HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ross-c@scs.leeds.ac.uk (R Clement)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: oversampling (was Re: using green marker on CDs)
Date: 1 Oct 92 10:31:23 GMT
Organization: The University of Leeds, School of Computer Studies
Originator: ross-c@csparc11

In article <2078@sdrc.COM> scjones@thor.sdrc.com (Larry Jones) writes:
>thus making it easier to filter out.  The tricky question, of course, is
>where do you get the extra samples to feed into the D to A?  There's no
>way to interpolate reasonable values since you don't have sufficient
>information to do so (thank you, Mr. Nyquist), so what to do?  Since the
>signal could literally have done anything between samples, there's no
>good reason to use any particular value as opposed to any other, so the
>simplest thing to do is just use zeros.

Are you sure that you could just use any samples? I don't think so. E.g.
if instead of interpolating zeros, you interpolated samples from another
piece of music and filtered, you would get both pieces of music together
(the filter doesn't magically know which samples are the odd and which
are even or whatever). 

So when you interpolate extra samples, the frequency spectra of the two
sounds add together. So therefore, a whole lot of zeros are used (I'll
leave it as an exercise for the reader to work out what the frequency
spectra of a sound represented solely by zeros is :-) ).

Cheers,

Ross-c
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: jcf@world.std.com (Joseph C Fineman)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Interesting experiments
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 02:48:49 GMT

  A simple but bizarre experiment mentioned in a recent issue of
_Nature_:  From a nail in the wall or other support (S) hang a rubber
band (R).  From that, hang a loop of thread (t) from which is hanging
another rubber band.  (A single thread with a knot at each end will
do, of course, but a loop is less work.)  From the bottom of the lower
rubber band, hang a weight (W) heavy enough to stretch the rubber
bands substantially (a pair of pliers works fine).  From the support
to the top of the lower rubber band, run a slightly slack loop of
thread (s).  From the bottom of the upper rubber band to the weight,
run another slightly slack loop of thread.  Imagine what will happen
if you cut the taut thread (t).  Now do it.  Now figure.

                 S
		sR
	       s R
	       s R
	       s R
	       s R
	       s ts
	       s t s
	       s t s
	        st s
		 R s
		 R s
		 R s
		 R s
		 Rs
		WWW
	       WWWWW

  Unfortunately, I have lost the reference to _Nature_ (it was about a
year ago), but it mentions a number of such paradoxical phenomena
(generically, series-to-parallel transitions), of which the above is
visually the most striking.  The thread t indubitably supports the
weight W at the beginning, but when t is cut, W moves *up*.  Likewise,
there are electrical circuits (passive but nonlinear) whose resistance
is increased by closing a switch within them; there are highway
systems where the opening of a new road results in increased travel
time for everyone; etc.

  In a similar vein, a slender column under compression is unstable
against buckling over a range of loads that is bounded above as well
as below.  Thus, it ought to be possible to cause a column to buckle
by *removing* part of the load on it.  I have never seen this done
myself, tho.

  Enjoy.

		Joe Fineman, jcf@world.std.com
From: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (John G Dobnick)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Metal Foil and Fillings
Date: 26 Sep 1992 04:59:55 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Reply-To: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

From article <1992Sep26.000109.17888@cs.yale.edu>, by rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla):
> In article <Bv5oKy.85y@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cad28526@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Chuck Douglas) writes:
>>sch@getafix (Simon Hamner) writes:
>>>I think it's to do with the fact that the foil & filling are made from
>>>different metals (aluminium & mercury ?) and when they come in contact,
>>			       ^^^^^^^
>>I don't know what the metal is for sure but mercury it definately is NOT.
>>
> ACtually, you're wrong. The metal is mercury amalgam. I don't remember
> the other components.

Metallic fillings are called "silver fillings" for a reason. :-)

The material is a silver-mercury amalgam, with a number of other
metals thrown in (in much smaller quantities) for various purposes
such as hardness, etc.  Palladium is one of the additional components.
(And you wondered why the dentist charged so much, eh?  :-) )

And at this point, my memory fails.  There were a couple of other
metals in this mixture, but their names escape me.
-- 
John G Dobnick                          ATTnet: (414) 229-5727
Computing Services Division             INTERNET: jgd@uwm.edu
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee     UUCP: uunet!uwm!jgd

"Knowing how things work is the basis for appreciation,
and is thus a source of civilized delight."  -- William Safire
From: russ@bbxrbk (Russ Kepler)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: noise cancellation
Keywords: noise cancellation
Date: 4 Oct 92 01:27:15 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization

In article <137851@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> tapley@sdxs04.llnl.gov (Bill Tapley) writes:
>I recently saw a demonstration of hearing protection, headphones,
>that used noise cancellation. Expensive, but what an ideal application.

Noise cancellation has been used in several application, but mostly
for large installations that emit lots of low frequencies.  A novel
application I read about was on a seagoing vessel where the cancellation
was in the air vents - the cancellation was particularly effective.

Another novel application is in hearing protection for shooters.  In
this application a pair of plugs are fitted to the ear channel
(somewhat in the manner of hearing aids) and an external amplifier and
other logic is added.  Received sounds are amplified until they hit
90db whereupon the amplifier goes into cancellation mode for the low
frequencies found in shooting.  I've heard good things about them, but
the cost is a bit high ($300 in quantity).

-- 
Russ Kepler, posting from home
Will hack unix for food 		(.sig stolen from dt - sorry, dt)
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Phony SCIFI on TV and in Movies
Date: 26 Sep 1992 20:08:37 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Sep26.102000.28905@klaava.Helsinki.FI>, cust_ts@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Tero Sand) writes:
>>>Er, just what's the difference between a "force field" with high enough
>>>resolusion (i.e., short enough wavelength) to simulate matter, and matter
>>>itself?
>>
>>The force field does not simulate matter, just the shape.  The colour and 
>>the rest are supplied by holograms.
>>
>
>I think what Carl meant was '.. as far as energy usage is concerned'.

No, what I meant was, "If you're producing a force field that simulates the
shape of the matter, and you're doing it at a short enough wavelength to be
convincing, what's the difference between the force field and actual matter?"
In particular, it strikes me that you're basically talking about projecting the
wave function of the matter whose tactile properties you're simulating.  Now,
maybe you're only projecting the wave function of a thin film of the matter,
rather than a solid object, and you're giving it rigidity via a coarser "force
field," but still, I can't see the difference between this alleged fine force
field and just creating the matter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Xref: sparky alt.folklore.science:3653 rec.arts.startrek.misc:10062 rec.arts.startrek.tech:5245
From: jittlov@gumby.cs.caltech.edu (Mike Jittlov)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science,rec.arts.startrek.misc,rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: SCIFI on TV - Duck on ST:TNG!
Date: 5 Oct 1992 11:20:43 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: gumby.cs.caltech.edu

>|> In article <1992Sep22.131131.22390@klaava.Helsinki.FI> cust_ts@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Tero Sand) writes:
>|>
>|> The ST:TNG tech manual or whatever they call the book duck this by
                                                          ^^^^
>|> saying that the ship carries quantities of generic matter that the
>|> replicator draws on.


Give Tero Sand a subliminal cigar!!

In the ST:TNG Tech Manual, by Rick Sternbach & Mike Okuda,
you will notice on Page 11's cross-sectioned USS Enterprise,
a VERY LARGE DUCK, just below the Main Bridge (on the same
floor as the airplane, and several floors above the somewhat
smaller but no less impressive Huge Mouse.  (And there's
much, much more..!)

I will wait here, while you get out your Tech Manuals and
magnifiers...

________________________________________ ___._`.*.'_._ ________
 Mike Jittlov - Wizard, etc       .   . +  * .o   o.* `.`. +.  
  Hollywood, CA 90026-2714       '   *  . ' ' |\^/|  `. * .  *
jittlov@gumby.cs.caltech.edu  (: May All Your  \V/  Good Dreams
  <& alt.fan.mike-jittlov>    and Fine Wishes  /_\  Come True:)
============================================= _/ \_ ===========

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science,alt.folklore.urban
From: dw@unislc.uucp (Dan Wright)
Subject: Re: Metrication and "normal usage"
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 23:32:18 GMT

Robin Fairbairns (rf@cl.cam.ac.uk) wrote:
: (Mr. John T Jensen) writes:
: |> Everyone but me says 'kiLOMiter' --- I, of course, pronounce
: |> it correctly as "KILLomeet'er", as the rules say --- and then have to
: |> explain what I mean half the time! 
: 
: I've taken to making a point of pronouncing the other measure
: `milLIMiter' to appropriate loons, in response to this odd piece of
: practice.  Where does it come from?

Here's the "usage" entry from Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary,
copyright (c) 1983:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In No. American speech "kilometer" is most often pronounced with primary
stress on the second syllable.  This pronunciation is also heard frequently
in British speech.  Those who object to second syllable stress say that the
first syllable should be stressed in accord with the stress patterns of
"centimeter", "millimeter", etc.  However, the pronunciation of "kilometer"
does not parallel that of other metric compounds.  From 1828 to 1841 Noah
Webster indicated only the second syllable stress, and his successor added
a first syllable stress variant in the first Merriam-Webster dictionary of
1847.  Thus, both pronunciations are venerable.  Most scientists use second
syllable stress, although first syllable stress seems to occur with a higher
rate of frequency among scientists than among nonscientists.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I believe North American pronunciation is influenced by words such as:
barometer, chronometer, dynamometer, geometer, hydrometer, micrometer,
odometer, photometer, radiometer, speedometer, tachometer, and (last but
not least with respect to "normal" body temperature), thermometer.

  -- Dan Wright
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science,alt.folklore.urban
From: dkmiller@unixg.ubc.ca (Derek K. Miller)
Subject: Re: "Normal" body temperature
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 20:08:33 GMT

In article <8au5RB13w165w@dogbox.acme.gen.nz> dogbowl@dogbox.acme.gen.nz writes:
>> At any rate, if any of these legends are true it does show the
>> inherent superiority of Fahrenheit over Celsius for common use since
>> the former is a scale of human experience (whether body temperature
>> and cold water or days in summer and winter) which is what most people
>> want to gauge when they ask the temperature. I have nothing against
>> scientists and engineers using C, of course, or Kelvin for that
>> matter, but for common usage F seems more sensible.
>
>
>I have never used the Fahrenheit scale in my life, and I never expect
>to. If a day is 22C then it is pleasently warm. 0C is damn cold as far
>as I'm concerned. 35C is OK for low humidity, but uncomfortable above
>about 85% RH.
>

I think of normal body temperature as 37 C. In fact, I have no idea what
60 F would feel like. Hot, cold, comfortable? Not a clue.

I think the Celsius scale IS in the scale of human experience - water freezes
at 0 (important to know for everything from mixing drinks to sticking
your tongue on metal poles) and boils at 100 (ditto for tea, pasta,
and to prevent scalding yourself).

I'll stick with centigrade.

      :=:=> Derek K. Miller                 dkmiller@unixg.ubc.ca
      Researcher, Alma Mater Society        thegrodd@tz.ucs.sfu.ca
      University of British Columbia, Canada
From: diverson@phys.ksu.edu (David Iverson)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: o.k. scifi
Date: 28 Sep 1992 02:25:35 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: bohr.phys.ksu.edu

In <1992Sep26.025752.28865@news.iastate.edu> glitto@iastate.edu (Scott M Klabacha) writes:

>While the points you raise about science in 'The Abyss' look fine to me...there
>was one (non-alien) scene I can recall which was ludicrous...if I recall
>correctly, there was a point when one of the characters dove into the water
>and swam from one craft to the next...never mind the fact that I tried to hold
>my breath along with the movie and couldn't (but then again, I wasn't
>physically exerting myself at the time, and the character was)...the water
>must have been really close to 0 degrees C (I'm guessing between 0 and 3
>degrees; but that's only a guess)...the character was a goner before he got
>halfway there...

>(Although I must admit that this never occurred to me until I read Michael
>Crichton's entertaining novel _Sphere_, where one of the characters attempts
>something similar, and is nearly killed by his under-30-second trip...)


Go hang out with some professional divers sometime... I've seen pros do
surface dives down to 60 feet that lasted about 2 minutes. On one breath of
course.  In case that
doesn't impress you, keep in mind that the air in their lungs dropped to
2/3rds of the original volume on the trip down.  (if you're one mile down
you'd have to go 3 miles down to get the same effect.)

-diverson
--
diverson@phys.ksu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science,alt.folklore.urban
From: smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven Bellovin)
Subject: Re: Metrication and "normal usage"
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:38:17 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories

The Farenheight scale does have two minor advantages.  First, it has
greater resolution without resorting to fractions -- each degree is
5/9 the size of a Celsius degree.  It makes it easier to talk about
temperatures in round figures without loss of information.  Second, in
many parts of the world, there's much less need to use negative numbers
-- and when the weather folks do, it's as much to underline how cold it
is...  (OK -- all the folks from Norway, Minnesota, etc. -- I said
*many* parts of the world, including all I've ever lived in...)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: juola@bruno.cs.colorado.edu (Patrick Juola)
Subject: Re: Black Holes (was Re: Speed of gravity)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 16:57:02 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.042537.24201@news.columbia.edu> jml12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Jonathan M Lennox) writes:
>
>  On a similar note, there's a problem I've been wondering about for
>some time, but I've never been able to get a good answer to.  (I asked
>about it on sci.physics a couple of times, but I never understood the
>answer.)
>
>  As I understand it (from SF stories and science popularizations,
>never having had a GR class), from the point of view of someone
>falling into a black hole, they fall in in finite time, whereas from
>the point of view of an observer "outside" (in an essentially flat
>spacetime) they take infinite time. 

This is exactly reversed.  Think of it this way -- if I watch someone fire
his engines from a mile away from a black hole, accelerate up to 1 mile/hour
(convert to km for the Europeans 8-), it's won't take more time than an
hour to fall to the black hole.  Less, in fact, since he's accelerating.

On the other hand, if I'm accelerating, I experience the time/space
distortion in the rest of the universe.  Eventually, I get close enough to
the the speed of light (in a stationary observer's frame) that from my
perspective, his clocks, &c. slow down.  Several evil pages of mathematics
later, I find that a) I'm not going to hit the ground in finite time, but
b) the rest of the universe won't perceive it that way, since their time
measurements are being continually expanded (to infinity, since I'm
continuously accelerating, from their point of view).


>Now, what I wonder about is how
>the person falling in perceives the rest of the universe.  Does she
>see time passing faster and faster, stars going supernova, the
>universe dying, etc?  Or is the situation fundamentally asymmetric?

The person falling perceives the universe going into super slo-mo and
then freezing.

>  Also, what does a person entering a black hole see of the things
>which have entered before her?  Do they appear as flattened rings
>around the event horizon from a flat spacetime, gradually falling
>faster and faster as the observer approaches the event horizon?

Probably, she doesn't percieve a thing.  Infinite red shift, you know.
Things closer to her are moving faster, and she ends up freezing relative
to them. 


>  The situation is confounded even further when you consider Hawking
>radiation...if black holes actually evaporate, then wouldn't a
>hypothetical immortal external observer see the black hole emit a
>burst of radiation and disappear before the victim ever actually
>crossed the event horizon?  And what would the person falling in
>experience?

This simply doesn't happen, since the external observer is not immortal.
It's the falling observer who falls, quite literally, between ticks of the
clock.

>Jonathan Lennox
>jml12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu
>
>
From: ss7m+@andrew.cmu.edu (Steven M. Stadnicki)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Staying underwater (was Re: o.k. scifi)
Date: 6 Oct 92 04:59:30 GMT
Organization: Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Okay, I feel compelled to respond with my own staying underwater story
now... about seven or eight years ago I was involved with a summer program
(RSI, for all the alumni out there) a little ways outside of DC.  One afternoon
towards the end of the six weeks we were there, me and a couple of my friends
decided to have a little contest as to who could swim the furthest underwater.
I recall one of the other two making it about three quarters of the pool's
length (it was an Olympic-sized pool), and I made it all the way down and
about halfway back; the third fellow was doing much better, having made it
one full lap, another half lap, and he was starting to swim the last half-lap
back to the start, when he started sinking to the bottom of the pool...

To this day, I can still remember my immediate reaction; "Oh, he's gonna
*really* show off by doing a few dozen pushups on the bottom of the pool."  It
took me a few seconds to realize that he wasn't doing pushups, just sort of
lying there...

His recollection of the whole event was thinking `I'm gonna make two laps,
yeah', and then just sort of fading to black... definitely not the sort of
thing I'd recommend doing.  Passing out underwater is not incredibly good for
one's health.

                                 Steven Stadnicki
                                 ss7m@andrew.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: jml12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Jonathan M Lennox)
Subject: Black Holes (was Re: Speed of gravity)
Reply-To: jml12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Jonathan M Lennox)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 04:25:37 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.171546.9136@news.columbia.edu> slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Seth L. Blumberg) writes:
>But wait a minute...the mass of a black hole is concentrated at the
>singularity, which is necessarily inside the event horizon.  If gravitational
>field propagation takes place at the speed of light, wouldn't that mean we'd
>never "see" the gravitational pull of the black hole? Or are we just getting
>the graviton flux emitted immediately before the mass collapsed to form a
>singularity, stretched out until the end of time by the good offices of
>general relativity?

  On a similar note, there's a problem I've been wondering about for
some time, but I've never been able to get a good answer to.  (I asked
about it on sci.physics a couple of times, but I never understood the
answer.)

  As I understand it (from SF stories and science popularizations,
never having had a GR class), from the point of view of someone
falling into a black hole, they fall in in finite time, whereas from
the point of view of an observer "outside" (in an essentially flat
spacetime) they take infinite time.  Now, what I wonder about is how
the person falling in perceives the rest of the universe.  Does she
see time passing faster and faster, stars going supernova, the
universe dying, etc?  Or is the situation fundamentally asymmetric?

  Also, what does a person entering a black hole see of the things
which have entered before her?  Do they appear as flattened rings
around the event horizon from a flat spacetime, gradually falling
faster and faster as the observer approaches the event horizon?

  The situation is confounded even further when you consider Hawking
radiation...if black holes actually evaporate, then wouldn't a
hypothetical immortal external observer see the black hole emit a
burst of radiation and disappear before the victim ever actually
crossed the event horizon?  And what would the person falling in
experience?

Jonathan Lennox
jml12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu


Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: Phony SCIFI on TV and in Movies
Keywords: laser phaser sound wave
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 19:13:35 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.163850.8112@news.columbia.edu> slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Seth L. Blumberg) writes:
>Pardon me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the term "phaser" as currently used refer
>to a projector of coherent *acoustical* energy? (Sort of the audio equivalent
>of a laser, in other words.)  I have seen detailed instructions for building
>these, using a simple high-voltage oscillator circuit and a few (dirt-cheap)
>piezoelectric transducers....
That may be true, but Star Trek phasers clearly cannot be acoustical
in nature, as they work in vacuum.
-Ekr

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431 (Nighthawk S)              rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Former chemist now CM400 mechanic                 ekr@eitech.com(preferred)
   "Base 8 is just like base 10, really...if you're missing two fingers."
Xref: sparky alt.folklore.science:3676 alt.folklore.urban:24999