kimmy

As with your story about bilingual dogs, or whatever it was, this is how it was reported by a number of major news sites: Sheriff Joe requires all deputies to carry AR-15s 24/7 -United Press International Joe Arpaio Requiring His Deputies To Carry AR-15s At All Times, Fight Crime Even When They're Off Duty -Huffington Post Arpaio requiring deputies to carry assault rifles 24 hours per day -even a Phoenix TV station, who you'd think would know their own sheriff well enough. I mean, the Phoenix news people that cover the guy regularly figured he was ordering his people to carry AR15s 24-7. You keep missing the point. A nutbag like Arpaio wouldn't get elected by the whole country. He wouldn't get elected in Washington or Oregon or Massachusetts or Michigan. The people that keep re-electing Joe Arpaio aren't representative of the US as a whole, but they constitute a solid majority in their own part of the country. -k

The sheriff's press release said he has ordered his deputies to carry their weapons 24/7, and the same press release said that he has spent $500,000 buying 400 AR15s for his department, but I concede that the press release does not specifically state that the weapons the deputies will carry 24/7 must be AR15s. He's not just "some crazy sheriff", he's the sheriff of one of the largest counties in America, with more citizens than many states. Over a million people voted in the sheriffs elections in Maricopa County, and he has won a solid majority in 4 straight elections, even after they've had a chance to find out that he's a kook. -k

Most of that stuff was just from the past few months. It was hardly an exhaustive list. There's crazies everywhere, but the Bible Belt is way out front. The American south has a far higher density of that sort of stupidity than the rest of the United States, because the American south has a far higher density of religious nutjobs than the rest of the United States. But yes, I do have a point. -k

Anti-gay legislation makes Russia a geopolitical threat? haha, no. Supporting Syria? America and Russia/the USSR have been picking opposing allies around the world for decades. This is nothing new. Snowden? First it was "haha, I'm not going to be scrambling the jets to go after a 29 year old hacker." Now apparently putting us on the brink of World War 3? Suuure. Say, if Luxembourg gives Snowden permanent amnesty, will Luxembourg then become America's greatest geopolitical foe? The greatest threat to America? Willard and his golfing buddies. -k

It's not always easy to tell truth from satire when we're talking about the southern states. I don't know about "proof", but I can give you an example. Without consulting Google, see if you can tell which of the following items are truth and which are satire: -Virginia candidate for governor proposes law to outlaw oral sex -North Carolina legislators propose establishment of a state religion -Rick Perry still mad that sodomy law was struck down -Arizona sheriff requires deputies to carry AR-15s at all times, even while off duty -Kentucky law says that only God can maintain the safety and security of the state. -28% of Louisiana residents blame G.W.Bush for sloppy response to Hurricane Katrina; 29% blame Obama -North Carolina law forbids the use of sea level data more recent than 1900 in formulating public policy. -Virginia candidate for lieutenant governor claims sin causes birth defects and says that God will redistribute wealth. -illegal for teachers in Tennessee to acknowledge the existence of gay people to students lower than 9th grade -Arizona sheriff mounts expedition to Hawaii to investigate Obama birth certificate fraud -Georgia lawmaker argues that women should be required to bring futile pregnancies to term because the animals in his barnyard have to. -Louisiana law requires that creationism be given "balanced treatment" in public school science classes. -Kentucky to subsidize building of Noah's Ark museum. Is it really so easy to tell which are satire? -k

While I was listening to a Matt Mays playlist on Grooveshark, I stumbled onto a song called "Sample and Hold", and was surprised to find it was a Neil Young cover. Mays had contributed it to a Neil Young tribute album called "Borrowed Tunes". "Sample and Hold" was originally on a 1982 record called "Trans" that I'd never heard of before. Apparently "Trans" went over like a turd in a punchbowl with Neil's fans, for reasons that will become quickly apparent. Initially my reaction was "WTF?" but then...strangely haunting, mesmerizing. Without further ado, Sample And Hold: -k

Is that because you're running out of ways to rephrase the same misconceptions? Because when current starts to flow in the coil, it creates a magnetic field that opposes the magnet in M2, causing a counteracting force that acts against the motion of M2. You're putting in more energy to overcome the repulsive force between the two magnets. Very simple. And if we were talking about a waterwheel, everything would wear out except for gravity. Was there a question here? So first off, Voltage is not "electrical force". I've heard voltage referred to as "potential" and "potential difference" before, but never as "potential of energy". "Potential of energy" is not a scientifically meaningful term, and it is certainly not a synonym for "potential energy". "Potential energy" can be measured in Joules. Voltage is not measured in Joules... voltage is actually measured in Joules Per Coulomb (ie, energy per amount of charge). In other words, it is not a potential energy until you have moved some amount of electrical charge in opposition to the voltage, at which point you have stored potential energy proportional to the amount of charge you've moved. Just as gravity is not potential energy until you have some amount of mass that can fall, a voltage is not Potential Energy until you have some amount of electrical charge that can move to a region of lower potential. -k

On their own, all of these words have meaning, but you have somehow managed to combine them to form a statement that is completely devoid of sense. Congratulations, I suppose. You can keep saying this, but it remains wrong. No matter how many times you say it, or how you try to rephrase it, it remains utterly false. Force is *not* energy. Calling it "a difference of potential" does not change that. Ridiculous. Relativity makes no claims at all as to the existence of or quantities of dark matter in the universe. Counter EMF is only an issue during the milliseconds where the spring is moving. After that, there is no counter EMF and the current through the wire is the same. Yes, some forces are generated by expending energy. Some forces don't. Pressure can be created using a spring or a weight, but it can also be created by burning fuel inside the combustion chamber in the engine of your Saturn Ion. Magnetic attraction can be created by a permanent magnet, but it can also be created by moving a bunch of electrons around coils of wire. Tension can be created a spring or an elastic material, but it can also be created by burning chemical fuel in your muscle fibres to cause chemical bonds to form. So far so good... The permanent magnet doesn't need energy to create the force that pulls the contact closed. However, as Peter F pointed out weeks ago, you'll notice there's no on/off switch on a permanent magnet. How are you going to close the contact? Either you bring the magnet closer to the contact, or you bring the contact closer to the magnet. Guess what? You're applying energy to the system when you do that. TADA! Mystery solved! I think what's sophomoric here is your reading ability, Pliny. I did not say that lower resistance will cause more heat to be generated. Just the opposite. Go back and reread. Indeed. And if somebody could create a wire with zero electrical resistance, then our electromagnet would also require zero energy to maintain its magnetic field. As we have already said, the electromagnet is spending energy to overcome the electrical resistance of the wire, not creating its magnetic field. Pliny! A real world wire does not have zero electrical resistance. And any wire with non-zero electrical resistance builds heat when it carries current. If a wire builds too much heat, it will melt and open the circuit. It's how a fuse works. Did they teach you anything at the Armed Forces radio repair school at all? No, I absolutely would not. We have been through that how many dozen times already in this thread??? We can store potential energy by moving objects opposite a force (compressing springs, lifting objects, pushing electrons against a voltage, etc). But a force is not, on its own, "a potential of energy". This is all true. The need for this new "revolutionary theory" was ... what was it again? Oh yes, I recall: Mr McCutcheon insists that his idea solves "anomalies" that conventional physics can't explain. But in trying to point out these anomalies, all he does is demonstrate that he doesn't actually understand the science he's attempting to debunk. A hypothesis is supposed to propose a solution to some problem. What problem is he solving here? How are we supposed to test this hypothesis? And why would I spend my time studying the ideas of a guy who has shown us quite conclusively that he doesn't know what he's talking about? Should I get fitness advice from Rush Limbaugh? Should I get typing pointers from my cat? Hey, there's some drug-addled teenagers out on the street... I think I am going to go ask for their thoughts on quantum mechanics! -k

Pliny, you are not just causing doubt about your familiarity with basic science concepts. You are now casting serious doubt about your ability to read. I did not say "putting current through a wire with zero resistance creates almost zero energy". Here is what I wrote: Notice that I said that our electromagnet "uses" and "requires" energy, and that I said nothing at all about an electromagnet "creating" energy. If you sat there and read my message and somehow came away thinking "duh yeah she said duh electromagnet creates energy huh huh" you are wrong. I am baffled as to what could possibly be going on in that space between your ears. This certainly appears hopeless, but my perseverance is undiminished. I will walk you through this once again. Let us return to the example of the Panasonic relay I mentioned in my previous message. It has a DC resistance of 360 ohms, and when we apply 12V, a current of 33.3mA flows through the relay. The relay consumes 12V*33.3mA = 400 milliJoules per second of energy, which is dissipated as heat in the copper wire. Suppose the people at Panasonic made the same relay with a wire coil made out of lead wire instead of copper. Lead has roughly 10 times as much electrical resistance as copper of equal dimensions, so the resistance of this relay with lead windings would be around 3600 ohms. So it would take 120 Volts to put a current of 33.3mA through the coil of lead wire. The strength of the magnet remains exactly the same, but it is using energy at a rate of 4 Joules per second. Now, suppose the people at Panasonic invented a material that is so conductive that they can built the exact same coil of wire and it has a resistance of 3.6 nanoOhms. (3.6*10^-9 ohms). Now, it takes only 120 picoVolts (120*10^-12 V) to push a current of 33.3mA through the coil. The magnetic field remains exactly as strong as the first two electromagnets, but now instead of 400 milliJoules per second or 4 milliJoules per second, the electromagnet now requires only 4 picoJoules per second to maintain the magnetic field. The amount of heat buildup in the wire is so small that there's no way to measure it. And if somebody somehow invented a true perfect conductor with zero resistance, then we could generate our 33.3mA current with zero volts, and the energy applied would be 0V*33.3mA = Zero joules per second, and we would still have a magnetic field just as strong as the 12V panasonic relay. And that's another demonstration of why your ideas about magnets and energy are just wrong. The formula for the strength of that electromagnet depends on the number of loops around the core, and it depends on the amount of current going through the wire. It doesn't matter what the applied voltage is; it only matters what the resulting current is. Which means that the energy we put into the coil does not relate to the strength of the magnetic field. If you're wondering why Cybercoma and the others aren't giving you serious responses, you shouldn't be. You should be wondering why I am giving you serious responses. I am kind of wondering that myself. - k

Regarding the question of whether Snowden would receive a "fair trial", I think the answer is that it's irrelevant. Prosecutors have an almost limitless ability to lay charges for computer-related crimes. A prime example would be the way in which Aaron Swartz was prosecuted. The prosecutors went out and made a list of charges and said "plead guilty and we'll go easy on you, but if don't plead guilty, we're going to put you away for 10 years." When Swartz didn't plead guilty, they went back to their office, and parsed the list of things Swartz did to find ways of laying even more charges against Swartz. "If you plead guilty, we'll go easy on you, but if you fight it we can put you away for 37 years. Changed your mind yet?" And later on they increased the threat again. "How about 50 years and a million dollars in fines. Feel like pleading guilty yet?" This ability to invent charges almost out of thin air is a result of outdated technology laws and overlap between new-fangled "hacking laws" and old-fashioned property crime laws, and overlap between property crime laws and copyright laws and intellectual property laws. The prosecutors in the Aaron Swartz case could have put him away for an arbitrarily long time. A hacker who participated in the campaign that exposed the Steubenville football team rapists will face far harsher punishment than the actual rapists themselves. And Snowden will no doubt face the same. Even if his leaks are found to be whistleblowing in the service of American liberty rather than treasonous traitorous backstabbery, they can still put him away for as long as they want on incidental charges. It would be like acquitting George Zimmerman of murder, but throwing him in jail for 50 years anyway for jaywalking and loitering and causing a disturbance. -k

I realize that Chinatown is regarded as a classic, and that what I'm about to say is sacrilege... ...but I think that clip you provided kind of sucked. The confrontation in the first part seems improbable, forced, contrived... and in the second part we see a tired old trope, the guy running his mouth while unaware that somebody is watching disapprovingly right behind him. Standing with his back directly to the door, steadfastly refusing to ignore the warnings of the guys he's talking to until he's finished embarrassing himself. I suspect that I Love Lucy and The Honeymooners had beaten that sight-gag to death long before 1973. But of course, I haven't actually seen Chinatown, so maybe I don't have adequate information to appreciate how awesome this clip actually is. A situation I think Bleeding Heart was alluding to. -k

When they're asked for concrete examples of terror plots they've foiled, they can demonstrate several relating to the foreign surveillance, but the only example specific to the metadata collection they can provide is some dude who transferred $8k to a terrorist in Somalia... which is something they didn't actually need domestic data collection to accomplish anyway. -k

I'm unsure about how to continue, to be honest. Pliny continues to have the same misunderstandings about points that have been explained and re-explained dozens of times already. I am wondering if some new method of communication could help. Something involving hand-puppets, perhaps. -k

It's clear that laws have been violated. And when people call these programs themselves illegal, I think it should be obvious that they're questioning their constitutionality. The threat is real, but it's also miniscule. The amount of money spent and the scale of these surveillance programs is completely out of proportion to the actual danger posed. As I proposed before, the "safety and security" of Americans would be helped more by installing active warnings at railroad crossings than by these massive surveillance programs. Well this much I can agree with, at least. I'd like to point out, however, that it's not just critics who try to make it either-or. The defenders of the surveillance programs are just as guilty of that, if not more so. They've used successes of the international surveillance to justify mass domestic data collection, but those two are not the same thing, and one could continue the international surveillance without the mass storage of domestic data. -k

I went to a festival when I lived in Ottawa. Some of the acts included: -Econoline Crush -GOB! -Joydrop -Swollen Members -the Black Halos and... Bif Naked! I was not much of a Bif Naked fan until I had seen her perform live. She is terrific! She was joined by L7 bass player Gail Greenwood, who I met before the show (and had no idea who she was until I saw her on stage ) Bif was not actually naked at all, though she almost ended up that way when Gail attempted to pants her during the show; Bif's punk rocker jeans were having a hard enough time staying up already. People are probably familiar with Bif already, so here is some GOB! instead: And the Black Halos... -k

hmm? Not really sure what you're getting at, August. I am not really into "organic", and I've never eaten "falafel" in my life. And I'm fully aware of the importance of diesel in transporting goods. Especially where I live, where *everything* we get is delivered by highway truck. -k

Shit, Pliny! Get it together! I don't have time to help you right now. I'll get back to this as soon as I'm able. In the meantime, I dunno, don't operate any heavy machinery or power-tools. -k

I'm guessing probably right outside a Taco Bell or KFC. HIYOOOO!!! -k

The idea that partisan politics proves the program is legal is flawed. The idea that if it was against the law, Republicans would jump onboard as a way of taking down Obama is just wrong. Tea Party demagogues have never let legality stop them from mounting outraged attacks on Obama, yet some of the biggest supporters of these surveillance programs are Tea Party demagogues. If taking down Obama was their only goal, they'd have fired up their moral outrage regardless of the highly doubtful constitutionality of this program. Obamacare is constitutional, but they howl about it 24/7/365. Support for, and opposition to, this program is something that transcends party boundaries. Members of both parties are on the intelligence committee and supporting it. Members of both parties are teaming up on legislation to shut it down. Something else that transcends party boundaries: members of congress who are supporting this program receive a shit-ton of money from defense contractors, whereas those who are fighting against it are aren't on that gravy train. -k

Since President Obama has responded to the leaks by taking steps to reform the FISA process and make the NSA accountable, he clearly thinks it was important. -k

It's my opinion, as well as many others, including Dan Ellsberg who has first-hand experience with trying to go "the legal route". Yes, he has taken a big hit to his own personal well being to do something important for United States citizens. As I said, he made a sacrifice. -k

"The legal route", "the proper channels"... hilarious. We've already discussed at length why that's a non-response. Dan Ellsberg, everybody's Model Whistleblower, scoffed at the idea that "the proper channels" were a viable option. Snowden could have leaked the information, or he could have kept his mouth shut and lived the good life. The only reason that this "open and public debate" has happened is because Snowden made it happen. The only reason that these "meaningful reforms" have happened is because Snowden made them happen. That Snowden himself is permanently exiled for creating "open and public debate" and "meaningful reforms" is unfortunate, I'm sure that he himself would agree with that much. Clearly he would have things better from a personal standpoint if he had just kept his mouth shut, but he chose not to. I think the word for this is "sacrifice". -k

The freedom to come back and spend 90 years in prison like Bradley Manning? I suspect he'll find Russia preferable. -k

Conservation of energy is a lot older than Einstein. A very small amount of energy is required to align the atoms in the piece of iron. Once they are aligned, all of the energy that we are putting into that electromagnet is being converted to heat. Didn't we already cover that? I am entirely clear on what energy means, and how the law of conservation of energy works. We're going through this exercise for your benefit, not mine. The electrical energy being put into the coil of wire is conserved as heat. It is the same amount of energy whether the coil of wire is generating a magnetic field that holds a spring closed, or whether the coil of wire is generating a magnetic field in free space that's not pulling on anything, or if the coil of wire has been unraveled and piled in a random mess that is generating no net magnetic field at all. In all 3 cases, the electrical energy we put into the wire is converted to heat. In all 3 cases, the exact same amount of heat is generated. No. Pulling the spring closed requires energy. Once it is in the closed position, it requires no further energy. If there is no electrical resistance, putting current through the wire uses almost zero energy and generates almost no heat at all. And if we could wind our electromagnet with a wire made of a superconductive material instead of copper, our electromagnet would require almost zero energy to create a magnetic field. (this is why finding a room-temperature superconductor would be such a big deal!) However, you're probably thinking of a relay wound with copper wire that might have a current-limiting resistor in-line with it to reduce the current flow so that the wire doesn't get damaged. Copper wire doesn't actually have zero resistance. Let's consider a typical commercial relay like this Panasonic 12V relay: http://pewa.panasonic.com/assets/pcsd/catalog/alz-catalog.pdf The coil has a DC resistance of 360 ohms. Is 360 ohms a lot of resistance for a coil of copper wire? Well, considering that the coil has thousands of windings and might be a hundred feet long if you unspool it, no. The resistance of long lengths of wire is actually a serious problem in many electrical applications like building wiring or power distribution. Anyway, our copper coil has DC resistance of 360 ohms, and when you apply the rated 12V input, you get a current through the wire of 12/360 = 33.3mA. The rated power of the coil is 400mW, and multiplying 12V*33.3mA gives 400mW. Bust open this little transformer, remove the spring contact, and apply 12V, and you will still measure 33.3mA going through the coil. Whaaaaa? What I have described is how an electromagnet works, how a permanent magnet works, and how the electromagnet requires a continuous flow of current to create a magnetic field while the permanent magnet does not. There is no "consumed", there's only converted. Most commonly, converted to wasted heat. The physics courses I have taken got me grounded in the basics of this subject, which helps me understand things like the difference between force and energy. As I said before, I'm doing it for the children. -k

What does it matter if you "like" Snowden? He's not running for office. -k