I checked the posts, how could anyone have missed this? *EDIT* Sorry it isn't this big on comp, honestly
From the Video Game Celebrities challenge. See all 327 entries (closed)
( , Fri 11 Sep 2009, 0:40, archived)
From the Video Game Celebrities challenge. See all 327 entries (closed)
( , Fri 11 Sep 2009, 0:40, archived)
Are they?
And there was me thinking that you can walk an a vacuum..
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 0:58,
archived)
finally!
someone with enough sense to post something I can see without my bifocals
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 0:44,
archived)
You should ask that "how many electrons per bit" question on the wikipedia reference desk
( , Fri 11 Sep 2009, 0:54, archived)
( , Fri 11 Sep 2009, 0:54, archived)
I could, but I need to figure out how to frame the question. The Wikipedia culture scares me.
I have a feeling the answer is going to begin with something like, "that's not how it works, gnaaa gnaaa gnaaa"
Maybe I'll post the question on Yahoo Answers, so some ignorant redneck can make fun of my haircut when he can't figure out the question.
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 1:03,
archived)
Maybe I'll post the question on Yahoo Answers, so some ignorant redneck can make fun of my haircut when he can't figure out the question.
They're not the sneering type, really.
A question on the science desk yesterday was "it have seen that if an ufo is looked anywhere , then it is seen that aliens use zigzag motion to come at the earth, so why can not use this type of maotion to go to any other planet?" ... and they did their best to guess at what this meant and answer the question.
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 1:20,
archived)
It's going to be long. 60 to 100m I'd bet.
You've got speed of light(on copper) divided by bandwidth time or the length of a clock interval
times the number of state changes per byte(datum plus stops and markers) times packet length. I think.
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 1:30,
archived)
times the number of state changes per byte(datum plus stops and markers) times packet length. I think.
I understood that. Does that make me a nerd?
So if I could learn the velocity of propagation over UTP copper, and the oscillation rate of the modulator...
I think I can work it out then. I WAS actually looking at the wrong way :P
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 1:36,
archived)
I think I can work it out then. I WAS actually looking at the wrong way :P
It's not going to be the speed of light.
Maybe a third, or a half, or two thirds. This depends on something or other to do with wires, I'm pretty sure, yup.
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 1:40,
archived)
Yeah, on copper makes a big difference.
The local speed of propagation/light/energy is slower. 66%ish for rough calculations.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_electricity
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 1:46,
archived)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_electricity
You're mostly right. I used to work in Cable TV, We would see up to 80% for very good coaxial cabling
Twisted pair cabling is a bit lower.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_propagation_speed
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 1:55,
archived)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_propagation_speed
Man, that's so big that is isn't actually loading for me.
You must be really, really shit.
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 0:46,
archived)
I'm not saying this definitely is a picture of the poster, I'm just saying I haven't seem them deny it
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 0:47,
archived)
Tch... I spent all that time optimising my gif
I cried tears when I had to reduce the animation quality... and now this!
*shrugs* bigger is always better?
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 0:47,
archived)
*shrugs* bigger is always better?
FACT: the only people who say " It's not the size that matters but what you do with it"
have small penises
( ,
Fri 11 Sep 2009, 0:52,
archived)