from suicide, a 20 times greater chance of dying from playing youth football, a 30 times greater chance of dying as a pedestrian in a car accident and a 100 times greater chance of dying from an automobile accident. The loss of a child for any reason cannot be diminished or overlooked. It is a gut-wrenching tragedy of titanic proportion.
Maybe that is why we do not let our children go unsupervised all day anymore. They are not jumping off dangerous cliffs; they are not walking on train trussels, taking rides with strangers or participating in other obviously, stupidly dangerous pursuits. Maybe there are good reasons why we do not see children outside playing very often. Maybe that is why so many more children survive to adulthood today. Remember all kids count.
Scot Hurlburt can be reached by e-mail at email@example.com
Prev Next
More like this story
Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.


text:
Round rabbit organic soft toy WAS Ł7
Description: This lovely rabbit makesa perfect eco birthday or green christmas gift. This little organic toy rabbit is 15cm in height and is totally organic. A perfect green gift for babies and at birthdays or christmas too!
Price: £3.00
Category: Children's
Type: Organic


text:
County stunned by commissioner's untimely death
Kerr died at scene of single-vehicle crash returning from Pa. on Friday
By Alex Bridges -- email@example.com
WINCHESTER -- The sudden death of Frederick County Planning Commissioner Gregory S. Kerr over the weekend continues to shock the community he served.
Kerr, 41, of 206 Meade Drive, died in a single-vehicle crash late Friday night in Huntingdon, Pa. A Pennsylvania State Police report states Kerr drove a Ford F150 pickup on Pa. 655 while transporting a race truck on a trailer.
The truck left the road. When he tried to bring the vehicles back over, the trailer caused them to jackknife, the report states, which then ejected Kerr out the driver's side window. Kerr, who was not wearing a seat belt, was struck by the trailer and died at the scene, according to police.
Kerr was bringing a race truck from a mechanic in Pennsylvania during heavy rain, his mother-in-law said Monday. Kerr and his wife, Jill Moler Kerr, have three children -- Ann Bailey, 12, Gunner Douglas, 14, and Tanner Scott, 17. Kerr served as vice president of the Hagerstown Quarter Midget Association. Their children have all participated in Quarter Midget racing.
"To those that knew him, Greg was a selfless, gracious and dedicated member of our racing family," a message on the Hagerstown Quarter Midget Association's Web site states. "He was ... truly dedicated to making our sport about the kids. He will be deeply, deeply missed."
Red Bud District Supervisor Philip A. Lemieux nominated Kerr in 2006 to serve as commissioner for the district. Kerr also served as the commission's liaison to the Winchester-Frederick County Economic Development Commission.
Commission Chairwoman June Wilmot said Kerr, still relatively new to the panel, would often help the group stay on track.
"You know from my perch, I could see him, he was just beginning to groove," Wilmot recalled. "It seemed to me ... when he said something, it sort of cut through everything else that was going on or being discussed.
"When there was conflict, he would just come in -- he was just a steady-as-she-goes kinda person and he would come in and say some really fine things to cut through it and sort of got everybody back on what the real question was."
The chairwoman received word of Kerr's death in a phone call from Shawnee District Supervisor Gene Fisher early Saturday morning.
News of Kerr's death came a shock to Wilmot and others.
"Obviously there have been commissioners who have passed away basically because they've lived a good life and a long life," Wilmot said. "He was living a good life, took care of his family ... he committed himself to caring about the public and served on the planning commission, which was notable."
"Here he worked out of town, with teenage kids, et cetera, et cetera, and yet he had time for us," Wilmot added.
County Administrator John Riley Jr. said a Red Bud District supervisor would need to nominate an appointee to replace Kerr. That process is not a priority at the moment, Riley said.
"I think we need to grieve the loss of Mr. Kerr and what he's brought to the county and give our support to his family and then we can move on with the rest of this at some point in the future," he said. "Obviously I was aware of it and it's a tragic loss. A fine young man."


text:
- Primary Role
- Founder @ Skybox Imaging
- Education
- Stanford University
- Website:
- http://www.skyboximaging.com/company/leadership/dan-berkenstock
Person DetailsUpdate
Dan Berkenstock is an entrepreneur and engineer from Chicago, IL who co-founded Skybox Imaging and currently serves as Executive Vice President & Chief Product Officer.
As Skybox, Dan leads the vision, implementation, and delivery of revolutionary information products & services derived from timely satellite imagery. Previously, Dan was the founding CEO. In this role he led the company from inception: raising $21M in equity financing from leading silicon valley venture capitalists, building the team to 50, obtaining US Government licensing to operate a private imaging satellite, and overseeing the design & successful critical design review of the company's first spacecraft, SkySat-1.
He is fascinated by scalable and novel data streams that revolutionize the ways that consumers, businesses, and governments make decisions in their day-to-day lives.
Dan is currently on leave from the Ph.D. program in Aeronautics & Astronautics at Stanford University, where he also received his masters degree. Prior to co-founding Skybox, Dan researched optimal design methods for spacecraft in the Advanced Supercomputing Division of NASA's Ames Research Center. Dan has also worked as a counterproliferation analyst at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, developing methods to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
Dan has worked at several early stage startup companies and served as a cooperative education student for NASA at Johnson Space Center. At JSC, Dan was a certified scuba diver at NASA's Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory where he assisted in training astronauts for extravehicular activities. Dan has supported two space shuttle missions as an assistant to the Assembly Checkout Office in Mission Control, performed computational analysis on the space shuttle, and supported T-38 trainer jet activities at Ellington Field.
Dan's programming language of choice is C, his favorite CAD tool is Solidworks, and he wishes he had more time for camping.
Experience (1)Update
Skybox Imaging
Jan 1, 2009
Education (1)Update
Stanford University
MSAero/AstroJan 1, 2005
News (3)Update
MIT TR35 List 2011technologyreview.com
Fast Company Profilefastcompany.com
Technology Review List of 50 Top Innovative Companiestechnologyreview.com


text:
Dear kind Kindie people,
After much deliberation, we have decided that we will no longer continue KindieFest. We have loved every minute of it and thank you for all your enthusiasm and loyalty over the five years. We will all be continuing active roles in the family music world and will certainly see you around the scene.
Our best,
Stephanie, Bill, Tor, & Mona


text:
Numerous galls on a young Valley Oak.
Plants lacking basal burl, approx. 2 m. in height, leaves glabrous.
about 3-4 inches long
Non-native in the Russian River this day...
Ok...no black floating triangle on segments like Vivid.
Most abundant Lep of the day. Fascinating to see So Much male mud-puddling...
Few flowering plants along the River this day. The red stuck out like blood on a rock..
Never had seen this outside of the lone outcrop in Islais Creek/ Glen Canyon
Little fellow, (about 7 inches), tagged by a car.
Fresh mountain lion kill from last night. North road looks like a crime scene!


text:
Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong. - Murphy's law
The Dream of Dumbarton Watch the rebirth of Strathclyde in my first AAR!
Best Character Writer of the Week: 3/2/13 Fan of the week: 1/6/13
"Fear not what will be, fear what has already come to pass"
Zombie invasion DLC. Zombie hordes of 20,000 spawn all around the map and start attacking everywhere. They are able to raise 1/3 of slain enemies as their own. They follow the religion of Braaains and their characters are recruited from among slain enemy nobles.
Byzantium - Imperial Restoration for Darkest Hour
Empire of Pohjola for Crusader Kings II
Wilhelm Scream for Crusader Kings II
The Nazi Time Machine - A Strange Story of the First Reich (CK2) Dead due to save game corruption. Will restart eventually.
This tread mad me sad... Please stop it to suggest so many stupped DLCs... This game wouldn't be Crusader Kings anymore...
Play as Jesus DLC. 0 AD starting date.
"History is form of cybersex!"
"Please, call me Grubby"
- General Schenkhuizen, Timeslines: What if Spain failed to control the world?
There might be Vikings out there! Or: How I accidentally traded my wife for a halibut (pining for the Fjords since I lost my USB and the save game)
Patriotism leads to nationalism, nationalism leads to racism, racism leads to suffering...
We wanted Beard DLC, we got Bear DLC
edit:maybe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginga:_Nagareboshi_Gin DLC would fit into Sengoku
Fleshing Orthodoxy (and maybe Catholicism), please !
The secret bear is awesome aha
Is NotaBear actually Polish Catholic, or does he have a secret bear culture and bear religion that he is actually a member of?
Also, how does the Secret Bear trait interact with the Berserker trait?
Secret Bears have a doubled chance to gain the Berserker trait. Additionally, Norse Secret Bears have a halved discovery chance due to the prevalence of fur-wearing in the frigid north.
Relentless madman.
As a serious answer I'm expecting either a Theocracy DLC or an expansion of the Map to India. Also, Zombies, can't forget them.
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!


text:
Blue Book® Suggested Retail Value
Fuel Economy (city/hwy)
More 2009 Journey Reviews
Other Journey Reviews
User Reviews
The community thinks...
The how to on how to not make a car by Adam from Detroit on 09/24/2013. Trim: 2009 Dodge Journey SE, Owned 4 years.
Pros: It has a great stereo system for the basic package. It also has great storage.
Cons: No acceleration at all. No power at all. Engine is to loud and just rings through the cabin. The seats are hard as a rock and the suspension matches that. There is more plastic in this car than metal leaving it with a very poor and cheap quality which makes it very easy to break with the hard suspension. The rear seat has no leg room unless you are under 5 foot or have no legs at all. I also have issues where it randomly will not start and the dealership cannot help me at all with it. It only has 59,000 miles. I also have the four cylinder engine and it gets horrible gas mileage for a four cylinder.
Overall review: Do not buy it!
Review ID: #576257 Is this review offensive?
Video Reviews
2009 Dodge Journey
The Journey is an all new CUV boasting versatile features.


text:
18 shiny, happy things iPhone and iPad users say to feel better about themselves
Summary: David Gewirtz counts down the 18 most common things iOS users say to feel better about themselves, their devices, and their choices.
14 of 19Image
#12 "Why would you ever want to do... [fill in the blank]?"
I've already highlighted a few "why would you ever" questions I've been asked, but the interesting thing about my correspondents is "why would you ever" seems to be applicable to virtually everything.
"Why would you ever use a spare battery?" Because some days are long days. "Why would you ever need a Micro SD card when you have the cloud?" Because the cloud isn't everywhere. "Why would you want to copy files straight to your device's USB port?" Because it's convenient and can even be scripted.
Oddly, enough, whenever there's some neat feature or useful function that another system has but Apple lacks, the fanbois tend to feign bafflement and ask, "Why would you ever want to do that?" as if "that" were jumping off a bridge or putting your hand on a hot stove, rather than simply having a spare battery.
Should Apple users feel better about themselves because of this? No. This is just a lame excuse for not having some feature or another.
Licensed image courtesy GraphicStock.
#13 "You never need to close all your apps."
I can't begin to tell you why this seems like such a big deal to the iOS faithful, especially since I never made much of a fuss about being able to close Android apps. But eventually, somewhere in almost all email discussions I've had about iOS and Android, an iOS fan will act as though he's pulling out a trump card and then throw down "You never need to close all your apps."
Well, first, you do. I can't count the number of times I've had to hard-restart my iPad or iPhone because something got wonky inside. And, second, you can close apps on the iPhone with the little minus-sign. You just can't clear them all at once without restarting. And the why is simple: because a fresh system often runs better, especially when some piece of code or another decided to go off the reservation.
Should Apple users feel better about themselves because of this? No. This one is just silly.
Image courtesy iOS.
#14 "iTunes is awesome, you just don't understand."
Oh, yes I do. I do understand. I dislike iTunes intensely. I have many gripes about it, including how it bogs down my PC, jumbles my files around, and more. My biggest complaint these days is that iTunes on my Mac OS X Server launches on its own, on a machine that has never, ever had an iOS device connected into it, and where I've turned off all the settings that would cause iTunes to launch. Plus Mountain Lion doesn't provide a clean way to just uninstall iTunes.
But I'm not alone. Go to Google and type in "iTunes sucks". Or go to YouTube and type in "iTunes sucks". There's an entire cornucopia of postings from people who seem to dislike iTunes even more than I do.
Should Apple users feel better about themselves because of this? No. You're drinkin' the Kool-Aid on this one, Bucko.
Image courtesy my always-present iTunes app on a machine that I don't want to be running iTunes.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


text:
130 - "Bouncy" Numerical Counter
What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Set HolyPower module to show counters in numerical form instead of a bar. Have scale to 170%, horizontal pos -102, vertical pos 101. Hide Blizzard frame. Have "Pulse when full" checked.
2. Get to 3 holy power points.
3. The number 3 starts "bouncing" in a diagonal way. (top-left to bottom-right)
What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
The expected output is having a pulsing number when full holy power (3 points in holy power). Instead, it "bounces".
What version of the product are you using?
Do you have an error log of what happened?
Please provide any additional information below.
That's pretty much it. When "Pulse when full" is unchecked, this doesn't happen, so it must be a problem with that specific function.
- 2 comments
- 2 comments


text:
Date to be announced shortly!
Create. Explore. Connect
with the lovely Elida Field
Wacky Nut Horse Farm on Bainbridge Island
Elida is well known for her art, women and wine classes that she teaches in her hometown of Camas, WA, as well as in Italy, Spain and Greece. I'm thrilled to have her come teach in my hometown of Bainbridge Island late this summer. It is a beautiful time of year here in the Pacific Northwest and we have lots of fun things planned. If you're familiar with Elida, than you know you're in store for making some great art, drinking wine and lots and lots of laughs.
All the details and registration coming! Stay tuned.
May 1st-4th, 2014
Wacky Nut Horse Farm on Bainbridge Island
stay tuned for registration details.
This art and life retreat will be a small, intimate gathering of 10 lucky ladies. We are in for a treat!
|Black Vines by Stephanie Lee
|To Perceive by Jeanne Oliver


text:
No. of Comments: 0
Add comments |
More comments
Infinity Tower, designed by Skidmore Owings and Merrill
(SOM), will stand 80 stories high at 330 meters and will be the world's tallest tower to feature a 90 degree twist. Infinity Tower will house luxury residential apartments, pools, a state of the art gymnasium, a nursery, conference room facilities, tennis courts and a luxury spa. The innovative design affords apartments on all sides staggering views. Open-space design has been implemented to ensure a minimum of pillars and Floor to ceiling windows providing a true sense of space and light. A reinforced concrete column will rotate with the twisting shape to create a helix. In addition each floor will accommodate a 1.2 degree twist to achieve the full unique 90 degree spiral.
WAN Mobile
Danish Education Design
World Architecture Day 2014
More Projects
Senior Site Architect - Shift Work - Hospitality
Senior Site Architect - Hospitality
Architectural Technician – Hospitality
Architect – Hospitality
Senior Project Architect – Hospitality projects
jobs in Dubai
Please enter above code:
Cannot read the code? Please click hereOR click on the image to reload.
Click here to view the NEWS IN PICTURES tablet site


text:
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Don't see the problem here. If you need an item, roll need. What is the point in passing and then rolling again?
If no-one can use an item to improve one of their gear sets at all then you roll on a shard, you just treat it like the boss dropped a shard.
Disenchantment is a last resort though, I'd far prefer someone gets an item of loot, even if they only use it now and then in their damage gear or whatever.
Jack Spicer said...
The point is the "discussion". If everyone just used the need/greed buttons, then locks and mages can't be discouraged from grabbing a cloak that is heavy on spirit and favors +healing - which they want for the +damage, for example.
Or maybe someone would point out, "hey you already won two pieces of gear it would be nice if you could pass on one".
I guess for players who have been playing this longer, using the default ui to roll need on something kinda feels like ninja'ing it.
Discussion then roll with the built-in is what I experience (and encourage) too. People who do all-pass are generally over-paraniod and stuck in the habbit from way back when the roll system didn't work well (like what, 2 years ago).
It's really quite simple, you just say "hey can I need?" 90% of the time, you're the only one who has use for the item anyway. If two people have equal claim, they both roll. If one person has already got an item, most of the time they politely give the item to someone else. Frankly the last time I ever had someone ninja an item from me was before BC came out...
Hell, even if the group is an all-pass group, waiting, asking and rolling need has never failed me. If you want the item, never be in a rush to pass just cause the group thinks that's how it should be done... you're only encouraging someone to ninja it from you. But also, never EVER roll on an item without asking.
GrumblyStuff said...
Also it filters out the ninjas early.


text:
Denver Broncos' Tim Tebow Grants Young Man's Wish
Tim Tebow is making the absolute best of his time off the field while the players and owners try to work things out!
The Denver Broncos latest QB, with the help of ESPN, recently granted the wish of a teenage boy who used to play football but probably never will again.
Check out this story.....