[Nuke]

• Since servers aren't compatible with PC operating systems (and thus must use server OS's), then does that mean supercomputers are also incompatible with PC operating systems?

while many servers are x86 based (there are other architectures though) they usually have more ram and more cpus/cores than your typical desktop os can handle is licenced to use (as far as windows goes, the desktop oses are intentionally crippled so that server admins cant buy the cheaper desktop os and install it on their server).  the server os really isnt that much different from the desktop os, aside from higher limits (more cores, more ram, and server appropriate defaults), and a software suite that is applicable to a server admin's or a desktop user's needs. the term server can also apply to any software running on any computer that provides some service to local or remote clients. for example i run a tftp server on my desktop so i can do network installs to other computers. this does not require any special hardware. a server os contains many of these server applications where a desktop os will not have them.

supercomputers are vastly different in that they tend to be vector processors. this means they operate on large sets of similar data per instruction, where a desktop or server does one operation per instruction (not to be confused with a cpu with multiple cores where they may do vastly different operations simultaneously). for a pc or server to do what a supercomputer can do it would have to iterate over the sets and do the operation multiple times, which takes up cpu time. its kind of ironic that the modern video card is actually more similar to a supercomputer architecture than a desktop/server architecture.

that being said operating systems require very low level code that is specific to the architecture being used. since the instruction set (and not to mention the entire programing paradigm) in a super computer would be vastly different than a desktop/server cpu. its no different than trying to run x86 code on an arm processor. they just arent speaking the same language. you can do things to make a codebase compile in various architectures but you would still require different executables to be made for the various architectures.

and my last point to make is that a modern super computer is really just a server cluster, which can be programed to act as a virtual vector processor, or can also act as a regular old server with a ****ton of memory and cores at its disposal.

[watsisname]

9: Is there more evidence for cosmological constant or quintessence?

Good question... this is the most recent free paper I could find on the topic:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.1955v4.pdf

In short, the universe can be modeled fairly well using either, but because there's as of yet no firm evidence for a time-variation in dark energy, and physicists being physicists, we prefer to stick with the cosmological constant (or more accurately, Ω_λ for a constant dark energy) over the more dynamic concept of quintessence.

[Astronomiya]

Neutrons also belong to the lepton family;

News to me; I thought they were hadrons.  I think you meant "neutrinos."

It is a mystery currently why gravity is so weak at very small distances, yet insanely strong force at a distance. In cosmological perspective, gravity could just as well be the ONLY force that affects the macroscopic universe in the galactic scale

Not really, actually.  It's only a mystery why it's so much weaker than the other forces to begin with.  Once that happens, the fact that it is the only force that matters on cosmogical scales follows almost immediately, once you also accept the fact that gravity is always attractive, never repulsive.  Since the forces between charged objects are so strong, they all met up and became buddy-buddy long ago.  The strong and weak nuclear forces only act over very tiny distances anyway (they both have some utterly ridiculous power-law fall off that may as well be exponential), so once the universe is effectively electrically neutral, the only force left that matters at all is gravity.  It's still extremely weak, but give it a few million/billion years, and even a weak force that's constantly active can produce big results.

Basically, gravity is the only thing that matters in cosmology precisely because it's so weak.

If your brain is not in a knot yet you didn't understand the quoted text fully. Re-read it and try to keep your cerebral matter from liquifying and leaking into your spine due to excessive freaking out.

Oh, come on.  It ain't that hard.    See here for a more complete description and visualization of what white holes are.

For an in-depth investigation of String Theory, you'd probably need a grad-school level course specializing in it, but I don't know for sure.  (I'm still an undergrad.)

Undergrad QM doesn't even come close to string theory.  A year-long (at least) graduate level quantum field theory course, followed by an in-depth literature review on the subject, would be the level of preperation you'd need to really understand the subject.

[Herra Tohtori]

Neutrons also belong to the lepton family;

News to me; I thought they were hadrons.  I think you meant "neutrinos."

Yes I did. Thanks for pointing that out.

It is a mystery currently why gravity is so weak at very small distances, yet insanely strong force at a distance. In cosmological perspective, gravity could just as well be the ONLY force that affects the macroscopic universe in the galactic scale

Not really, actually.  It's only a mystery why it's so much weaker than the other forces to begin with.  Once that happens, the fact that it is the only force that matters on cosmogical scales follows almost immediately, once you also accept the fact that gravity is always attractive, never repulsive.  Since the forces between charged objects are so strong, they all met up and became buddy-buddy long ago.  The strong and weak nuclear forces only act over very tiny distances anyway (they both have some utterly ridiculous power-law fall off that may as well be exponential), so once the universe is effectively electrically neutral, the only force left that matters at all is gravity.  It's still extremely weak, but give it a few million/billion years, and even a weak force that's constantly active can produce big results.

Basically, gravity is the only thing that matters in cosmology precisely because it's so weak.

Good points.

One thing that comes to mind, though, relating to gravity being always attractive, never repulsive force.

Just because the normal matter we know always gravitates toward each other (gravity being an attractive force), doesn't mean all stuff in the universe behaves the same. The current hypothesis is that visible matter and energy form four percent of the entire universe (correct me if I misquoted the percentage). The rest is dark matter, which does behave just like normal matter with regards to gravity (based on observations of rotating galaxies they should have a halo of dark matter around them, which we can't see but which affects the speed at which different parts of the galaxies rotate) - and dark energy, which we know very little of and make random guesses.


However, while we're making those random guesses, we have also observed a mysterious force that seems to be accelerating the rate at which our universe is expanding. Which really sounds quite a bit like antigravity to me in certain senses.

If your brain is not in a knot yet you didn't understand the quoted text fully. Re-read it and try to keep your cerebral matter from liquifying and leaking into your spine due to excessive freaking out.

Oh, come on.  It ain't that hard.    See here for a more complete description and visualization of what white holes are.

Well I was more referring to the weird stuff that suggests white hole and black hole are the same object, and that a white hole may become a black hole at later time.

The actual anti-blackness itself isn't so much of a stretch... but the other implications mentioned are rather exotic.

[Astronomiya]

Just because the normal matter we know always gravitates toward each other (gravity being an attractive force), doesn't mean all stuff in the universe behaves the same. The current hypothesis is that visible matter and energy form four percent of the entire universe (correct me if I misquoted the percentage). The rest is dark matter, which does  behave just like normal matter with regards to gravity (based on observations of rotating galaxies they should have a halo of dark matter around them, which we can't see but which affects the speed at which different parts of the galaxies rotate) - and dark energy, which we know very little of and make random guesses.


However, while we're making those random guesses, we have also observed a mysterious force that seems to be accelerating the rate at which our universe is expanding. Which really sounds quite a bit like antigravity to me in certain senses.

Yeah, radiation plus normal matter is something like 4-5%.  Dark  matter makes up additional 25-30% of the universe, and dark energy the rest.  Think of dark energy as a perfect fluid that has negative pressure.  Yeah, that's really weird and totally at odds with how every other fluid behaves.  Still, because it has negative pressure (in an FRW model, anyway), it causes the universe to expand.  Dark energy, by the way, is the mysterious force that accelerates the rate at which our universe is expanding.  If I may just quote some basic results at you, in a flat FRW model*, if the universe is matter-dominated, the size increases as t^2/3, if it's radiation dominated, it goes as t^1/2, and if it's lambda (dark energy) dominated, the universe expands exponentially (this also means that an empty flat universe is an eternal one).  A flat radiation or matter dominated universe slowly stops expanding over time - the expansion rate is zero when t is infinity.

*An FRW model assumes that the universe is homogenous and isotropic on large scales and each component of it is a perfect fluid (no viscosity, basically).  FRW universes can be closed, flat, or open.  Our universe closely approximates a flat FRW universe which is becoming lambda-dominated over time.

[FlamingCobra]

What would happen if someone had been exposed to high levels of magnesium, strontium, and barium and low levels of calcium since birth?

[watsisname]

...

Why do you ask?

[FlamingCobra]

I'd like to know the effects it would have on bone strength/density

[Herra Tohtori]

You'd get a lot of nutritional adverse effects as other alkali earth metals don't act as exact substitutes for calcium, they have subtly individual properties and would thus behave differently.

Aside from probable problems in growth and bone integrity you could get things like deformities (especially if nutritional levels were very badly skewed during pregnancy) and, more likely, termination of the pregnancy.

Aside from the bones requiring calcium for the hydroxylapatite mineral, they also require other things for the calcification, such as vitamin D and, apparently, small quantities of the other alkali earth metals you listed (although that seems to be debatable). Magnesium, for certain, is an important mineral for humans; not as much is known of strontium and barium.

I am suspecting that while the calcium in bones could be partially substituted by strontium, barium or magnesium due to their superficially similar qualities, the resulting bone mineral would have somewhat different properties than the calcium based apatite - whether it would be harder, more brittle, more flexible, more durable, or just a plain disaster, I cannot say.


What would probably be more important for immediate vitality of the human being are the calcium channels in our nervous system. I don't want to think very much what would happen if there was no calcium available, or if all calcium was replaced by other alkali earth ions.

It should also be noted that it would likely be impossible to offer more of other alkali earth metals than calcium in the diet. Calcium is very ubiquitous, avoiding it would prove immensely problematic, and magnesium, strontium and barium would have to be added in spades...

Actually while you're at it, why not add beryllium and radium to the experiment? I don't think the subject will have a very long or fulfilling life anyway...

[FlamingCobra]

You'd get a lot of nutritional adverse effects as other alkali earth metals don't act as exact substitutes for calcium, they have subtly individual properties and would thus behave differently.

Aside from probable problems in growth and bone integrity you could get things like deformities (especially if nutritional levels were very badly skewed during pregnancy) and, more likely, termination of the pregnancy.

Aside from the bones requiring calcium for the hydroxylapatite mineral, they also require other things for the calcification, such as vitamin D and, apparently, small quantities of the other alkali earth metals you listed (although that seems to be debatable). Magnesium, for certain, is an important mineral for humans; not as much is known of strontium and barium.

I am suspecting that while the calcium in bones could be partially substituted by strontium, barium or magnesium due to their superficially similar qualities, the resulting bone mineral would have somewhat different properties than the calcium based apatite - whether it would be harder, more brittle, more flexible, more durable, or just a plain disaster, I cannot say.


What would probably be more important for immediate vitality of the human being are the calcium channels in our nervous system. I don't want to think very much what would happen if there was no calcium available, or if all calcium was replaced by other alkali earth ions.

It should also be noted that it would likely be impossible to offer more of other alkali earth metals than calcium in the diet. Calcium is very ubiquitous, avoiding it would prove immensely problematic, and magnesium, strontium and barium would have to be added in spades...

Actually while you're at it, why not add beryllium and radium to the experiment? I don't think the subject will have a very long or fulfilling life anyway...

Because beryllium and radium are radioactive.

Any ideas of how someone COULD have jacked up bone strength without resorting to genetic engineering? Since bones dump calcium in lower gravity environments, I will assume that it immediately follows that bones of humans that matured in high gravity environments would have significantly higher calcium levels?

[Herra Tohtori]

You mean aside from high calcium supply, along with other nutrients required for calcification, and lots of exercise where the skeleton, skeletal muscles, and tendons are stressed (which is THE single most effective way to get strong bones - lots of activity in childhood and youth)?


There's always traditional engineering with titanium plates screwed on the bones, possibly in a mesh pattern. Very invasive, though. Not recommended.

Also, it's not gonna help much for joint strength. Ligaments are gonna get torn anyway with certain amount of stress on them, even if bones stay intact.

[FlamingCobra]

You mean aside from high calcium supply, along with other nutrients required for calcification, and lots of exercise where the skeleton, skeletal muscles, and tendons are stressed (which is THE single most effective way to get strong bones - lots of activity in childhood and youth)?


There's always traditional engineering with titanium plates screwed on the bones, possibly in a mesh pattern. Very invasive, though. Not recommended.

Also, it's not gonna help much for joint strength. Ligaments are gonna get torn anyway with certain amount of stress on them, even if bones stay intact.

Invasive procedures = do not want.

How much stronger are we talkin' here?

Any thoughts on increasing visual acuity?

[Herra Tohtori]

How much stronger are we talkin' here?

So much that it can significantly decrease the risk of fractures once your bone density starts to go down by aging.

Think of it as a buffer zone for old age. For most adults, bones are quite well enough durable, and significantly bigger risk of fracture is not knowing how to fall right, than having less bone density than those who beat their bones up regularly. If you know how to fall with minimized damage, risk of fractures gets much lower (as does the amount of pulled muscles, twisted ankles and wrists, and general bruising you're likely to experience.

The mechanism is that once bones get microdamage from small shocks, they get repaired to higher density. How much structural integrity actually goes up, I can't say, but bone density does increase and that means it takes longer for the bones to degrade.

Any thoughts on increasing visual acuity?

Aside from cybernetic augmentations such as binoculars to increase aperture size and magnification, or glasses or contact lenses to improve the focusing of the image - no, you're stuck with the resolution that the cells on your retina offer you.

[FlamingCobra]

what about osteopetrosis and Hypercalcaemia?

[Ghostavo]

Aside from cybernetic augmentations such as binoculars to increase aperture size and magnification, or glasses or contact lenses to improve the focusing of the image - no, you're stuck with the resolution that the cells on your retina offer you.

There have been developments with artificial eyesight so I won't be surprised if 10 years from now devices like the linked one surpass natural eyesight.

[FlamingCobra]

Ok, from what I can tell, the G171V mutation to the LRP5 gene produces high bone mass and otherwise increases skeletal strength. What I'm wondering is, can that mutation be administered therapeutically using viruses? If so, what would be the results of doing that before the onset of puberty in addition to rigorous physical activity and..... dangerously high calcium intake. As well as setting up some sort of mechanism that creates small vibrations or shocks while the person sleeps, causing microdamage to the bones, as you stated.

And couple all of that with very generous protein intake and a little bit of steroids?

[Polpolion]

Ok, from what I can tell, the G171V mutation to the LRP5 gene produces high bone mass and otherwise increases skeletal strength. What I'm wondering is, can that mutation be administered therapeutically using viruses? If so, what would be the results of doing that before the onset of puberty in addition to rigorous physical activity and..... dangerously high calcium intake. As well as setting up some sort of mechanism that creates small vibrations or shocks while the person sleeps, causing microdamage to the bones, as you stated.

And couple all of that with very generous protein intake and a little bit of steroids?

yeah no

[Herra Tohtori]

You'd be more likely to create a permanent dialysis patient with cancer than any sort of supersoldier.

[Unknown Target]

10. Read a lot on your own to make the classes you do have to take if you're pursuing a degree easier to get through. Try to find forums and projects that are related to what you want to learn and what you want to do (seems like you're already doing this ).

[FlamingCobra]

You'd be more likely to create a permanent dialysis patient with cancer than any sort of supersoldier.

How did you guess?

10. Read a lot on your own to make the classes you do have to take if you're pursuing a degree easier to get through. Try to find forums and projects that are related to what you want to learn and what you want to do (seems like you're already doing this ).

I care not about degrees in medicine or supersoldiers. Or cosmology. I just find some of these topics interesting. Especially regenerative medicine. Well, actually, I think a research position in regen. med. would actually be pretty cool but.........

I'd most like to get a degree in video game creation or anything that will let me work on NRS. Maybe I'll be able to get a job with LiftPort group? But then I'll be such a super mega nerd that no woman would ever be caught dead with me. WAAAAAAAAAAAH!!! T_T


Going back to the whole supersoldier thing, I believe I have already worked out a way to significantly improve reaction time. Total Liquid Ventilation. I have read from some sources that TLV delivers more oxygen and is more efficient at removing CO₂ than gas breathing. I would assume that more oxygen to the brain = better information processing = faster thinking & better reaction time.