The question Artsutanov asked himself had the childlike brilliance of true genius. A merely clever man could never have thought of it -- or would have dismissed it instantly as absurd. If the laws of celestial mechanics make it possible for an object to stay fixed in the sky, might it not be possible to lower a cable down to the surface, and so to establish an elevator system linking earth to space?" -- Arthur C. Clarke, 1979, "The Fountains of Paradise"
It sounds like science fiction. And it was.
Now, 30 years after "2001" author Arthur C. Clarke wrote about an elevator that rises into outer space, serious research is happening all over the world in an effort to make the far-fetched-sounding idea a reality.
The benefits of a fully realized elevator would make carrying people and goods into space cheaper, easier and safer than with rocket launches, proponents say, opening up a host of possibilities.
Restaurants and hotels for space tourists. Wind turbines that provide energy by spinning 24 hours a day. A cheaper, easier and more environmentally friendly way to launch rockets.
Scientists envision all of the above -- possibly within our lifetimes.
"Space elevator-related research is valid, but there are hurdles to overcome," said David Smitherman, a space architect at NASA's George C. Marshall Space Flight Center.
Continued on Page 49
#2
Those are not shopping shoes, .5MT, those are afternoon party shoes. The young lady is on her way to a birthday party in the apartment down the hall from the elevator that doesn't want to let go.
#4
The idea is that a Space Elevator can pay for itself during development. That is, if they can figure out how to mass produce nanotube cable that is just 1cm long, it will be worth a fortune. A mass produced 1 meter long nanotube cable would be worth a fortune to the tenth power.
And a 1km long nanotube cable or ribbon would completely change the world in amazing ways.
It also branches out from there. For example, a sheet of nanotube film would be invisible, but strong enough to stop a speeding car.
A Space Elevator is great. Getting there might be even greater.
#6
I demand a space escalator with a 17,400,000 level mall at the top.
Posted by: ed ||
11/07/2009 11:40 Comments ||
Top||
#7
We are trying to figure out how to build a space elevator, while certain other countries are trying to figure out if girls should go to school. Draw your own conclusions.
This is too weird: A bird reportedly has dropped a "bit of baguette" onto the world's largest atom smasher, causing the machine to short out for a period of time.
It's just the latest mishap for the Large Hadron Collider, or LHC, which scientists plan to use to get insight into the universe's origins. The LHC, which has a 17-mile track to circulate protons and is located underground on the French-Swiss border outside Geneva, Switzerland, is the largest particle accelerator in the world and cost about $10 billion.
The LHC booted up in September 2008, but technical problems forced it to shut down shortly after its launch. When the mystery bird reportedly dropped a piece of bread onto the particle accelerator's outdoor machinery earlier this week, the device was not turned on, according to reports, and therefore did not suffer major damage.
Had the machine been activated, the baguette incident could have caused the LHC to go into shutdown mode, the UK's The Register reports. The Register quotes Dr. Mike Lamont, a worker at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (or CERN), as saying that "a bit of baguette" had been dropped on the LHC, possibly by a bird.
A call to CERN's press office was not immediately returned.
#6
Jeebus, think of the calamity that would have resulted if that bird had pooped on the collider.
Posted by: ed ||
11/07/2009 11:44 Comments ||
Top||
#7
So, this thing is so sensitive that this is enough to cause a glitch? A piece of bread... on an OUTDOOR part? How reassuring, I just hope it won't snow or something.
#8
I didn't hear exactly where the bird decided the system looked hungry, but I could give a "for-instance" possibility. To keep things cool requires a lot of external machines, and if a fan shorted in one then the cooling system for that part of a sector might eventually fail. Rather than wait for an overheating, they prefer to shut down quickly when they detect something wrong.
"Technical problems" is a cute euphemism for "explosion."
At the moment the machine is tuning up (no collisions yet) and we're testing readouts and checking timing. Even without collisions, beam halo and beam splash give you something to test your detectors with. CMS "e-commentary"
Posted by: James ||
11/07/2009 22:14 Comments ||
Top||
When was the last time your employer gave you a raise because the company had a little windfall? Don't feel bad if your memory is drawing blanks.
But economists are optimistic that such a thing could happen. In fact, many assume that wages actually might rise over time if lawmakers end up taxing the most expensive health plans offered by employers.
The tax is the leading proposal in the Senate to pay for the expansion of health insurance coverage to the roughly 46 million Americans who are uninsured. It would apply to high-cost health plans offered by employers, which typically include health, vision and dental insurance, among other health-related benefits.
The parameters of the tax may change as negotiations evolve. But the latest version would impose a 40% excise tax on plans costing more than $8,000 for individual coverage and $21,000 for family coverage. The tax would only apply to the cost of plans above the threshold amounts. Higher thresholds would apply to plans for retirees over age 55 and high-risk professions. And they would be temporarily higher in 17 states where the cost of living is expensive.
The proposal would raise an estimated $201 billion over 10 years, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT).
But it could raise a lot more beyond 10 years, since the thresholds would rise on a formula based on inflation, and health care costs increase far faster than inflation. Translation: As health care costs rise, more and more plans will exceed the threshold.
The hope, however, is that the revenue will be generated not from a lot of health plans being taxed, but because workers are getting paid more.
Here's how that could work: the specter of the tax would cause employers with plans approaching or exceeding the threshold to opt for lower-cost plans. If that happens, the employer would end up spending less to subsidize employees' health care and have more money to pay workers.
"If employers increase or decrease the amount of compensation they provide in the form of health insurance ... CBO and JCT assume that offsetting changes will occur in wages and other forms of compensation ... to hold total compensation roughly the same," Congressional Budget Office (CBO) director Douglas Elmendorf wrote in a letter to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont.
And just as with any raise, that money would be subject to income and payroll taxes.
Sound implausible? Well, there doesn't seem to be much precedent. When CNNMoney.com asked a handful of economists and tax experts to point to just one example in the past when employers passed on a windfall in savings to their workers, no one could recall a specific instance of that happening.
But they offered a few explanations that suggest it may not be so far-fetched.
The first is that unions specifically agreed to lower wages in exchange for better benefits. Presumably, if the tax works as hoped, unions will then bargain for higher wages since the value of their health benefits will have declined. The second is that while no employer feels pressure to pay more to workers today, given how high unemployment is, at some point the labor market will tighten and employers will again have to offer competitive compensation packages to attract the best talent.
Lastly, it's not impossible to believe that companies gave workers smaller raises than they might have otherwise because health costs have risen four times as fast as wages over the past decade.
Granted, that doesn't explain why the lowest wage workers haven't done better. "For those at the bottom [of the income distribution], who saw even more wage stagnation than those at the top, health cost inflation can't explain the squeeze on wages because they have health insurance coverage at much lower rates," said Elise Gould, director of health policy research of the liberal Economic Policy Institute.
Nevertheless, that doesn't mean it might not have been a factor for those higher up the income scale.
If wages do rise as a result of employers' saving money on health costs, it won't happen overnight.
And "no one's arguing it will be a dollar-for-dollar offset," said Paul Van de Water, senior fellow at the liberal Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
"Some of it will go to shareholders," said Howard Gleckman, editor of the blog Tax Vox and senior research associate at the nonpartisan Urban Institute. But, he added, "I think some of it will end up in wages."
And if it does, the revenue collected from income and payroll taxes will go up. In fact, it's assumed that increased income and payroll tax revenue will pay for much of the expansion of health insurance coverage. How much? The JCT estimates more than 80% could come from taxes on those increased wages, Van de Water said.
If the economists are wrong and wages don't rise, that could be a sign that health costs aren't falling as much as hoped. In that case, he noted, the revenue to subsidize insurance purchases would instead come from the tax being imposed on a growing number of high-cost health plans. So, workers would end up with higher health costs and no wage increase. Those are two reasons to hope the economists' theory is right.
#2
Ah, yes, economists. The same people who told us that we needed the stimulus or unemployment would go above 8%....and housing would continue to go up and up...so would the stock market...and other happy little fairy tales that didn't come true.
When their batting average comes close to that of the Psychic Friends Network, maybe I'll pay some attention to their incoherent ramblings.
The Washington Post this afternoon reported "President Obama delivers remarks on Ft. Hood shooting at end of tribal leaders conference and before he decided to make some obligatory remarks about that Fort Whatever incident in Texas, our 54th state or so, which voted against him in the presidential election and whose citizens mostly watch Fox News and therefore must be punished." The transcript begins:
SPEAKER: PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA
[*] OBAMA: Please, everybody, have a seat. Let me first of all just thank Ken and the entire Department of the Interior staff for organizing just an extraordinary conference.
I want to thank my Cabinet members and senior administration officials who participated today. I hear that Dr. Joe Medicine Crow (ph) was around, and so I want to give a shout out to that Congressional Medal of Honor winner. It's good to see you. Ah, a MoH winner. Must have taken a lot of planning, he must have been up against some stiff competition, and I'm sure he felt like he'd won the lottery when they hung that trophy around his neck. Personally, I'd have maybe used "recipient" or "bestowed" or "earned", but that's just me.
Ah, the dangers of giving shout outs without a teleprompter. Crow is not a Medal of Honor recipient. As noted by the Congressional Medal of Honor Society:
The Medal of Honor is the highest award for valor in action against an enemy force which can be bestowed upon an individual serving in the Armed Services of the United States. Generally presented to its recipient by the President of the United States of America in the name of Congress, it is often called the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Crow's name is not included on the Society's Medal of Honor recipient list. He was, however, awarded the Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor, in August.
Obama, often described as "cerebral" by the mainstream media, should know the difference between the Medal of Honor and the Medal of Freedom, especially since he personally awarded the latter to Crow. Don't expect his blunder to receive wide coverage. It's not something he can blame George Bush for. Oh, he'll find a way.
#1
An old Napoleonic method of bonding with the troops when addressing the assembled. Gives the appearance of profound memory by recognizing someone in the crowd and remembering certain aspects of their private lives and accomplishments. (Ahhh, there in the ranks...are you not Sergeant Legrand? You were with us at Gerona correct? How is it with your wife Claudie?).
Looks like someone gave Barry some inaccurate info on Dr. Crow in the pre-brief. I simply hate it when that happens.
#2
Since this man received his Medal of Freedom in August, this is a medal Barack awarded. Thus giving him a "shout out" was a way of reminding the audience that he rewards Native Americans.
P.S. It also makes not knowing the difference between the 2 medals unforgivable.
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
11/07/2009 11:29 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I'm wondering how the left / liberals would have reacted if this faux pas had been done by Bush instead of Bambi.
#1
Beneath the official multicultural smokescreen which dare not speak the name of the religion that prompted this attack, I believe most Americans understand this was a terrorist attack on America.
#3
I hope this father of one of the 9/11 victims stands his ground:
"A memorial to honor a Sept. 11 victim from a small northwestern Connecticut town has been halted by the unexpected conflict arising from his father's insistence it say his son was murdered by "Muslim terrorists."
Town officials in Kent are balking, saying it would be inappropriate to single out a religious group in a project on town property and paid for with taxpayers' money. The memorial plaque to be erected outside the town hall is on indefinite hold.
Peter Gadiel is criticizing town leaders for being too politically correct, and says he's frustrated about what he calls a growing trend across the country to soften the reality of the Sept. 11 attacks by not mentioning a word about terrorism on victims' memorials.
"Ordinarily I would not want a reference to his murder on his memorial, but there seems to be an effort to whitewash what happened that day," said Gadiel, a 61-year-old retired real estate investor.
"I don't think it's right that people should be murdered like that, and that people intentionally forget what happened. It's wrong. It's immoral."
What interpretation of Islam influenced Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan? As often before, the trail leads to the official sect of Saudi Arabia -- known as Wahhabism to most of us of who denounce it. Confronting the role of radical Islam here is not Islamophobic, but common sense -- and the first response moderate Muslims themselves will have.
Hasan, though born in America, refused to have his picture taken with women -- an attitude distinct to fundamentalist radicalism among Muslims. The Prophet Mohammed cautioned his followers that when they go to live in non-Muslim lands they must accept the laws and customs of their new home. Millions of American Muslims get their picture taken with women, even ones not their wives, and don't worry about it. To refuse such an elementary and even trivial act of courtesy sets Muslims apart -- and that is the aim of radicals.
We've also learned that, before his transfer to Ft. Hood last year, Hasan served as a psychiatrist at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, DC, and regularly attended Friday prayer at the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring, Md. The Silver Spring clerics have issued formal statements condemning the carnage at Ft. Hood. But Imam Faizul Khan, long the main prayer leader at the mosque and a friend of Hasan, said he never believed Hasan capable of such an act. Yet what docrines did Hasan absorb at the mosque? While he was a communicant, it hosted at least four talks by Enver Masud, the founder of The Wisdom Fund, the main Muslim "truther" group in America.
And Khan is a leading board member of the Islamic Society of North America -- the main Wahhabi-lobby group in the United States, established by Saudi Arabia to impose extremism on American Muslims. ISNA has a long and disgraceful record of promoting radical Islam. On the roster of the ISNA board (listed on its Web site), the Silver Spring center's Imam Faizul Khan is the fourth member under its president.
But the mosque has worse associations. On its own Web site, it promotes a Sharia-based financial product -- the Amana Mutual Fund, put together by the Wahhabis at the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), in northern Virginia. Federal antiterrorism agents raided IIIT in the Operation GreenQuest raids of 2002. That operation remains an ongoing inquiry; IIIT and the Amana fund are still under investigation. Convicted Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami Al-Arian is still in US federal custody because of his refusal to give evidence about the Virginia Wahhabi ring caught in GreenQuest.
Most interesting of all: The button on the MCC's Web site titled "Islam" takes you to a pamphlet titled "Islam Is . . ." by a person calling himself "Pete Seda." Seda is an Iranian also known as Pirouz Sedaghaty and Abu Yunus. He was one of three officers of the US branch of a Saudi-based "charity," the Al-Haramain Foundation -- until being indicted by the Justice Department for terror financing and tax fraud. Seda and his companions still await trial.
From a ghastly act to a Saudi-backed fundamentalist imam to a Saudi-run designated terror-financing "charity" is not a long trail. It is a small coil of associations that exists in too many US mosques. American Muslims must drive these elements out of their community. The problem's not traumatic stress, much less Islam. It's the ideology, the money and the interests of the Saudi hardliners.
In which Sajjad Shaukat demonstrates why the Muslim world continues to fall behind the rest of the world in all measures except the misery index and the creation of jihadis.
Although the whole of Islamic world is target of Indo-Israeli plot, yet the same has intensified in case of Pakistan and Iran. It is because of the fact that Pakistan is a declared atomic country, while Iran is determined to continue its nuclear programme. In this regard, US-led some western countries have also been supporting the Indo-Israeli nexus against Islamabad and Tehran overtly or covertly.
However, we cannot blame especially India and Israel including US regarding the conspiracy against Pakistan and Iran without some concrete evidence. In this context, in his interview, published in the Indian weekly Outlook on February 18, 2008, Israel's ambassador to India, Mark Sofer explained regarding India's defence arrangements with Israel by disclosing, "We do have a defence relationship with India, which is no secret" and "with all due respect, the secret part will remain a secret." On being asked whether he foresaw joint exercises, Sofer replied, "Certain issues need to remain under wraps for whatever reason."
Indo-Israeli plot remained under wraps till 2003, when Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon visited India to officially reveal it. In this respect, Indian 'The Tribune' wrote on September 10, 2003, "India and Israel took giant leaps forward in bolstering the existing strategic ties and forging new ones" and Tel Aviv has "agreed to share its expertise with India in various fields as anti-fidayeen operations, surveillance satellites, intelligence sharing and space exploration." Next day, 'Indian Express', disclosed, "From anti-missile systems to hi-tech radars, from sky drones to night-vision equipment, Indo-Israeli defense cooperation has known no bounds in recent times".
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: john frum ||
11/07/2009 11:05 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The battlelines need to be drawn-Europe,US India and Israel against the terrorist states of Pakistan,Iran,Saudi and Syria!
Political correctness, (PC) is conforming to political/social expectations. These new expectations have been socially engineered by the elites who want to transform our society. It is a Marxist technique to undermine western values. In the extreme political correctness is the demand of a totalitarian state to follow the party line.
Political correctness has been a powerful tool to prevent citizens from speaking and hearing the truth. By the use of media propaganda pitting one group against another and indoctrinating children with television and in youth groups has made particular subjects taboo. The PC re-education takes place daily in our schools and universities. It has changed the cultural complexion of America. The practice of "Political Correctness" will gradually transform the cultural complexion of any society.
Totalitarian regimes use it to keep citizens isolated from each other. People in communist nations had to go into a back room, scan the room for listening devices before talking about meaningful issues. Open discussions of political and religious subjects were muzzled through the fear of authority's reprisals. Citizens were intimidated not to share their thoughts and beliefs.
Over the past 50 years there has been a frontal attack on our culture. Traditional moral values that created American exceptionalism have been systematically decimated. God, the Ten Commandments, the flag, personal responsibility, competition, the work ethic, patriotism, civility and chivalry have become negative values. Masculinity and femininity have been blurred to create gender confusion.
Unthinkable a short time ago, Kevin Jennings, a radical homosexual activist has been appointed the "safe school czar" under the Obama administration. According to his writing, he advised a 14-year-old boy who was having sex with an older man to wear a condom. He illegally did not report this incident to the authorities. Yet, he is in a powerful position to impose his announced agenda on impressionable minds. His ascending into the executive branch shows the power of political correctness to shut down the dissent against homosexual indoctrination.
A bonus to the homosexual special interest was attached to our military budget to underhandedly make thought, not conduct a hate crime. This means the government is empowering one group over another.
As the dependency on the government grows, it becomes easier for people to relinquish their freedom for greater security. The top-down decrees, rather than the bottom-up values are accomplished by making promises to the already dependent citizens. Coercion is used on the most adamantly individualistic patriots to submit to the power of the state.
Anyone opposing the undermining of our institutions can be ostracized and demonized by the use of politically incorrect labels such as homophile, racist, right-winger or even capitalist. Rush Limbaugh has been outrageously slandered by lies that paint him a racist to prevent him from becoming a part owner of a national football league team.
The politically correct bomb stops any open discussion of major societal changes. This strategy has been effective in totalitarian governments, ramming down their throats policies that would not have been approved by free citizens. This can only happen when people cower in a corner and watch their freedoms being stripped away one by one.
An article in the Russian newspaper, Pravda, called the American people "sheeple." Ben Franklin said: "Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you." We better wake up or lose our nation. Political bullies win when citizens no longer have the courage to say, "How dare you." Standing up together against the bully caused him to cowardly back down.
Americans need to say what they think regardless of government threats. This would erase the power of political correctness and the unconstitutional "hate crimes- thought crimes." It would empower citizens to take action like voting out self-serving representatives and change the debate to solidify our freedoms rather than diluting them.
America has a built in repellent for this type of invasion within. It is our Constitution and Bill of Rights sacredly written by our founding fathers. Speaking without fear and making personal sacrifices in time and money to support our constitution will invigorate American exceptionalism.
We are beginning to courageously go on the offensive as true patriots. This strategy will allow us to regain and stabilize our freedom. God Bless America.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/07/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The question Artsutanov asked himself had the childlike brilliance of true genius. A merely clever man could never have thought of it -- or would have dismissed it instantly as absurd. If the laws of celestial mechanics make it possible for an object to stay fixed in the sky, might it not be possible to lower a cable down to the surface, and so to establish an elevator system linking earth to space?" -- Arthur C. Clarke, 1979, "The Fountains of Paradise" 
Had the machine been activated, the baguette incident could have caused the LHC to go into shutdown mode, the UK's The Register reports. The Register quotes Dr. Mike Lamont, a worker at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (or CERN), as saying that "a bit of baguette" had been dropped on the LHC, possibly by a bird.
The Washington Post this afternoon reported "President Obama delivers remarks on Ft. Hood shooting at end of tribal leaders conference 
