What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

For those who do not know Steve Jobs has died

  • Thread starter lance
  • Start date

lance

Class 5 Nepenthes hoarder
Yes, this is very sad news. The owner of apple, Steve Jobs, has died of an illness. :-(

Let us all think of how the devices he developed have changed the way we think.

Thanks for making the ipad 2 :hail: :hail: :hail:


on another note a neutrino in a atom excelerator has passed the speed of light, proving einstein's theory wrong.
 
Last edited:
RIP steve!
 
I prefer PC to mac but I love the I pod so RIP Steve!
 
on another note a atom in a atom excelerator has passed the speed of light, proving einstein's theory wrong.

http://xkcd.com/955/

I know the topic is about Jobs, but... on an unrelated topic, I bet you 200 bucks in plants they'll be proven wrong :awesome:
 
lance said:
on another note a atom in a atom excelerator has passed the speed of light, proving einstein's theory wrong.

This was in my chem book... which was written in 2005.

"It is now possible to accelerate particles to a speed well above 90% of the speed of light. (According to Einsteins theory of relativity, it is impossible for a particle to move AT the speed of light)"

Don't know if that means that the speed is .9x or 1.9x; x being the speed of light.
 
"...above 90% of the speed of light." Division.

"90% above the speed of light" would be pretty friggin' amazing.


Anywho... I'm not a fan of Apple nor the way Jobs ran it, but I think it's pretty safe to say every one of us has him to thank for a lot of what most of us do every day. Well... and for the Apple Trolls all over the place, but that's not necessarily his fault.

Jobs lived his life the way he wanted and he left the world a better place for it, so good on him. RIP.
 
I think they mean more than 90% percent to the speed of light, like maybe 95% or 99%.
 
This was in my chem book... which was written in 2005.

"It is now possible to accelerate particles to a speed well above 90% of the speed of light. (According to Einsteins theory of relativity, it is impossible for a particle to move AT the speed of light)"

Don't know if that means that the speed is .9x or 1.9x; x being the speed of light.

They're talking about .9x the speed of light. The neutrinos were measured as the speed of light plus 1/40,000th, which in itself would be groundbreaking if true. 1.9x would shatter the world of science...

Edit: Double ninjad!
 
  • #11
Just to weigh in. I'm a nuclear engineer so have had a considerable amount of coursework on subatomic particles/modern physics.

While it IS true that their results show neutrinos traveling faster than the speed of light, both the scientists that published the results as well as the scientific community in general are mostly of the opinion that it is due to a flaw or oversight in the experiment itself, namely, how the speed is measured and what could have gone wrong with it.
 
  • #12
We'll see what happens ;)
 
  • #13
The nice thing about science is replication...if those results cannot be obtained again then there obviously was some error.
 
  • #15
RIP Steve Jobs.
Stay foolish, stay hungry.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and the bartender says, "sorry, we don't serve neutrinos here." A neutrino walks into a bar

That chemistry book must be outdated... I can accelerate particles to 100% of the speed of light by flipping a light switch.
 
  • #16
I guess I will be the bad guy and say this...

There is a very interesting post about Jobs in Slashdot's recent discussion, and I AGREE with it completely. In real life Jobs was not a very nice person, and by no means does he deserve any kind of worship.
Unfortunately people are blinded by fanaticism when it comes to Apple, and I guess that merits some respect to the company.
Apple is known for their smart advertisement campaigns and the ability to present a mediocre product (from a technological point of view) as a magical_must_have_device that every teen out there absolutely needs to have to be accepted amongst his/her peers. Steve Jobs was good at selling things, that's all.

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/10/10/1227229/richard-stallmans-dissenting-view-of-steve-jobs

P.S. Ehh I turned the conversation back to Steve from a successful derailment earlier :(
 
  • #17
Steve Jobs was good at selling things, that's all.
Imho, this statement pushes the saint-worship pendulum too far in the other direction. Personally I believe that some of the things he accomplished were significant & outside the realm of sales.

One of the statements from your link is probably more reasonable:
Just because Jobs was innovative, popular and successful doesn't mean he was a saint.
 
Back
Top