|
Funny - I just remembered dreaming about it tonight. They launched rockets every minute and tried again and again landing it successfully. I was watching from some remote landmass and it seemed completely reasonable that they had so many of it 
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
It seems to come down quite quickly. Doesn't give the rocket much chance to compensate for unknown variables like wind, or sea motion.
Also the rocket centre of gravity must make it naturally unstable on a barge. Must have clever latches.
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking wind too.
When I studied I was a member of the hot air balloon club at the uni.
Normally it's a completely smooth experience to go by balloon as you move with the wind.
But once we were on the country side in an area without commercial aircraft and we were allowed to go up to twelwe thousand feet, something no one in the club had ever done before.
So naturally we decided to go for it.
On the way up at about 8000 feet we went through a layer of air that shifted the wind direction 180 degrees.
The balloon tilted about 20 degrees to the side which figuratively scared the sh*t out of us, as we were entirely unprepared for it.
I immediately thought of this when I saw the rocket lose control.
BTW. There was a second time when we figuratively crapped our pants during that flight.
At eleven thousand feet the flame went out, and couldn't be lit again. To little oxygen.
We had a pretty good speed downwards when we could light the flame again, almost three thousand feet lower.
Luckily a hot air balloon has an additional function as a parachute.
|
|
|
|
|
Can be fun if all you're doing is the sightseeing flights.
But this rocket is landing on a barge at sea and the winds tend to be a bit stronger and and more unpredictable. On top of that they would need the barge to be stablized. Maybe at the speed they're dropping they should us a small parachute or small rockets at the top for stablization.
|
|
|
|
|
They've released a training pack[^] for people who want to help out.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of my settings have been unsettled.
I've had to go to the trouble of clicking about seven times!
Way too much of a pain!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps you tossed your cookies. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
The word of the day is misophonia[^].
I came upon it due to being concerned with a disturbing pattern in my behavior that seems to be getting worse. Anytime the phone rings, especially the cell phone, I feel a sense of dread, and have started uttering expletives uncontrollably! I used to be able to control it, or at least limit it to my inside voice. Now it's progressed to a 2 second pre-answer verbal assault on the unwitting caller. 
I'm pretty sure there is a correlation between the amount of time I find myself on the phone and the progression of this ill behavior...that and the fact that 9 times out of 10 someone is calling because they need something, need to commiserate, or just want to talk about themselves/nothing. At any rate, I need to get a handle on it.
So, I was wondering if others in this community also experience this, and if so, what method you may have for dealing with it. I have a feeling gin may be a common answer!
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
kmoorevs wrote: what method you may have for dealing with it.
Turn phone off
Turn ringer off if phone must be on
Don't answer phone if ringer must be on
Answer and then immediately hang up if phone must be answered
Give phone to gf if actual conversation must ensue.
That pretty much takes care of it for me.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Give phone to gf if actual conversation must ensue.
You gf isn't always here.
|
|
|
|
|
Please press 1 for English! 
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.1 new web site.
When you are dead you don't know it, it's only difficult for others.
It's the same when you're stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Just answer the phone in German!
I've been getting a lot of nuisance calls from telemarketers, so I just don't answer numbers I don't recognize.
|
|
|
|
|
Cornelius Henning wrote: Just answer the phone in German!
Do you regard German as especially scary? 
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
Well scary not... but pretty neither 
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
depende de a quién le escucha!
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
I had the impression from his earlier postings that he knows German. That's the only reason I selected German.
|
|
|
|
|
Good memory Cornelius! Actually, that German phrase is the name of an instrumental from Ritchie Blackmore/Rainbow and is the only German I know!
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
I've always had my doubts since I was wee tad and heard my parents talking, and my father saying: "but, where did he come from ?:" [^]
«To kill an error's as good a service, sometimes better than, establishing new truth or fact.» Charles Darwin in "Prospero's Precepts"
|
|
|
|
|
Nah, it's closer to 1:1, QED.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, the way statistics can manipulate reality.
On the other hand, the probably that any human exists is 100% -- after all, humans exist. It's irrelevant to ask the probably that I exist because all those humans that exist are "I's" and the ones that don't are obviously "not I." In other words, you cannot have a human exist that is not an "I" (meaning, a unique individual to which we can say "you" to.)
Silly statistics.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Silly statistics
Three statisticians go hunting together. They see a deer, and the first statistician shoots, but his shot misses by a foot to the left. Then the second statistician shoots, but his shot misses by a foot to the right. The third statistician says "Okay, we got it!"
|
|
|
|
|
Like many before him, the author is confusing pre-hoc and post-hoc statistics.
For example:
The probability of a couple having four children, all sons, is 1 in 16.
Given that they have three sons, the probability of them having a fourth is 1 in 2.
In like manner:
Given my remote ancestor, the probability of my future existence is very small.
Given that I already exist (Cogito, ergo sum), the probability of my existence is 100%.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
modified 18-Apr-15 14:37pm.
|
|
|
|
|
The original image was published on a Harvard Law blog, so one can perhaps understand the lack of statistical expertise of the blogger.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a question then:
Can you prove that randomness exist? Usually we use statistics to highlight areas that we don't truly know the cause and effect. But when you throw a dice, is it not just plain Newtonian physics at hand? So it is just the movements of your hand that is unknown, and therefor cause "random" outcomes?
Can you prove that everything isn't deterministic? But you don't know all the stuff to make the calculations work, so you use probability?
If I'm right, nothing else could have happened, and the probability that you got born is equal to 1. 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
