@xxovercastxx:

Of course they're not synonymous. "Heat" and "molecular kinetic energy" are not synonymous. "Heat" is "molecular kinetic energy". I do not want to say identical, because what is identity really? Is an identical definition sufficient? Or must things be "identical" in some other, more substantial way? To define hearing though, you must define that something is being affected by vibrations. That makes hearing "identical" to being affected by vibrations. But hearing doesn't exist (doesn't happen) outside of something being affected by vibration. In the same way, the painter cannot be reduced to the printer, but the printing can be reduced to the painter and so can the act of creating the printing by the printer; ultimately even the printer itself can be reduced, although not literally since it is an object and not an action. The same way, being affected by vibrations cannot be reduced to hearing only, but hearing can be reduced to being affected by vibration. In fact, we can hear without our eardrums if vibrations can be transmitted to the ear in other, non aerial ways. Of course we can also "hear" without an ear, but that only means our present definition of hearing is too narrow, not that it's completely wrong. Our definition doesn't account for the fact that the vibrations need to be encoded in neurological patterns so that we can make sense of them. But that part of the equation does not affect the original question of "if a tree falls and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound". Saying that it does is akin to answering the question "if a tree falls and no one is there to hear it, is it heard?". Of course it's not heard - that would be a contradiction - but that was not the question. Of course the fact that it's heard or not depends on your definition of heard, but for any definition that solely aims to define the human hearing system (or something similar) it is not heard. On a quantum level it may be "heard", but quantum physicist would more likely call it "observed" as it is a more general term that agrees with quantum mechanics' high level of abstraction.

Of course, a quantum physicist would probably argue that we're all wrong about identity and don't understand quantum mechanics and that even if things are identical they're really not, etc. He'd probably be right, but no one cares.

It's a UAG. Unmanned Aerial Ghost.


That was bad...need more chocolate. Ahhhhh.

>> ^gwiz665:

Restoring sanity and/or fear:
A crowd size estimate commissioned by CBS News and carried out by AirPhotosLive.com estimated the crowd at 215,000 people, plus or minus 10%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rally_to_Restore_Sanity_and/or_Fear#Cr
owd_size
Restoring Honor:
Anywhere from 80k - 1,6 mil (Seriously doubt that last part)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restoring_Honor_rally#Crowd_size


Fun fact, the United States Parks Department still uses aerial photography analyzed by scientists to estimate the size of crowds at rallys in DC for their own planning purposes. But ever since they estimated the Million Man March at 400k people, they have been legally prohibited by congress from releasing their estimates to the public.

The CBS news commissioned AirPhotos Live surveys are the only publicly available scientific estimates using the same methodology used by the US Parks Department. If you're going to compare two accounts, compare their estimate of Restoring Honor, 87k, to their estimate of The Rally to Restore Sanity, 215k.

I do find it amusing that the best figure for The Rally to Restore Sanity is also the highest one you will ever hear in the media, and the best figure for Restoring Honor is the lowest you will ever hear in the media. The far right might not be better at turning out people, but they beat the hell out of us when it comes to manipulating perception.

It's like 52 pickup after-Aerial pinata with an after-dose of a potassium nitrate, charcoal, and sulfur cloud ready for an army of eager Boy Scouts to breathe.

Dude needs to fix his aerial... BAD! That shit is unwatchable.

Can't we just enjoy the guy driving his multi million dollar aerial murder machine?? ; )

>> ^garmachi:

eco
worldaffairs


Thanks

Now imagine lots full of these ugly cars with those neon colored action bubble sale stickers. $20,000 off!!!
Test drives with helmets and parachutes.

Picking the kids up from soccer practice.

High speed car chases that turn into aerial dogfights.

The sheer number of drunk driver/fliers. " Don't worry man. It's not that far a flight."

Or worse, the SUV model.

>> ^Jinx:

Is engaging your enemy only when you see the whites of their eyes somehow more palatable?

Is it mere coincidence that collateral from modern wars is much less than from 100 years ago?


Um.. yes. There's a disconnect when you can't physically see the person you're affecting.
Your mirror neurons can't help you empathy if all you see is a green and gray aerial photo.

And.. wtf are you talking?! Since 2008 61 drones attacks have killed 824 human beings.

14 were Al Qaeda.

"Smart"bombs and drones are no better or "safer" than carpet bombing or artillery.

It's all fuckin' war. And it's all fuckin' awful.

Volcano scoring system: 5 points for each tourist successfully squished, 15 points for a scientist, and 50 points for any aerial surveilance vehicles taken down.

Meths a better drug for battle-The direction the military went soon after observing the effects on the troops of them micing over, was to figure out how to give get it into the enemy. Aerial Dispersal-Why din't they simply aerate it and send in the trooops to mop-up after 4-6 hrs or so?? Would have made for some whack patrols!

ARES (Aerial Regional-scale Environmental Survey of Mars)

And yet I still fear their aerial target practices at higher fear levels.

Because the Supertanker uses a pressurized dump system it can drop water from 400 to 800 ft as opposed to other water bombers which use gravity to drop the water and must be around 200ft. This video, though, is probably just a test of the system itself, so is flying much higher.
>> ^Zyrxil:
It's hard to imagine how dropping the water from what looks like a very high altitude would do anything useful, as by the time the water reached the ground it'd be dispersed over an extremely large area.

>> ^Skeeve:
Yep, it's an Evergreen 747 Supertanker, the largest aerial firefighter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreen_Supertanker>> ^vaporlock:
Is this a firefighter or what's going on. Anyone know?

It's hard to imagine how dropping the water from what looks like a very high altitude would do anything useful, as by the time the water reached the ground it'd be dispersed over an extremely large area.


>> ^Skeeve:
Yep, it's an Evergreen 747 Supertanker, the largest aerial firefighter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreen_Supertanker>> ^vaporlock:
Is this a firefighter or what's going on. Anyone know?