text:
Healthy Chorizo Recipes (Slide 3)
(Slide 3 of 12) Start at the beginning | View recipes as list
Recipe: Slow-Cooker Picadillo
View as: Thumbnails List
Chorizo Migas
Migas, scrambled eggs with strips of tortillas, is a tasty breakfast or quick dinner. Poblano pepper…View slide
Chorizo-Stuffed Pork Tender…
This mouthwatering pork tenderloin is stuffed with chorizo, cheese and spinach. Once you master stuf…View slide
Slow-Cooker Picadillo
Picadillo, a Latin American-style hash, is usually made with ground beef. This one uses bison or lea…View slide
Baked Cod with Chorizo & Wh…
This recipe follows the Spanish and Portuguese tradition of pairing mild white fish with full-flavor…View slide
Couscous Paella Soup
This soup is inspired by the flavors and ingredients of paella, but unlike paella it's simple enough…View slide
Bobby Flay's Honey-Rum Ba…
Chef Bobby Flay cooked these baked black beans, spiked with chorizo and rum, on one of his televisio…View slide
Pulled-Pork Torta
This fun layered tortilla and pulled pork dish is made in a pie pan, which is just the right size to…View slide
Iberian-Style Sausage & Chi…
This hearty sausage and chicken ragu was inspired by a fabulous stew Bruce Aidells enjoyed when he w…View slide
Lima Beans with Chorizo
A bit of chorizo sausage gives these beans a sassy hit of smoke and spice. Serve them as is (on smal…View slide
Mussels South of Two Borders
Prince Edward Island may account for a healthy share of the world's mussel production, but this reci…View slide
Homemade Chorizo Tortas
A torta is the Mexican version of a panini—a pressed sandwich made with crusty bread that can have…View slide


text:
Entries in 'numbers' (10)
The six-year-old Apple App Store in numbers
Apple's App Store has reached the ripe old age of six, and as of right now contains some 1,252,777 apps.
'Titanfall was a pretty big miss for EA and Respawn' claims Forbes
EA's decision not share concrete sales numbers for Titanfall in its recent financial report suggests the game missed expectations, Forbes has speculated.
Twitch off to a great start on Xbox One
There were 108,000 unique Twitch broadcasts from Xbox One in the first week since the streaming tech was patched onto the machine.
More than half of PS4 owners have subscribed to PlayStation Plus
PlayStation Plus is proving hugely popular with PS4 owners.
$1bn worth of Call of Duty: Ghosts sold into retail on day one
Call of Duty: Ghosts has apparently 'sold more than $1 billion of Call of Duty: Ghosts into retail stores worldwide as of day one'.
Gamescom 2013 celebrates 23% attendance spike
Attendance numbers of last week's Gamescom 2013 were up an impressive 23 per cent on the 2012 event, the event's organisers have revealed.
INFOGRAPHIC: Some very large Call of Duty numbers
Activision has just sent out an infographic detailing a history of the Call of Duty series' multiplayer mode.
More Ouya sales numbers revealed to mixed response from devs
A number of new devs have revealed the sales numbers for their Ouya games and the reaction can best be described as mixed.
SingStar user numbers jump following free-to-play transition
Sony's decision to make SingStar a free-to-play PS3 title has seen a dramatic increase in user numbers.
EA will return to Wii U if Nintendo "can sell more boxes"
Nintendo has been told that it must sell more Wii U's if it wishes to win back the affections of third party publisher EA.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
- Overview
- Specs
- Reviews
Genuine Innovations 16g Non-Threaded CO2 CartridgeThe 16g non-threaded is the most popular CO2 cartridge by Genuine Innovations.
- Works with all Genuine Innovations cupped inflators
- Compatible with Ultraflate, Ultraflate Plus, Ultraflate Pro, Microflate, Air Chuck, SecondWind IH and SecondWind MTB
- Ground Shipping Only
- Continental US Only. It will be removed from any AK/HI or International Orders.
Genuine Innovations 16g Non-Threaded CO2 Cartridge
- cartridge compatibility:
- Non-Threaded
- cartridge size:
- 16g
- weight:
- rating:
- 5
? Place an order in the next Hours Minutes . Overweight charges may apply to some items.Based on delivery to . Change location
Not the correct shipping zip code? Update your information below.
Enter a valid zip code
Please select options for this product
Find in Store Check availability for
Item availability can change quickly and is not guaranteed.
Stores Within 50 Miles of:
Enter a valid zip code
Please select options for this product
Item availability can change quickly and is not guaranteed.
Please contact your local store to confirm status.
Shipping See options for delivery
Estimated Delivery for
Type Estimated Arrival Date
Two Day
Next Day
Next Day Saturday
Change Shipping Destination
Enter a valid zip code
Please select options for this product
- Important Shipping Information
- Additional processing time may be required prior to shipping.
- This item contains hazardous or flammable material, and can only be shipped ground within the continental U.S.
- Learn more about shipping
SPECIAL OFFERTake An Extra 20% Off This Item, Discount Taken in Cart. See details
Anniversary Sale: Event available 7/22/16 - 7/31/16 at all Performance Bicycle Retail locations, online and by phone. Advertised category and/or brand savings taken off lowest marked price on all applicable items during the event period. Some brand and/or item exclusions may apply to this promotion – visit Terms and Conditions for details. Bikes and items labeled Doorbusters are priced as marked and are excluded from advertised category and/or brand discounts. Doorbuster availability limited to stock on hand. Online, discount taken at checkout. Taxes, gift cards, Team Performance memberships/renewals, Spin Doctor Services/Service Plans or shipping and handling on web/phone orders are not eligible to receive discounts. Discounts cannot be applied to previous purchases. Sorry, no rainchecks. In retail stores, colors, styles and select brand availability varies by location. Photographic, typographic and pricing errors are unintentional and subject to change.


text:
Reconstruction or Construction?
The now infamous "Interview" of Pope Francis with the self-avowed atheist, Eugenio Scalfari, was recently removed from the "Francis" page of the Vatican website where it had been placed under the rather curious designation, "Speeches."
Since its original publication in La Repubblica, the Italian daily which Scalfari founded, it has come to light that the session with the Pope had neither been recorded, nor had notes been taken at the time. The exchange was reconstructed by the eighty-nine year old Scalfari after the fact.
Now, in a true interview with foreign journalists working in Italy, things become curiouser and curiouser. Scalfari says that he told the Pope when he sent his version of the exchange for permission to publish it:
Keep in mind that I did not include some of the things that you said to me. And that some of the things that I attribute to you you did not say. But I put them there so that the reader may understand who you are.
Despite this friendly warning, he received the "ok" to publish his version. But Scalfari goes on to admit to the reporters he was addressing:
I am perfectly willing to think that some of the things that I wrote and attributed to him are not shared by the pope, but I also believe that he maintains that, said by a nonbeliever, they are important for him and for the activity he is carrying out.
Reported in Chiesa.
About the Author
Rev. Robert P. Imbelli, a priest of the Archdiocese of New York, is Associate Professor of Theology Emeritus at Boston College.
59 comments
- All
- Editor Featured
Perfectly willing, huh? How obliging.
I'd think that anything in that interview, at the very least, should be taken with a huge grain of salt. That the Holy Father approved the content suggests that the interview story in its entirety isn't thoroughly discredited, but it seems to fall somewhat short of thorough credibility.
Next Friday, when Francis' first solo run at an encyclical, Spe Salvi, appears, it will be interesting to see how Chiesa and company approach it. The techniques they have been practicing on "soft interviews" and spontaneous Papal comments presumably won't work on an Encyclical. And they will have to think very carefully about the future implications of any line of approach they choose to the reception of future Encuclicals, by Francis or anyone else.
Sorry, in that last line above, Encyclicals of course.
is this that to which you meant to refer?:
With his apostolic exhortation "Evangelii Gaudium" (The Joy of the Gospel), which the Vatican has scheduled for publication Tuesday, Pope Francis finally makes his real debut as papal author.
Spe Salvi is a wonderful encyclical written by Pope Benedict XVI.
Thanks, Fr. Imbelli and Charles Ryder. Write in haste, repent at leisure!
Still, given the difference between the formal, official document and casual communications such as off -the- cuff homilies, remarks to journalists, etc. It should be interesting to see how the next Encyclical will be received .
Having appreciated the Pope's sermons to the young people at World Youth Day in Rio, I very much look forward to Evangelii Gaudium.
And I agree with Charles that Spe Salvi is indeed "a wonderful encyclical!"
I am surprised that so many people, including you, Fr. Imbelli, are so huffy about the Scalfari "interview." Was it really "infamous"? Golly, no. It didn't seem to bother Pope Francis, so why should it bother everyone else unless he really needs to be protected from his own naivete. I mean, if you think he is too simple minded to be pope, say so.
Now let it be said that making up things the pope didn't say so people can "understand him better" is a far cry from conventional standards of journalism in this country. It doesn't seem so odd for Europe, where Rupert Murdoch reigns as the ethics-setter (what's that buzz on my phone?). It probably won't seem odd much longer in the United States since our media are relying on cheap, young Brits brought up on Murdoch to cover stories that American media used to assign to Americans. And for that matter, Rupe has enough American media now to claim to reign as our ethics czar. We call that market capitalism. But that is a gripe of a whole different color.
Mr Blackburn, I am relieved at your concession:
Now let it be said that making up things the pope didn't say so people can
"understand him better" is a far cry from conventional standards of
journalism in this country.
I believe it's also known as deceit.
I presume that Signor Scalfari has not been consulted for Evangelii Gaudium.
Just yesterday I was sorely tempted to teach history, not as it is, but as it should have been.
I very much wanted to teach that Joan of Arc was the patron saint of the Résistance in France during WWII. That would have been a pure figment of my imagination (as far as I know), but it felt right. Had I yielded to that temptation, with luck the story might have gone viral and later become accepted as a little known historical fact. It would have helped correct the image that people have of her. Wouldn't it be just a little fib for the sake of a larger truth? Claiming something that didnt happen so that my students could "understand her better"?
In the end I compromised and said that she was "popular" in the Résistance in France during WWII. I don't have any evidence for that either, but surely it has to have been true at least among some people...
Deceit? What a quaint term In Washington it's known as "spin."
The various interviews with the pope have been unimpressive: America's Freudian slap at women, Commonweal's lame attempt at humor, Scalfari's fiction.
It will be interesting to see if the forthcoming "exhortation" will be more trusting of its intended readership.
'...a far cry from conventional standards of journalism in this country."
I can't see how this can be improved, except perhaps swapping out "country" for "universe." I'm sure any reputable publication that favorably quoted this guy's fabrications will be anxious to make amends.
"The now infamous...". Really? It is now infamous because of whose opinion? We do agree the only indisputable absolute is God, right? The rest is opinion, right?
"...the eighty-nine year old Scalfari...'. Yikes! I do wonder how it came to be we actually valued the lives and opinions of those who a certain revered bit of writing claims to lived 120 years and another quite literally 950 years. Well, some folks are now more than a little obsessed with youth so I guess the comment's clear drift from historical usefulness makes sense.
Deceit? My goodness, what was the story about glass houses?
Tom Blackburn
Thank you for pointing out the much ado about nothing in the coverage of this Scalfari interview. Why is the right so obsessed with it? The one with the Jesuits says so much more and has yet to be deconstructed. Doing away with Scalfari accomplishes nothing. What is curiouser and curiouser is the right's obsession with him.
Dear MightBe,
"We do agree the only indisputable absolute is God, right?" Right!
"The rest is opinion, right?" Wrong!
As for houses of glass, I would say deceit is deceit, whether perpetrated by Murdoch or Scalfari, whether by a cover-up or a false accusation.
Professor Mitchell,
"Much ado about nothing?" I fear now you are being "un po ingenuo."
Had the subsequent revelations about the Scalfari "interview" not come to light, the words "of the Pope" would have been bruited about to no end or, rather, to the end of those whose interest would be served. One of the strengths of the conversation with Father Spadaro is that we trust that he has conveyed the "ipsissima verba Francisci," and not a fabrication thereof.
As for "the right's obsession" – all Contributors here are card-carrying Commonweal Catholics.
Scalfari should have recorded the interview and transcribed it. Short of that, he should have informed readers about the nature of the piece. But the pope approved the text, so calling it deceitful seems, well, pretty nasty. What was the point of noting his age, by the way?
Speaking of wonderful encyclicals, since that suggests the existence of not-so-wonderful encyclicals, how about a blog post on "Encyclical lowlights"? That would be a fitting sequel to "Papal lowlights".
I am a Commonweal subscriber but not an intellectual and often barely a thinker. Pope Francis' deeds and words, as conveyed by the press, put a spring in my step and hope in my heart. It seemed to me that he had eluded his handlers and taken it to the street (and Scalfari). The official backtracking from that interview awakened my rhinencephalon with a whiff of the appointment of Greg Burke, formerly Fox's Rome correspondent, as Vatican media wrangler in June 2012. As the appointment occurred shortly after the leaks and other embarrassments, I assumed that his role was to suppress news. As this blog is discussing the Scalfari phenomenon MailOnline is heralding Greg Burk as "The PR genius who helped make the Pope popular: Francis's marketing mastermind" I was hoping that he was a vestige of Pope Benedict's tenure and would quietly return to journalism. It was my hope that Pope Francis was a brilliant and compassionate priest of mature years with nothing to lose moved by the Holy Spirit to turn our gaze to Christ's teachings, pure and simple. It would be a great disappointment to learn that he has been branded, puffed and painted to increase enrollment.
Christina, just a note -- the Mail article is a ripoff/rewrite (British journalistic standard can be even lower than Italian standards, believe it or not) of a Vice magazine (unfortunately named!) article on Greg Burke.
And as someone quoted in the Vice piece, I should be consistent and come to Greg's defense -- or, rather the defense of Pope Francis, who does not seem to be someone who is easily manipulated. I think Greg was a very smart hire, and I hope he can help bring some organization to the Vatican communications machine, such as it is.
This is not about controlling the message or the pope -- Greg was hired well before Francis became pope, and the place was still a mess. All of a sudden Francis was elected and Greg fixed everything?! No, I don't think that's how it worked. The messenger and the message changed. I think the Vatican communications people were as surprised as anyone, and as much as anything need to get out of the way rather than controlling.
But the bureaucracy will try to "tame" Francis. That's the way it works in every system, liberal or conservative. Staying free and in contact with the outside world will be a constant challenge for the pope. Let's hope he succeeds.
Bob Imbelli -- As far as being a "card-carrying Commonweal Catholic," I think it should be pointed out that Commonweal Catholicism is not like Soviet Communism, and that contributors and subscribers have a range of views. Just as the term should not be used to disparage an entire group of Catholics, not should it be used as a shield against criticism of one's own views.
I personally find it almost comical the way Magister and others of the Old Guard are scrambling to try and seize on anything to try to reinterpret Francis as in fact amenable to their old ways and as pointing to an inevitable disappointment to the vast majority of Catholics and others who see Francis as a fresh presentation of the Gospel.
But I too am a contributor here, and we obviously have different views in this regard.
Father Imbelli is a voice of reason, rationality and respectfulness. I appreciate his contributions to Commonweal.
Dave Gibson,
what is truly amusing are the pirouettes being performed to ignore or make light of Scalfari's astonishing claim: "I am perfectly willing to think that some of the things I wrote and attributed to him are not shared by the Pope." "Sono dispostissimo a pensare che alcune delle cose scritte da me e a lui attribuite, il Papa non le condivida."
If you fail to find that shameful, then indeed, we have different views in this regard.
I wouldn't call the Argentine pope's unwillingness to argue with the old man a pirouette. (Maybe a colgada.)
Bob, I was an early and vocal critic of Scalfari's awful journalism. I just don't feel the need to try to use it to advance an agenda. Those are two separate things.
Not as amusing as suggesting the pope stop referring to himself as a Jesuit.
I'm glad we can agree that it was "awful journalism."
A question: when you made your critique, were you aware of his recent admission quoted above?
If not, are you willing now to go beyond "awful" – perhaps to "shameful" and, yes, "deceitful?"
Father Imbelli, how do you explain that pope Francis approved the article before publication? Surely that gives it some weight in spite of the, on its face, astounding admission of not-writing-what-was-said and writing-what-was-not-said.
Good question, Claire.
Bob, I'm not going to play your games, nor would I attempt to induce others into name-calling against others. You are building yourself a glass house.
I can only surmise that the Pope, pressed for time, did not review the article carefully. Whether this was being "un po furbo" or "un po ingenuo" (his words to Father Spadaro about himself) or a combination of the two, I can't say. It is possible (though this too is only surmise) that he now regrets it, hence its removal from the Vatican website.
no further questions.
Alrighty then, Bob.
Deceit. A while back in history the Schwartzs were having their friends the Steins for dinner. A knock at the door. The door is answered by Mr and Ms Schwartz. Standing at the door are two very neatly dressed fellows in tidy uniforms demanding help in their efforts to locate the Steins. They are under strict orders to round up all Steins ASAP. Without hesitation the Schwartzs lie. The deceit works. The Steins lived another day.
Arrogance. Nope. Cannot think of a single scenario when that behavior is remotely acceptable.
Bob, you use words as if you and only you were in connection with God. That ain't so. The most compelling attribute of the fellow who joined Christ on a rather remarkable journey that day on the cross was not his scholarly presentation. It was his humility.
Bob, you use words as if you and only you were in connection with God.
Father Imbelli does no such thing.
I see all the usual suspects are up to all the usual tactics. Apparently trying to advance the cause of good and fair journalism, and maintain the integrity of papal teaching, is now, take your pick:
Advancing an "agenda";
Not the finest hour for Commonweal's editors.
I propose a new journalism award: the Anti-Anti-Scalfari Prize, to be bestowed upon the lefty making the most outrageous assertions about any non-lefty critic of a Scalfari-type interview. Competition will be brisk - we may already have some winners.
Quit your day job.
Fr BOB
You write: "I can only surmise that the Pope, pressed for time, did not review the article carefully." But Scalfari phoned TWO times, two different days explaining to the pope's secretary " that I did not include some of the things that you said to me. And that some of the things that I attribute to you you did not say" Scalfari insisted over this point and the pope said it was OK anyway. So the pope knew the Scalfari approach and he approved it.
I daresay most of us aren't immersed in the canons of Italian journalism, and just because an unsavory commercial practice has a precedent, it doesn't follow that therefore it's ethically acceptable. In my view, I don't think it's going too far - in fact, it's just simple truth - to note that the original Scalfari interview, as published, sans any notice that here were elements of reconstruction or embellishment, misled the world into supposing that the published words actually were those of the Holy Father. I know I was misled.
Of the many fine English adjectives we have to describe such a situation - dishonest, misleading, fraudulent and so on - "deceitful" seems to do the job as well as any other.
That Scalfari later 'fessed up to reconstruction and embellishment is important, but it was quite some time after the initial publication, long after the original "interview" had made its impression on the worldwide readership. Also, it's doubtful that Scalfari's admission received the same blaze of publicity that the original interview did.
That the Holy Father allegedly approved the content prior to publication also seems important - although, as Fr. Imbelli notes, in that case it also seems important that the piece now has been pulled from the Vatican website. And I'm not sure that the papal approval materially alters the ethical analysis. We were bamboozled.
As I said I was merely offering a surmise. But, as you have followed the pre-publication exchange, you know that it was uniquely with Monsignor Xuereb, the Pope's secretary. As I read their exchange, Scalfari had not heard back about the letter and the text he sent, so he called Xuereb. Xuereb said the Pope gave the "ok" to publish. Scalfari, to his credit, responded, "but did the Pope read my accompanying letter?" Xuereb said he didn't know, and Scalfari urged him to check again. The Secretary said the Pope was out and would return at 2:00 and he would check with him. At 2:15 Xuereb called and told Scalfari the Pope said: "give him the 'ok' again."
So yes, the Pope said "ok." Did he read it carefully and realize the "liberties" Scalfari had taken?, I don't know. The time-line suggests haste on the Pope's part. It's clear that I do not think it was wise to publish the edited exchange, and I'm glad it was removed from the Vatican website.
The question of Scalfari's journalistic practices and ethics are one thing -- deplorable, to my mind, as I have said from the beginning.
The larger question, the one raised here, is the effort to try to rewrite Francis by undoing this "interview." The reality is that there is very little in the Scalfari interview that the pope has not said elsewhere, in actual recorded interviews, and with greater force and detail.
The panicked Old Guard seems to think that highlighting the unreliability of this interview undermines everything else that Francis has said. That seems to be a hard sell.
Then again, he was speaking off-the-cuff in those interviews and they are not infallible ex-cathedra statements, so even if he did say what he said we can freely ignore it ...
I cannot remember the level of explanation some posters seem to find necessary for Pope Francis ever being applied to Pope John Paul II. He wrote a number of things I gave up reading because I found I was never going to understand what he was talking about. No one but The Wall Street Journal ever bothered to try to explain him to me. I find it insulting to Pope Francis that so many folks think he needs to be explained.
I would hope no one was writing a doctoral disertation or a book of moral theology that depended on direct quotes from the Scalfari interview. If anyone did, I would vote not to award him his degree or would not read her book. Those are the only people, ISTM, who have a dog in the Scalfari fight, and there can't be very many of them.
The pope said in the interview for America and la Civiltà Cattolica that sometimes he trusts people to much
He trusted Scalfari and didn't reread the interview.
I think the same happened for the letter for the Council of Trento anniversary where he praises the hermeneutic of continuity quoting Benedict. This letter is strange, because he uses the pluralis maiestatis, that lately was abandoned even by Benedict, then it contradicts previous statements but also contradicts his acts: only two months ago Francis fired the 4 liturgical consultants , conservative, appointed by B16, and appointed his advisors, followers of Bugnini, the creator of the conciliar Mass, and the bête noire of conservatives.
So I think, he signed a letter that he never read. This is only my take of course.
Isn't it time to close down this thread?
The larger question, the one raised here, is the effort to try to rewrite Francis by undoing this "interview."
I don't think this is the larger question, nor the one raised here. But I do think it will be interesting if the Pope, or perhaps the Papparatchiks, will be more circumspect going forward about the procedures for interviewing the Pope. That would be a good thing, I think, as long as they don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Bernard Dauenhauer:
You wrote,
Isn't it time to close down this thread?
With all respect, I strongly disagree. Yes, it's been a bit rough, but that's no reason to shut it down. Light can come from these exchanges. I say, allow time and space for that to happen. What's to be gained by shutting it down? What's to be lost by keeping it open? If some readers don't like the tone or content, they can simply tune out.
Bernard and Gene --
It seems to me you all have hit upon the most painful issue here -- do the faithful have a right and/or a duty to face apparent contradictions which sometimes appear in the teachings coming out of the Vatican? The liberals say Yes, the conservatives seem to say No, just reinterpret what Rome says and hope the problems go away.
ISTM that it's time for each and every one of us to look at our own, individual motives for wanting to consider or to ignore the very real problems of faith and morals and to admit to ourselves that there ARE some problems..
We must ask ourselves: Am I responding through fear that I might have been seriously wrong before, or, worse, that popes themselves have been and are being seriously wrong? And if the answer is Yes, have I been ignoring some real problems, then the question becomes: what attitude ought I to take towards the Pope's inconsistencies? Should the liberals crow "See? See? I was RIGHT!!" ? Should the conservatives cover their ears, shut their eyes and pray that the problems will just go away? Neither response is a good one, I say. Everyone can be wrong. Including popes. To know the Truth, first we must face the truth, like it or not.
Good advice Ann. It would clear the air greatly if the temptation to re-interpret events and public statements from an interested point of view could be seen as the dead-end it is, no matter who is doing it. Still, the fact that an occasion has provoked this sort of response may say something about the difficulty of handling "authoritative" contributions to any conversation on an important topic. How best to get past this sort of roadblock is the question.
These discussions should not be shut down until the disputants simply stop disputing and whatever is said has become repetitive, abusive or borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring.
Yes, boring is in the ears of the listener, but when the listeners stop listening ....
I agree with my friend Gene, and will stipulate that if I believed half the things that liberals think I, as a conservative, believe, I'd hate me too!
"As for "the right's obsession" – all Contributors here are card-carrying Commonweal Catholics."
Thanks for the chuckle of the month. Did you delete from the Vatican website the infamous review of Chaput's brilliant book? Or did Scalafari do that." It might be more reprehensible to deny being far right than actually being far right. But I defer to Stephen Colbert..
Scalafari did it – it's above my pay grade!
I don't know that there is a left/right split in all this. What I see is the professional journalists not being as put out about the Scalfari affair as some of us laypersons (in the journalistic sense).
Jim McCrea wrote:
These discussions should not be shut down until the disputants simply stop disputing and whatever is said has become repetitive, abusive or borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring.
Yes, boring is in the ears of the listener, but when the listeners stop listening ..
Again, with all respect, I disagree. I'd say discussions shouldn't be shut down, period. And in fact, that's the rule, right? Interest in a thread peters out, comments stop coming in (or, as Jim put it, "the disputants stop disputing), and the thread dies a natural death – as opposed to someone coming in and shutting it down.
Jim raised the possibilities of threads becoming repetitive or boring; but what some will find boring, others will find worthwhile. Why should someone in the first group have the right, the power, to say, "I'm bored, so regardless of whether the rest of you are bored, too, I'm shutting this sucker down." That person should simply turn his/her attention elsewhere, drop out of the conversation, and let the others continue, if they so desire.
"Again, with all respect, I disagree. I'd say discussions shouldn't be shut down, period"
Gene --
Right! And your advice needs to be heeded in the Catholic colleges that are the subject of a new thread here. I didn't go to a Catholic college, and I'm grateful for it. Why? Because too often in "Catholic" colleges discussions are shut off when the discussions become threatening. Certain things simply could not be considered -- see, most egregiously -- the Index of Forbidden Books. Of course you'll win all your disputes when your opponents are muzzled.
"Catholic" means "all-inclusive". When the Catholic Church does not allow all opinions to at least be heard, then it isn't being Catholic. True, not all opinions can be true -- they contradict each other. But most opinions can be improved by submiting them to criticism. In the Middle Ages ALL opinions were given a hearing. No,they certainly weren't all approved, and disapproval could have horrilble consequences. But all werre heard, and theology was the better for it.
Jim Pauwels makes an interesting point (at 12:39 a.m.) when he says he doesn't see journalists here as put out about Scalfari taking liberties as the journalistic laity. As one of said journalists, I suppose I have to respond affirmatively, at least for myself.
Fifty years ago I would have been very disgusted with Scalfari. Thirty years ago, I would have been put out about him. Ten years ago, I still wouldn't have done what he did but I would have no longer been surprised. Today? Meh. I don't know if anyone still working has ever heard of the Hutchins Commission or the ethics of journalism. I do know that Humbert Wolfe's old poem now applies to much that goes on in the US of A:
You cannot hope to bribe or twist,
Thank God, the British journalist;
But, considering what the man will do unbribed,
There's no occasion to.
Look at what's begun to pass for journalism in my lifetime. Start anywhere, say Hunter Thompson and Tom Wolfe. Or network anchors with, for Pete's sake, agents. No ink-stained wretches, they. Or cable "news." Or Cooke, or Miller at the WaPost and NYTimes respectively, both of which were once known for having editors. Or what some of our superannuated columnists with a Pulitzer on the shelf and mold in their heads continue to be paid for.
So am an old fart banging my cane on the porch and talking about how it used to be. Jim, you may be happy to know I still shout at the radio and TV and hurl the morning paper (what there is of it) across the floor. But get surprised? No, I have stopped being surprised.
Tom B. --
And you can write. :-)
I am not concerned on this post with "inconsistencies" nor with "contradictions," but with acknowledged misrepresentations. My question is simply: are people prepared to tolerate or even condone such? Remember this goes beyond not taking notes or not using a recorder.We already knew about those and that would not have warranted a new post.
let's go back "fifty years" to the thrilling days of yesteryear (to quote a radio program of the time) – it seems the moral sense was keener (or at least there was a higher shame index).
Jim, you may be happy to know I still shout at the radio and TV and hurl the morning paper (what there is of it) across the floor.
I am indeed :-)


text:
State revenues plunge; Malloy to unveil emergency budget plan
BY KEITH M. PHANEUF © The Connecticut Mirror
Not a subscriber? You can purchase a single-day subscription for only $0.75 to read this and access all of our content and our E-Edition. CLICK HERE purchase a single day subscription.
Become an electronic subscriber to the Republican-American for only $8 a month. CLICK HERE.


text:
Read More About
The award-winning franchise Quaker Steak & Lube, known for its Best Wings USA and more than 20 sauces, made history as it served up the company's billionth chicken wing at the Plano Lube "Hard Hat" & Billionth Wing Party on November 15.
The private event, attended by more than 200 VIPs, celebrated the brand's expansion into the Plano, Texas, market. The restaurant will open to the public in January 2013.
During the exclusive event, Lubies enjoyed The Lube's award-winning food and signature drinks as they learned all about the cult-like fan following of The Lube.
Plano dignitaries in attendance included current Plano Mayor Phil Dyer and former Plano Mayor and president and CEO of Quaker Steak & LubeJohn Longstreet.
Attendees also took part in the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to witness the newly elected Mayor of Lube Nation, Ken Rumbaugh, as he made history eating the company's billionth chicken wing.
"Eating the billionth wing was an absolute honor and privilege," Rumbaugh says. "I am so proud to be the Mayor of Lube Nation."
Longstreet adds, "As a former Mayor of Plano, I was thrilled to bring the 'Hard Hat' & Billionth Wing Party to the Plano Lube. We truly made history when our newly elected Mayor of Lube Nation Ken Rumbaugh ate our billionth wing, and we are ecstatic to launch the Plano Lube in January while continuing our Texas takeover."
The Plano restaurant will create close to 200 jobs for the area and will be the third Quaker Steak & Lube location in Texas.
The new Lube will encompass an 8,000-square-foot design while accommodating seating for more than 360 people, including a 1,000-square-foot brickyard patio, two full-service bars, and more than 34 flat-screen TVs.
This past June, the company launched its Texas invasion and announced plans to open 10 new restaurants throughout the area, two of which are currently open in Carrollton and Waco, Texas.
Quaker Steak & Lube has quickly become one of the fastest-growing restaurant chains in the country. The company is on track to open 12 restaurants this year and another 12 in 2013.
The brand has signed development agreements in six new markets with five new franchise groups. Quaker Steak & Lube has close to 60 locations open across 18 states and Canada.
The compelling décor, including race cars suspended from the ceilings, motorcycles, Corvettes, and gas station memorabilia, combined with its crave-able food and supercharged events, has created a cult-like following for The Lube, as fans call it, for more than 38 years.
Collectively, the company serves more than 80 million wings annually along with burgers, ribs, steaks, salads, sandwiches, kid's meals, signature beverages, and many more flavorful menu items.
The Lube is also known for creative food promotions and recently won the coveted MenuMasters award for its limited-time offer, Shake, Wrap & Roll.
Hand-crafted and hand-shaken beverages are also featured on the Blowout Beverages menu, including the industry 2012 Cheers Beverage Award-Winning Bar Jars.


text:
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Anachronism - Rated M - 08-06-2013, 08:25 PM
Content Warning: Swearing, Language, Some Content Unsuitable for Children Under 13, Drug Use, Murder, and General Mishaps and Misery.
Note: Ongoing Project.
Chapter One
New Chicago, Northern America
November 23, 2050
Alicia Aarons was an actress of the highest caliber, and she knew this fact very well. The career brought her a variety of lifetimes worth of roles, from femme fatales to old crones to young maids in distress. But her present circumstance was distracting her, just a bit, from these usual thoughts about her daily goings-on.
Because little Alice was going to jump.
The fall wouldnt kill her; she knew that first-hand. Falling was fun, like flying. Hair floated around your face, wind rushed between your fingers no, the fall was the best part. Pure, unadulterated freedom
Yes, what would kill her was not her descent to the pavement.
That would be the men with guns at the foot of the Willis Building.
She took a drag off of her last cigarette and exhaled the smoke with the filter still squeezed between her teeth, and her eyes took in the glowing city one more time. Twinkling lights, tall metallic towers, skyscraper apartments and not a single star in the sky, as far as the eye could see. In a pinch, shed call it desolately beautiful; and she smiled down at the captive audience below. Coppers, FBI, civilians, SWAT all mingling, gathered on the black and yellow asphalt veins of the dirty city.
Slim fingertips graced her lips as she pulled the cig away, a final cancer cloud dissipating in the thin air as it swirled in the upper atmosphere, and she grinned at the hover cops as they neared. The giant whirlybirds descended to eye level, the wind whipped by its engines tossing her coat to and fro with her long, long brown hair. The side door of the machine opened and men in black combat armor lined up their little red dots on her forehead, the laser heat making her skin tingle as her lips curled up.
Relaxed even as her end drew near, she tossed the tobacco aside, the dull red ember dying in the cold, and she put her hands in her pockets as they drew nearer. Her mind wandered to a few days before, when the entire mess had started. But
Wait a minute. She stared at the SWAT officers in the copter and drew a finger across her throat, brow furrowing in confusion, and they dropped their weapons in a group groan. Come on, this is going to be the third friggen time youve forgotten your lines! Were on a petrol budget, here! Audible groans of annoyance came from the audience below and Alice just sighed, pulling her PDA out of her pocket and reading the prompts on it. This company was starting to get annoying; marijuana had been legal for nearly thirty years now but they had the most stupid and elaborate commercials for it. The entirety of the last five hours had been repeatedly trying to finish this one commercial, the first in a new line for some new film that was using their product, oh my.
The lines are just really stupid. Alice looked around and over her shoulder behind the fence, at thin wires attached to the harness under her clothes. Also, where the hell is the police chief? Hes supposed to come up here first before you guys do and Ive already forgotten what take were at. She shoved the device back in her pocket and grumbled in irritation as the director called it for the day from inside the copter, the techs on the roof coming over to undo her wires and pull her back to safety. A gofer handed her a hot cup full of coffee, half-cream with extra vanilla, and she walked over to the rooftop access door as she drank it slowly. The heat warmed her cold bones and she smiled at the man in the raincoat that began to walk alongside her. Jak, relax. You know this is just a dumb ad for Mary Jane Cigs, for my movie. He scowled at her over his scarf and stared straight ahead at the metal door. Dont give me that look, I know you didnt sleep last night and Im sorry youre going on day three as it is. She sipped more of her caffeine down gladly and turned her head as she looked over her shoulder, seeing the director berating his producer and she couldnt help but cringe at the sight. The married couple fought like, well, a married couple; Jon couldnt get things sorted right with the acting crew and Miriam couldnt get his grips on the job properly.
The bodyguard next to her made another noise, this one more inquisitive, and she just shrugged and offered her coffee, a daily routine; he declined with a hand against the mug and she simply nodded, as she did every day, and finished her drink before tossing it into one of hundreds of waste bins across the large rooftop. Fences blocked off different areas of the top of the building at least, they had, before theyd rented the top off. Each little area had its own purpose makeup, costume, more makeup, rehearsal spot, catering, a few trailers for naps, and For some reason, there was a dancing pole. There was a gag about a pole somewhere in the new movie she had yet to read that far into the script yet, as she liked surprises so random actors were posing with it for the Bonus Features easter eggs. She found it ridiculous, and so far had avoided it like the plague.
Jakyll put a narrow hand on her shoulder and she looked up at him again with a frown. No, Im not hungry, I just want to take a short break. Its friggin cold up here, Jak, she whined, without quite sounding whiny, just irritated. Youd think global warmingd fixed that by now! His bright blue eyes just threw a chuckle at her as they twinkled, a rare smile reaching his eyes, and he kept his hand on her shoulder. His hackles were up, she noticed; he was tenser than usual, quieter than normal. The man was paranoia at its best, but this was out of sorts and she was starting to worry. But she quickly cast these cares away; it wasnt her job or place to concern herself with his business which was protecting her from said problems to begin with.
Across the roof, shouting bounced off the ill-constructed shanties, and they only spared a short glance back. The married couple had cracked open the celebratory champagne, for reasons unknown. The two men were quite the lush ones, always drunk if they could help it and it was only proper at this point to feel embarrassed for them.
Motion caught her eye, and a grin leapt to her lips as she saw the door open. Finally, the ass-hole decided to show! Marty, come on, youve taken all-
Her eyes widened as the door slammed open under the dead weight of a corpse, the body slamming to the concrete roof and brain matter splattering across the roof from the force of the impact. A hole in the head was his cause of death, and the citys police chief lay prone, cold, gray.
A shrill scream rent the air not her own, but that of the production team around her.
A flurry of motion occurred and the only thing that felt solid was Jakyll tackling her to the ground to keep her safe from the mass trampling that nearly occurred. She buried her face in his coat, trembling in abject shock, and as silence fell, he grunted. Im fine, she whispered, voice small. He stood and helped her to her feet, wrapping an arm around her to pull her close and safe. The masked man glanced around, pulling a handgun from inside his coat, and he ushered her over to one of the air-conditioner vents and gestured for her to sit. Jakyll didnt speak didnt need to. She understood perfectly that he wanted her to hide and stay down while he looked for the killer. Hired mercs were good at the whole talk without talking thing.
Well, he was, anyway.
Alice hunkered down with her arms over her head, trembling minutely as she watched him check behind and under the various props and scenery around the rooftop before scanning over the other roofs. He nodded curtly and returned to her spot, bringing her back to her feet and pulling her quickly past the dead body. No words were exchanged as they descended the stairs until they found an elevator, and as they waited for it to ascend to their floor, Alice began to wretch and covered her mouth, skin turning ashen and clammy as her body shook and her stomach heaved. He kept his arm around her even as she vomited up what shed eaten at breakfast and the coffee too, and kept calm as the elevator open and he walked her inside. She simply leaned against him, trembling and weak, and he put a hand on her forehead. No, not sick, just in shock. Shed be fine. He rolled his eyes a bit and picked her up, pulling her over his shoulder as she swooned, and pressed the lobby button.
I stare at the girl in the mirror: T-shirt, torn up jeans, no beauty queen.
But the way that you see me, you get underneath me, and all my defenses just fall away, fall away.
I am beautiful with you, even in the darkest part of me. I am beautiful with you;
Make it feel the way it's supposed to be!
The slow descent gave him time to think about his errands for the day, idly ticking them off. Take Miss Alice to the conference for Epic of the Ninja later; the movie had been a hit and panels were clamoring to have her on it. Then meet with his sister for lunch at the bistro. Take Miss Alice home. Guard the house. Short nap at breakfast while his temp covers his nap.
The elevator dinged at last and he strode off it, smoothly resting his ward on a chair and arranging her so shed be comfortable, and he knelt at her side, patting one of her hands warmly and watching her unconscious face rather tiredly. Assassination attempts and threats aside, this was routine for them by now. Theyd lost more police chiefs on this one commercial series than any other project shed agreed to star in and it was starting to take its toll on her delicate sensitivities. The blond man looked up at the director as he walked over and when the barrage of questions began Did you do it, did he set her off somehow, why do you always have to be around, et cetera he just shrugged them off and continued gently prodding his ward back into the waking world with carefully light nudges on her face. Her eyes fluttered open and she whimpered, trembling and curling into the chairs raised back, and he rubbed her spine through her trench coat, glaring at the director. The man backed off at last, leaving the two alone.
Jakyll? Another grunt of acknowledgement. Can you please just take me straight home today? I dont want to go to the convention. Im too scared. A nod. Thank you. She curled up again, hands over her ears as she tried to drown out the noise. He sighed through the mask covering the lower half of his face and turned blue eyes to the rest of the room. Panic everywhere, police scouring the lobby and interrogating random patrons. Security was already elevating around the city, the color red shining from every visible monitor in the room, and personnel were already heading into the security office of the building to investigate.
This was getting too tense for his liking and he fixed his scarf, the white paper mask shifting with it, before rising and pulling her to her feet, leading her over to the security desk and gesturing to where her coat was hung up on the rack. The young rookies hands shook as he grabbed the Kevlar-lined garment; this was his first time in the rodeo, and all Jakyll could really do was leave a generous tip of a fifty dollar bill on the table as they walked away.
Outside, Chicago was chaos as always, perhaps more so than usual as a result of Martys murder. Jakyll guided his ward through the crowded streets, traffic at a standstill even as rush hour peaked, and he eyed each cab as they walked past. Not a single one was void of passengers; theyd have to walk home. With a grimace, he pulled Alicia onto the sidewalk as cars began to creep along.
Jak? The tiny voice made him stop and he looked down at her as she lifted her face to look at him in turn; her face was still pale and her skin remained clammy. Can we stop to eat somewhere, first? He furrowed his brow, thinking to deny it and insist on cooking when they arrived safely at her apartments, but an added Please? was plaintive enough to make him concede. His watchful eyes picked out the fast-food stops as they walked, but none were tickling her fancy. Granted, her stomach simply growled because it had been so abruptly voided, and shed eat anything at this point, but he wanted her to eat something of substance instead of the gruel-like oatmeal shed become accustomed to since her schedule had begun to implode.
Some back-alley Chinese restaurant seemed to appeal to her bellys grumbling. Jakyll found himself presented with a pair of odd drinks. Through the servers thick accents, he understood them to be bubble tea, and that the odd, clear orbs were tapioca balls. Alicia had removed the lid from her cup and was stabbing the pearls with her straw, eating them calmly as she sipped from the rim of the transparent cup. M-m-mmm, mango tea. Try it, Jak, its good! She smiled at him and he stared at her instead of his drink. Look, youre not the ugliest mug in the city, just take a sip.
no. Im fine. He gently pushed his drink away and folded his hands on the table, the linoleum and his gloves squeaking as they rubbed together.
No, you are not, she muttered, being a bit violent with her tea as she stabbed her straw through the next tapioca pearl and shoved it between her teeth with much gusto. This was the Alicia he was used to; rather bossy, but trying to be polite about it and being upset when it didnt get her the response she wanted. He smiled a bit to himself, minutely shaking his head, and he looked up at the waiter when they returned.
Spiciest dish youve got for me, and she wants wantons with chicken and that fried noodle dish I know youve got back there. The waiter eyed him in annoyance and wrote it all down before walking away with an agitated twitch to his step. Ah, well; Jakyll wasnt one to be polite to the help.
As Alicia ate, color returned to her cheeks and she didnt look half so peaky. His own food sat in a brown paper bag, neatly contained in recyclable packaging with its own set of cheap paper-wrapped chopsticks and cellophane-enclosed fortune cookie. Alicia cracked hers open after she paid the tab and she read it aloud as they walked down the sidewalk, Dont get so cocky; its only just begun.
Ominous. Jakyll carried his takeout tucked under his arm, his other hand lightly wrapped around her waist to keep her close. She didnt mind the contact, had said once it made her feel less vulnerable and exposed, and in any case, she appreciated his furnace-like body heat. How he didnt sweat to death under all those layers was incomprehensible.
It was time to go home, and she just wanted a god-be-da.mned nap.
I stare at the girl in the mirror: T-shirt, torn up jeans, no beauty queen.
But the way that you see me, you get underneath me, and all my defenses just fall away, fall away.
I am beautiful with you, even in the darkest part of me. I am beautiful with you;
Make it feel the way it's supposed to be!
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Hybrid Mode
|Similar Threads
|Thread Starter
|Last Post
|Wolf's Song Challenges - Rated G to PG-13
|Teachers Corner


text:
Meaning, why is it the exact number that it is? Why not 2x10^8 m/s instead of 3? Does it have something to do with the mass, size or behavior of a photon? To be clear, I'm not asking "how we determined the speed of light". I know there isn't a clear answer, I'm really looking for the prevailing theories.
Tom, would you have asked the question "why is the speed of light 1 ls/s" if we happened to measure distance in lightseconds and time in seconds?
The true answer to your question is: the speed of light is 1 if you measure distance and duration in compatible units, and it is whatever your system of units defines it to be if you adopt units that are more cumbersome. Another way of explaining is that speed - loosely speaking - corresponds to an angle in spacetime. And angles are dimensionless.
I know, this is not seen as a satisfactory answer. But that is because you ask the wrong question. The right question is "why is everything around us so slow? Why are the speeds we typically encounter for material objects around 10^-8 level?"
The particular value of $c$ depends on how long a meter is and how long one second is. If meters were longer, for example, the speed of light would be a smaller number, even though light would still be as fast. Viewed this way, physical measurements are ratios. In this case, it's a ratio of the speed of light to a rather arbitrary speed - one meter per second.
One meter per second is roughly a walking speed. So your question might be interpreted as, "Why is the speed of light three hundred million times faster than a walking speed?"
This question is very anthropocentric. It is a question about how large we are (how many atoms are in our bodies), how much power our muscles can exert (the energy involved in chemical reactions), and how strong our bones and ligaments are (the strength of materials).
Since we would like to stick to physics, it will be more insightful to look at the speed of light as a ratio of something else. We should look for some other speed set by nature, rather than a human-based speed, and compare the speed of light to that.
A typical candidate is to take Planck's constant $\hbar$ and the unit of electric charge $e$. These can be combined to create a velocity $e^2/\hbar = 2.2*10^6 m/s$. (In some systems of units, you need to include other "constants" like the permittivity of free space to convert the units.)
This is, roughly speaking, the speed of an electron in an atom. An electron's energy is characterized by $E \approx e^2/r$, with $r$ the size of the orbit. Its angular momentum comes in units of $\hbar$, so $L \approx \hbar \approx mvr$. The virial theorem lets us write the energy as $E \approx mv^2$. Using these facts, we can look for a way to estimate the velocity. $v = mv^2/mv \approx E/(L/r) \approx (e^2/r)/(L/r) = e^2/L = e^2/\hbar$.
This "typical electron speed" is about $\frac{1}{140} c$. As a ratio, $e^2/\hbar c \approx \frac{1}{140}$. This is called the fine structure constant. It's very useful to know, because it's a number that describes the innate strength of the electromagnetic force.
Your original question becomes "why is the fine structure constant $\frac{1}{140}$?", or "Why is the speed of light $140$ when measured in fundamental units from quantum mechanics and electromagnetism?" Aside from a hokey invocation of the anthropic principle, I don't think there's an answer to this question, at least not yet. A physical "theory of everything" might hope to derive the fine structure constant from some more basic idea, but this has not yet been achieved, and it is unknown whether it ever will be.
the speed of light was created by Nature to be one, the number whose multiplication influences nothing. But the primitive people who lived in spacetime and moved by speeds much smaller than $c=1$ - along small angles in the spacetime - were not able to see that their speeds were particular fractions of the maximum speed. The mankind remained that primitive until 1905 when Albert Einstein changed the story (with some marketing help by Hermann Minkowski in 1908).
So even though space and time are fundamentally the same quantity measured in different directions, the people chose different units for length and duration. Some particular people chose $1/24/3600$ of the solar day because the powers of $60$ and $12$ etc. were quite popular - a lot of random messy history of mathematical conventions. They called the units one second.
Other people chose one meter as $1/40,000,000$ of the circumference of a meridian.
In those randomly chosen units of distance and time - which were refined, to be more accurate, to the number of periods of various types of radiation - the speed of light $c=1$ could have been written as $299,792,458$ m/s. At least, the measurements became accurate enough so that the definition of one meter was changed in the 1980s to keep the speed of light in these units at least constant. So the speed I wrote is now actually exact, by definition.
Adult physicists who work with relativistic theories use units where $c=1$. Similarly, adult quantum physicists use units with $\hbar=1$, $k_B=1$, and sometimes $G=1$ when they study general relativity (or quantum gravity).
To summarize: the numerical size of the universal constants has nothing to do with fundamental physics - it is all about human conventions (the units).
Best wishes Luboš
Well, currently the speed of light is defined to be an exact number, with the second determined in terms of the electron transition times of cesium, and $c$ meters defined to be $c \times \left(1\, s\right)$. So, the trite answer for this is that we defined it to be so.
I would think that the more careful answer would be that chemistry happens at very low energies compared to typical relativistic energies. Since the energies are low, this means that the fundamental time scales of everyday life are much longer (in relativistic terms) than the fundamental length scales. $c$ tells you how to convert from one to the other.
The speed of light ("$c$") is really a conversion factor that converts space distances into time durations. It is part of the geometry of space-time and in particular it is used to calculate the invariant infinitesimal proper time, which in Minkowski flat space-time, is given by this formula:
$d\tau^2 = dt^2 - ( dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2 )/c^2$
For any particle or object with a non-zero rest mass, the proper time is an invariant that all observers will agree on and this value will agree with the time recorded by a clock carried by the massive particle or object. So this is the real meaning of the constant "$c$" - it is a conversion factor between space and time in the 4 dimensional space-time geometry.
Now according to Special Relativity, a massless particle must always have 0 proper time ($d\tau^2 = 0$) which means:
$dt^2 = ( dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2 )/c^2$
and therefore
$c = \sqrt{ (dx/dt)^2 + (dy/dt)^2 + (dz/dt)^2 }$
which means that massless particles must always travel at speed "$c$". So "$c$" is really the speed of massless particles. The most obvious and well known massless particle is the photon - the quantum of the electromagnetic field. That is why "$c$" is the speed of light.
Theoretically gravitons would also be massless so they would also travel at speed "$c$". For a long time neutrinos were thought to be massless so they would have also traveled at speed "$c$" but now it is known that at least 2 and probably all 3 types of neutrinos have a very small but non-zero mass and therefore the non-zero mass neutrinos would have to travel at less than "$c$".
Thus the speed of light really happens to be the speed of all massless particles and it really is a conversion factor between space and time.
A lot of the answers here seem to miss the thrust of the question, which is (I think), why do photons travel at the speed of light c, as opposed to some other speed. That is, given a definition of a meter as "a stick that is this long", why does light take the particular amount of time to cross that distance that it does.
The answer is that there is a set speed that any massless particle travels at, such as a photon, and that speed, c, is a fundamental property of our universe. Any time a physicist says something is fundamental, it means (s)he doesn't know why, it just is.
To be fair, you can explain why c is significant by appealing to relativity, the way we measure how time flows, the definition of the units we use when measuring it, etc. But, at the most basic level, c is a given, something we plug into equations, not something we get out of them. It is a property of light (and any massless particle), but it is one we have to observe the universe in order to find.
As a side note, the experiments used to determine the speed of light aren't especially unclear. There are several. Which one gave the first accurate answer is, perhaps, in some dispute, but the making of the measurement isn't a point of contention.
Ultimately, the answer is that we don't know. And, at the same time, we don't know if we can ever know why it is this way.
We've measured $c$ with respect to a unit system that we humans have devised1, but we do not know if there is any reason for it to take that particular value; it simply is what it is.
c is just a fundamental property of our universe, the maximal speed of information propagation; yet it was defined to be exactly 299792458m/s to define a meter.
The speed of light is not arbitrary. You can calculate the speed of propagation of small perturbations using Maxwell's equations, which gives $c=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\mu_0 \epsilon_0}}$. Thus when these to constants are fixed, so is the speed of light.
The speed of light is just a conversion factor from one coordinate direction to another. The proper unit is "one," or $1.0ly/y$ and so forth. Now it has this funny set of units in cgs and so forth. However, if you were to argue the speed of light could be different in these units then the Planck units, such as $\ell~=~\sqrt{G\hbar/c^3}$ would all rescale accordingly and as a result so would our rods and clocks. This would make the rescaling completely unobservable.
Why $c~=~ 299,792,458m/s$ has to do with other constants of nature, such as the mass of the proton and so forth. We measure the speed of light according to physical objects and it has this large value due to the physical dimensions of rods, which depends on the Bohr radius which in turn depends on mass of electrons and so forth. The speed of light is so large, in part because gravity is very weak, and this really has to do with the fact elementary particles have little mass in comparison to the Planck mass. If this huge disparity did not exist the natural unit for the speed of light is one Planck length per Planck time, which is just a unity.
The speed of light is a property of spacetime, which has a Minkowski metric, which means it has a Null Space, which marries space and time into Velocity, which is invariant. One might have a look at David Hestenes "Space Time Algebra" and various of his papers, or visit a site on Geometric Algebra (ie, Clifford Algebra ). The geometry of spacetime is impervious to units of measurement - whatever floats your boat. One prof used furlongs per fortnight.
Actually the speed of light can be different in different media, for example, it is higher than $c$ in Casimir vacuum and smaller than $c$ in a solid medium.
It seems the actual question here is why the speed of light in flat vacuum is the highest speed at which information can be transferred.
This comes from the Special Theory of Relativity where it was shown that if there was FTL information transfer, a casualty paradox would appear. This is because $c$ is used in Lorentz transforms.
And now naturally emerges a further question, why exactly the Special Theory of Relativity uses $c$ in its Lorentz transforms rather than any other speed. This is due to the idea that all inertial frames should be indistinguishable: the speeds of all processes, either electromagnetic, mechanical or gravitational should change similarly when changing a reference frame. If electric processes changes one way and say gravitational another way, we could determine whether we are in a moving or stationary frame.
It follows that all fundamental interactions should propagate at the same speed for this criterion to be met.
So actually if there somewhere exists a medium where speed of light is higher or smaller than c, then in such medium it is possible to determine whether the given frame is absolutely moving or stationary relative to the medium. Such medium does not have the main propertiy of our vacuum, which distinguishes it from Ether: that there is no difference between moving(without acceleration) in it and being in rest.
As Kyle Kanos said in his answer, we just know it is there. It is calculated theoretically, and coupled with experimental evidence, we just accept that the speed of light is $c=3x 10^8 \frac {m}{s}$.
You see, we always expect everything to be as we like it. We want to have control over all around us, even nature. Our inherent conception is that we occupy a central, priveleged position in everything we do, from relationships to businesses to our understanding of the universe. The reality is that we are anything but priveleged. Science has repeatedly shattered this misconception of ours, but we still hang on to the ego. I suggest you watch Carl Sagan's famous speech The Pale Blue Dot which puts accross this message so powerfully.
In such a case, I think it is extremely unfair to expect the speed of light have a value that appeals to us, other than $c$, the universal speed limit. In your case, the question is not about why the speed of light has that particular value, but why we think it is not supposed to be so.
There is a unique numeric value of c in whatever units (eg: m/sec , or miles/hour, or furlongs/fortnight) you are using that correctly converts velocity to $ \phi $ radians for doing boosts with the Lorentz Group where $\phi $ is called the Lorentz Boost parameter. $$ v/c=tanh(\phi) $$ The number of radians for a particular boost is not random because boosts do not commute. For $ \phi << 1 $ the following is true: $$ [xBoost(\phi) , yBoost(\phi)] = zRotation(\phi ^2) $$ If you do not use the correct value of c to convert your boost velocity v to $ \phi $ radians, then you will not calculate correctly the $ \phi ^2 $ radians of rotation that is experimentally seen. As long as Boosts are elements of the Lorentz Group, there is a unique numeric value of c for each choice of units. The value of c is not different in another universe, it is not set by God, nor can it be randomly set by Congress.
In some sense c is an artifact of how we measure the thing called velocity using sticks and ticks. If long go we were able to perceive velocity directly in $ \phi $ radians, for example by seeing a fractional length or time contraction which $ =cosh(\phi) $, then we would never talk about v or c.
Suppose that there is a SuperEarth with a city called SuperParis. In this city, the inhabitants keep an iron rod with two marks on it. This distance is called a supermeter, it's the basic unit of length on superearth.
If by pure chance these people use the same unit of time as humans and if by pure chance 1 supermeter would be 299792458m here on earth - then what is the speed of light for the superpeople?
We measure relations between objects that belong to our local environment. Our rulers are based on atomic properties.
c is a property of space or, as said above, is a property of the universe, not of the light, because I share the viewpoint of Israel Perez that matter and space are different expressions of the same entity, following Spinoza (Ethics).
c is a relation, a ratio, between length and time intervals. If you check the definitions on time and length units it becomes clear that they are not independently defined, one is defined with help of the other. Then one must conclude that c is really a fundamental property that express how perturbations can evolve within space.
Similar behaviour is watched in the waves in a lake. It is a property of the medium (vacuum, field, aether,space,...many names)
This explains why light propagates always in the same way regardless of the motion of the source or the receiver.
About the value of the measure of c:
I think that we can only measure the two-way speed of light, not the one-way (as Poincaré). We only measure the ratio (L/T) and this is an absolute constant.
Assume that in this world (or in the distant past) the atoms have the double of the size of our local atoms, then the relation L/T has to be the same, and physical laws keep invariant, (the electrons will take a longer time, compared to our local time, to evolve around the proton and the emmited light will be redened :-)
We do not make any 'absolute' measure on lenghts or time durations. Fundamentally we can not do it in another way.
You can prove from Maxwell's equations that the speed of light is: $c=\sqrt{\frac{1}{\epsilon_0\mu_0}}$. Where $ϵ_0$ (vacuum permittivity) and $μ_0$ (vacuum permeability) are both constant.
If you want to fully understand how this equation works, I recommend you to read this proof: Maxwell's equations predict that the speed of light is constant.


text:
I have been using Javassist to dynamically manipulate classes as they are loaded. While adding code to a method is relatively easy using Javassist, I have not been able to find a way to remove code.
At this time I am simulating the removal of the code by using nop instructions to replace the targeted opcodes and any parameters. However, I consider this to be mostly a hack:
Each opcode has to be treated separately, since the byte length of the parameters differs. In some cases I also need to choose between nop and pop, depending on whether the removed opcode affects the stack or not. This kind of manipulation is starting to get tedious - and the code that does it is becoming accordingly convoluted. So, naturally, I am hoping for an existing solution.
The final result is filled with nop instructions. While the JVM should optimize those out with no performance impact, the resulting bytecode is still quite inelegant and bigger than it should be. This is more of an issue of aesthetics, but it is still something to consider.
Unfortunately, merely shifting parts of the bytecode array to close the gap is not enough - any references to the moved code (e.g. branch instruction indexes) should be updated as well.
Is it possible to remove instructions using Javassist? Alternatively, is there a bytecode manipulation library that would allow me to do that easily, without having to essentially parse the bytecode myself?


text:
I am trying to adjust the size of a background static
UIImageView (from
Nib file) for
iPhone5 users. Unfortunately, the following code does not seem to make any difference on the background view's size.
Does anyone know why? Thanks in advance for any help you can provide.
- (void)viewDidLoad
[super viewDidLoad];
// Do any additional setup after loading the view, typically from a nib.
AppDelegate *appDelegate = [[UIApplication sharedApplication] delegate];
device = appDelegate.deviceType;
NSLog(@"The device platform is: %@", device);
if ([[device substringToIndex:8] caseInsensitiveCompare: @"iPhone 5"] == NSOrderedSame) {
[background sizeThatFits:CGSizeMake(320, 504)];
else {
[background sizeThatFits:CGSizeMake(320, 416)];
//Note: 'background' is declared in `ViewController.h` as, `IBOutlet` `UIImageView` *background, and is linked to the image view in ViewController_iPhone.xib


text:
Bruin Guide
The Bruin Guide is available in online magazine form. Readers can review it page by page or use the links in the Table of Contents to navigate to a specific page.
A version of the Bruin Guide that is accessible using a screen reader can be found here.


text:
This publication provides easy access to the most frequently sought after Florida plant, garden and landscape information. There are features on landscaping and landscape design along with various aspects of Florida ecology and natural habitats. The content is edited for its usefulness to teachers, students, commercial property and homeowners, nursery growers, lawn men and people everywhere with an interest in plants. Thousands of articles, posts, horticultural fact sheets, landscape plans and images are provided. The Online Bookstore specializes in Southern and Florida gardening and numerous Florida books both fact and fiction. The Garden Store compiles design resources for better outdoor living. The content is family safe and there are no google ads or annoying advertisements on this website. Enjoy and don't forget to plant a plant today!
Leigh Fulghum
Florida Garden Finder
Links to some Landscape Plans
Fruit and Other Delights for Shipping
Garden Plants for Florida Gardens
Send a Fabulous Plant Today!
The Decor You're Looking For
|Everyone loves Fresh Flowers
Leigh finds the best of the internet florists for you to browse in this convenient online flowershop. Order florist arrangements and bouquets or order direct from growers for absolute freshness. Have a luau or do your own wedding flowers with sumptuous orchids and tropicals flown to you direct from Hawaii.
Explore the Bookstore
Free Images of Florida Plants and Florida
|Feeling hot and frazzled?
Consider an Indoor Fountain
|Flowers Delivered
|http://500fastcash.coAdvance cash loans online - apply for easy and quick personal loan.
Created by Leigh Fulghum with Certain Natural History Illustrations by Cathie Katz. Copyright 1997-2012
E-mail: email@example.com
Other original websites by Leigh Fulghum: Karisma Day Spa | China-A Restaurant | Jesse Durko's Nursery | MEDICOLASER | Enterprise Staffing Services | Maynard's on the Bay | Kerrifoxkincare | Kerrifoxnails | Atlanta Picnic Caterers


text:
Evercolor Shadow Stick
Gorgeous, versatile color that locks on and lasts until you take it off.
Evercolor Shadow Stick is the perfect solution for a quick, long-wearing eye that looks incredible all day. The Shadow Stick is your primer, shadow base, and eye shadow all in one. You can also use it as an eyeliner. It won't come off until you take it off! You can use it to line and define or create a quick smokey eye. The creamy texture helps to smooth out fine lines. Once your beautiful eye look is complete you can be sure it will stay fresh all day long!
Stroke the Evercolor Shadow Stick across the eye, smudging quickly if a softer look is desired.
Take the line just beyond the natural end of the lid to widen your eyes.
Lightly line across the top or bottom lash line to achieve that great soft, smudged liner look.
Evercolor Shadow Stick Ingredients: Cyclopentasiloxane, Mica, Trimethylsiloxysilicate, Synthetic Fluorphlogopite, Iron Oxides (CI 77491, CI 77492, CI 77499), Polyethylene, Lauroyl Lysine, Ozokerite, Titanium Dioxide, Octyldodecanol, Synthetic Beeswax
May Contain: Lecithin, Tocopheryl, Ascorbyl Palmitate, Citric Acid


text:
Jan. 15, 2013 -- Eating less sugar is linked with weight loss, and eating more is linked with weight gain, according to a new review of published studies.
The review lends support to the idea that advising people to limit the sugar in their diets may help lessen excess weight and obesity, the New Zealand researchers conclude.
"The really interesting finding is that increasing and decreasing sugar had virtually identical results [on weight], in the opposite direction of course," says researcher Jim Mann, DM, PhD, professor of human nutrition and medicine at the University of Otago.
Mann and his team analyzed the results of 30 clinical trials and 38 other studies. Their goal was to summarize the evidence on the link between dietary sugars and body weight in adults and children.
For years, some experts have linked excess sugar in the diet, including both sugary foods and drinks, to obesity and a higher risk of chronic disease, including heart disease and diabetes.
However, those studies have produced conflicting findings.
The new review is published in BMJ.
Sugar & Weight: The Studies
Since 2003, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended that intake of "free" sugars be limited to 10% of calories daily. The WHO is in the process of updating that recommendation, and it commissioned the review of this research to help that process.
Free sugars are defined as sugars added to foods by the manufacturer, cook, or consumer, or those naturally present in fruit juice, syrups, and honey.
In some of the studies evaluated, adults were told to lower their sugar intake.
Those who did lowered their weight slightly, Mann says. Over the course of the studies, which lasted for up to eight months, the average weight loss was about 1.7 pounds.
Adults who increased their sugar intake over the same average time period increased their weight nearly the same amount.
Over time, Mann says, that decrease (and increase) could be more. "There is also evidence that the longer the study, the more striking the effect," he says.
The link between sugar intake and weight was less consistent in studies of children, Mann found. He says that is mainly due to the kids not following the diet advice.
When they looked only at sugary beverages, however, the link between a sugary beverage habit and being overweight in children was strong.
Those who had the highest intake after a year were about 1.5 times as likely to be overweight or obese as those with the lowest intake, Mann found.


text:
17 December 2013
Eynsford's the Castle Hotel has re-opened after a 14 week long, £90,000 joint refurbishment by new licensees Sharon and Gordon Thompson and brewer Shepherd Neame. A family business, husband and wife Sharon and Gordon and their four children are all involved in the day-to-day running and bring a wealth of experience in pubs and restaurants to the venture. The couple were previously licensees of an
Read more
10 December 2013
A Shoreditch pub, the Prince Arthur, Brunswick Place has reopened after undergoing a complete refurbishment. New licensee Euan Johnstone and Kent brewer Shepherd Neame have jointly invested £100,000 to completely modernise the pub, while maintaining the eclectic aesthetic of a classic, real ale country pub. The upstairs living accommodation has been transformed into a function room accommodating
03 December 2013
A local couple with experience working in the casino business have taken on Bexleyheath pub the Prince Albert on the Broadway. Husband and wife Barrie and Claire Houghton have re-opened the pub after a £100,000 refurbishment by brewers Shepherd Neame.
02 December 2013
Shepherd Neame is to spend £1.4 million redeveloping a hotel at one of the most picturesque spots on the Kent coast, regularly used as a film location. The Fayreness Hotel, overlooking Botany Bay at Kingsgate near Broadstairs, will be renamed the Botany Bay Hotel, remodelled to make the most of its spectacular views and stylishly refurbished with a family-friendly coastal feel. Work started in the
28 November 2013
Shepherd Neame's Visitor Centre has received a silver award in the Small Visitor Attraction Category of the Beautiful South Excellence Awards 2013-2014. The award is the latest in a string of accolades for the attraction which received gold accreditation from the Green Tourism Business Scheme earlier this year and picked up silver at last year's Beautiful South Awards.
Contact us by email
Contact us by phone
Shepherd Neame LimitedThe Faversham Brewery17 Court StreetFavershamKent. ME13 7AXUnited Kingdom
Shepherd Neame is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority for consumer credit regulated activities.


text: Let me try again with an actual subject line: Two questions: 1. Swish-e 2.2.3 was installed on a website that I am now responsible for. The results page returns only title and URL. I would like to include returning the meta description, or the first 25 words of the file, or some other indicator as to the contents of the file. Is this possible? Where is it documented? 2. It looks like swish-e was set up to index everything in .htdocs. BUT, there is some significant information that is not being indexed, and I don't see anything stopping that from happening. Because these are special printer-friendly pages, it is possible that there is no web link to the file. On the other hand, if I am indexing from the filesystem, that shouldn't be the issue. On the other hand, the folders tha I want indexed have names beginning with "_". I do not that files beginning with a dot are not indexed. Would an underscore fit into a "do not index" category? Is there a way around this? Thanks, ari Ari Davidow firstname.lastname@example.com on Tue Dec 6 12:09:03 2005


text:
1620 Bayview Ave
Toronto ON
Recently I was in Toronto for a visit. Decided to head to Hwy 61 with some friends to try their BBQ. I had heard and read some very mixed reviews about it. I wasn't sure what to expect when I got there.
The decor feels right. What I mean by that is the place feels like a BBQ joint from the South. Tucked into a storefront on Bayview Ave its got great curb appeal with flames and barn boards. The inside is even better. Lots of blues (of course) , Jazz and other music posters , comfortable seating upstairs and down with a couple of friendly bars you want to saunter up to and have a beer. They have a terrific selection of craft beers.
I spoke with the General Manager Matt and asked if I could see their pits. He was really accommodating and let me see their kitchen and their pits. They use 2 Cookshack Electric smokers in the kitchen and a HUGE custom made 2 ton Ole Hickory in the back. They use organic apple wood for all their smoking.
As I headed to sit down for lunch I asked if could try a sample platter with my friends and a few of their sauces. What happened in the next hour or so was a bit of a blur. Ribs. Lots of ribs, from their original signature side ribs (my fav) to their Dakota beef ribs ( they had a little heat to them) and then their Mississippi back ribs . Bourbon glazed pit chicken – super moist and flavorful, tender but not too tender brisket that yielded well to a snap test and had a lightly smoky flavor, Texas style sausage – that had a great snap, great texture to it and a beautiful scent of smoke plus the best onion rings I have ever had anywhere. Alongside of all this was their sauces… 61 BBQ, Dakota, Memphis, and a really unique creole sauce I could have drunk a cup full – it was so good. I didn't even capture a before picture the BBQ enticed us all so much. I think that says a lot. The aroma was captivating. The food was gorgeous to look at. Nothing was over sauced or shellacked so much that the meat didn't come through. Here's the bones:
Seriously as soon as they bottle this stuff I will buy a case or 3 Hwy 61 Creole Sauce.
The meats mentioned above were all incredibly well done. We liked it all. – The pulled pork was however not my favorite. I found it to be on the mushy end and not all that appealing. It was also lacking flavor. I like bark. I like bark on pork especially since it captures so much flavor. This certainly would not keep me from going back again.
I talked to Matt about the restaurant a bit. I asked him where they learned to BBQ – he told me that the crew had done their own thing but also had gone to learn from a couple of folks who know BBQ inside and out because it literally is in their blood…. Mike Mills yes.. that Mike Mills of 17th Street BBQ fame and his lovely daughter Amy Mills. They all had gone to the OnCue and business of BBQ course.
Matt also talked a bit about the challenges they had with bringing such a large smoker into the downtown Toronto area. The amount of challenges they had to overcome was huge. From the smokestack length to the building they had to create behind the restaurant to accommodate a hand wash station and prep table were just a couple of obstacles. They have overcame them all and made all of the health inspectors, fire departments and councils happy.
This was a really good BBQ experience. We all thoroughly enjoyed our meal. The warm hospitality, the great ambiance and the kick ass Q all led to some very happy people with full bellies who are already thinking of making a repeat visit. There are a whole lot of other things on their menu I still want to try. Kudos to the crew at HWY 61 BBQ. They make some of the best BBQ I have ever tried in Ontario. I'll be back for sure.


text:
Find My iPhone, iPad, iPod touch, or Mac
Find your missing iPhone, iPad, iPod touch, or MacIf one of your Apple devices goes missing, iCloud can help you figure out where you left it. Just sign in at iCloud.com to see your missing Mac, iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch on a map.
Check the Activation Lock Status of an iOS deviceBefore buying or selling an iOS device, check the current Activation Lock status to make sure that the device is ready for a new owner.


text:
I'd like a non-amazon answer to this quandry...
It looks like, via spot instance pricing, you could run an instance for 22 or 23 cents an hour, for as many hours as you want, because the historical charts for hours/days/months show the spot price never goes over 21 (22?) cents per hour. That's like half of the non-reserved instance cost for the same sized instance and its even less than a reserved instance would ever work out to be per hour. With no commitment.
Am I missing something, do I have a complete and total misunderstanding of the spot/bid/ask instance mechanisim? Or is this a cheap way to get an 24/7 instance while Amazon has a bunch of extra capacity?