1

Geek Speak / Re: Will there be a browser paradigm shift?

« on: 13/02/2012 04:36:47 »

Personally, I would rather have a PC at my desk.  Don't get me wrong, I love the cloud for email and file sharing, etc.  But I control the power on my desktop.  If it is slower than I like I can upgrade it.  If I want more video power or memory I can add that.  Hard Drive Space isn't a problem either.  If I want to buy a new PC every 10 years or every 2 it is my decision.  I can even buy used.  I have control.  I have freedom.

If everything moves to the cloud then who has control?  If it is running slower than I like what do I do?  What is my ISP going to charge me for this?  Right now they get quite pissy if I download over 250GB in a month.  How much will I be downloading if everything I do is online?  What do I do if an application I am using locks up hard?  Will I have to call someone?  Will they answer the phone at 1:30AM on Sunday or will I have to leave a message.  Will there be prioritization?  Will my stuff get slowed down if someone more important needs to do something (NASA for instance?)  Also, what about hackers?  "Sorry Boss, we can't work today because a hacker group is doing a denial of service attack on our Cloud, guess we will try tomorrow."  Lastly, as has already been stated, there is privacy.  All the naked pictures of my dogs will stay safe on my PC behind my firewall where no one can get them and post them on Cheeseburger. 

I do not mind using my android phone or storing a few docs on Google and I love my hosted Exchange account, but I am in no hurry to have a dumb terminal set on my desk.  For me it is a matter of trust and convenience.  When I want my PC it is there.  If the internet is down it is still there.  If I want to play Skyrim, there it is.  As far as trust goes, who do you trust more than yourself?  AT&T? Comcast? Orange Business? Google? Your Government?  Maybe RIAA can run it? Oh how about the ATF? 

2

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: What created the Moon's magnetic field?

« on: 08/02/2012 15:23:33 »

Hmm, Didn't the moon smash into the Earth, leaving most of its metal core and taking away a lot of the lighter materials?  Could the magnetic field on this rock be there because the rock was at one time part of the Earth?

3

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: The Earth is gaining 160 tonnes per year through global warming. Discuss.

« on: 07/02/2012 21:14:38 »

I understand that the Earth is warming right now but I also understand that the temperatures have been going up and down all the time throughout the history of the planet and was curious if the planet was actually getting larger or if it just fluctuates.  From your reply I have to believe it fluctuates.  I am also curious what sort of effect gaining or losing mass would have on the planet.  Does gravity get stronger and weaker?  Does the rotation of the planet slow down and speed up?  Or is 160 tonnes a year not enough to make a difference?

4

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: The Earth is gaining 160 tonnes per year through global warming. Discuss.

« on: 07/02/2012 17:36:11 »

If the Earth is gaining mass due to global warming (which seems to be in question,) then wouldn't it lose mass during global cooling?  If so,the Earth's mass would always be in a state of flux.  Either way, what are the ramifications of this?  Would it matter?

5

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Does planet size determine life form size?

« on: 01/02/2012 20:49:06 »

Was thinking about this today and am curious what you folks think.  Does the size of a planet determine the size of the lifeforms living there?  I know Earth has plenty of different sized creatures so maybe not.  But I have also seen documentaries on pygmy elephants that are small because their environment is smaller.  Maybe the average size would be larger or smaller.  I also think gravity would play a roll in it so maybe it would be opposite of what I was originally thinking as a larger planet would likely have higher gravity and thus smaller creatures.  What do you think?

6

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: How should we defend against NEOs?

« on: 29/01/2012 15:42:20 »

A few things.

What is the extent of our detection ability?  Do we have some kind of planetary sonar?  It just seems that the chances of someone seeing an incoming object with a telescope would have worse odds than the lottery.  Also, if we somehow did detect it, how fast are these objects usually moving?  Would we have time to do anything?  If we did have time to prepare a NEO killing package would our current propulsion systems be able to intercept it far enough away to not cause more damage to us than if left alone?  Going with the shotgun / rifle analogy, a shotgun does far more damage at close range than a rifle.

For me it seems that the best plan, assuming we could get to the object in time, would be to steer it away.  Maybe smash a bomb into the side of it.  Not to destroy it but to change its course.  Of course I doubt we currently have the tech for that either.

Lastly, I really like the astroid space station idea.  No telling what kind of new elements we could find on that beside all the other uses.  My only question, what effect would having a 10km object orbiting the Earth have on the Earth?  Does a 10km object have enough gravity to damage or change our planet?