Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

"I'll need to be able to pull by date or by a number of key fields"

So, in other words, you have already decided on key fields. If you use a database, this has things call index's, that can search billions of rows for a key field in a fraction of a second. If you don't use something with INDEX's then you can't do this.

Where has this idea that Databases can't scale come from? - The world runs on Database for heaven sake. Do you think when you take money out of an ATM, its going to MONGODB? - And yet there are millions of ATM's and you can take money out of your VISA account in almost all of them anywhere in the world. That is called scale.

I wonder, how much Co2 has been released into the atmosphere, with this bug present on millions of computers, over decades, causing PC's to eat more electricity than they should.

Its also more formally called TDD. Create some code that tests the suitability of the existing code to solve the problem. Then randomly change the code until it passes the test, and all the others. Repeat, rinse, etc.

Imagine 2 envelopes, A and B. Inside both envelopes is a hidden binary code, just printed on a card.

01001101000101101011011011.

These envelopes are sent to Alice and Bob. However, Alice doesn't read the code directly. She first generates her own pseudo random stream of random 0's and '1's. She can control the ratio of 1's and 0's, by initially choosing an angle, and the Generator will spew out a sequence that all '0's if the angle is 0degrees, or all '1's if the angle is 90degrees, and any angle between 0 and 90 will adjust the ratio accordingly.

Alice then X'ORs her stream of 0's and 1's with that printed on her card, in the envelope, to give a result.

At the other envelope, BOB does exactly the same. He also has a pseudo random number generator, (using the same seed as Alice). When he sets his angle to 0, and Alice sets her's to 0, they will BOTH end up with the same sequence on the PRNG, and so XORing the number on the card will result in the same message. In fact when Alice and Bob set their PRNG to the same angle, they always will get the same sequence, and so their message will always match. Nothing spooky going on here.

The spooky thing happens when Alice and Bob choose different angles. Lets say that Alice sets her angle to 0 degrees, and Bob chooses 30 degrees. They do the calculation, and it appears the final sequences correlate 3 out of 4 times.... or 25% of the time there is a difference between Bobs and Alices code. Bob then changes his angle back to 0, and Alice sets hers to -30 Degrees. Again, after doing the calculation, they work out that 25% of the time the codes differ. If alice sets hers to -30 and Bob sets his to 30, it would be common sense to say that there could be no more than 50%, the codes will differ. Except this is not the case. In the real world, using real entangled particles the result comes out to be 75%. What *must* be happening for this result, is the original hidden code printed on Alices and Bob's card MUST some how change, when the other party changes their angle.... OR, that there is no hidden code, but something else is going on... No hidden fixed sequence of numbers can explain the experimental results. This is 'Spooky' action at a distance, and can't be explained using traditional physics on its own.

I have noticed this also.... For example, how would a programmer of a games physics engine, allow particles within that engine to move at any velocity. A computer only has a finite amount of power, its really difficult to make a particle move through infinite space, if it is going to have to render that particle at every position as it travels along. What happens if the particle's speed approaches that of the limits of the computers CPU. Dont want to end up skipping frames.... Well, one way would be to slow down the time perceived by that particle. this way the computer wouldn't have to spend as much time rendering it. Of course this might mean there are side effects, like time dilation, but the alternative would be things just disappearing at position a, reappearing at position b some distance later, which wouldn't be indicative of a crap physics engine. And, well, the particle isn't gonna know, its not like its got its own 'clock'...its just a particle.

"Like Windows, Android has built a dominant market share because any hardware manufacturer can license it."

If that is the only reason that Android has for having a dominant market share, any old phone manufacturer can load it with crapware and sell it to the gullible?

The thing is.....Light *has* to be coming out of the torch at.5c, according to the observer who sees the torch traveling also at.5c. He sees the torch, and the person traveling along at.5c, trying to measure the speed of light. He sees the light leaving the torch at.5c. so, if he sees the light leaving the torch at.5c, the *only* way he can work out why the guy traveling at.5c measures the light, he perceives traveling at.5c, going at 1c is by taking into account the time dilation and length contraction.

Imagine a piece of copper wire, and electrons flowing down it, and another piece of copper wire a short distance away, with electrons traveling in the opposite direction. the amount of electrons in each wire per inch = the amount of protons per inch, so there is no static electric charge or attraction between the two wires.

HOWEVER, because the electrons on wire 1, 'observe' the protons in wire 2 traveling in the opposite direction, they see them move closer together due to this things getting shorter phenomina. when they move closer together, more can fit in the same place, and so the wire appears to wire 1, to become more positively charged than it really is. because electrons are attracted to positive charges, they experience an electrostatic attraction to the wire.

And, that, is what magnetism is. Its simply caused by the effects of relativity on the electrons in a moving current.

Your watch measures time, so you can use it to calculate how fast the light comes out of your torch by timing how long it takes to travel a distance, and you have a meter stick to measure just that.

When you are traveling fast, your watch slows down, and your meter rule gets shorter. However you don't notice this, as your own internal body's clock slows, and you yourself gets shorter in exactly the same proportions. But, when you measure the speed of light, coming out of the torch, now with your slower watch, and shorter meter stick, everything just adds up and you calculate the light to be traveling at the speed of light, EVEN THOUGH, the light, relative to you is now traveling just.5c.

The person you have just passed sees your watch, and meter rule, and thinks you've made a mistake, because your rule is longer and your watch ticks slower. He sees you measuring the speed of light coming from your torch. To him, he sees the light is coming out of your torch at.5c, but can see you (inaccurately) measuring it....and working it out to be 1c because you've measured it over a shorter distance using a slower watch.

When he measures the speed of the light coming out of your torch passing him, he also works it out to be going at light speed.

So there you go. There is no paradox. Light is going at the same speed regardless of if you are moving or not. The only difference is that your movement causes things like slowdown of time, and length change, which means that you are unable to calculate the "proper" relative speed of light, which would be.5c.......any attempt at measuring it, always comes out at 1c.

OR.....the more usual way of putting it is just make the speed of light constant, regardless of your speed, and alter the other things such as time, and length, to make your speed calculations always come to 1c.