Re: Overview Of New Intel Core i7(Nehalem) Processor

Typical anti-gun nut thinking (or lack thereof). Of COURSE I nkow how to use one - but I have no intent of suffering the consequences of your personal limitations.

BTW, there's no need to look anything up - I quoted Article II in its entirety.

Hoplophoibia is pathological fear of firearms.

And gun control is Anti-American.

Thanks, Rich

On a sunny day (Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:57:13 GMT) it happened Richard the Dreaded Libertarian wrote in :

Do not people over there see the 'gun' as extention to their dick. So if you have a small one, a big gun compensates... And talk about it all the time... hehe

FWIW, it's about 120mph in a "stable spread" position, up to 200mph for a head-down dive (this is for tropospheric altitudes; higher speeds are attainable in the stratosphere, but you'd need a space suit).

Still a lot less than an airliner, though.

You're dead either way. At 120mph, there's not much difference between water and concrete.

Yes,and idiots that actually think we are in a civil society and nothing needs fixing are those that are afraid.

Fact is, we are NOT in a civil society. The civil folk need guns to protect ourselves from the retarded criminal onslaught.

Absolutely true.

The Golden Gate Bridge is about 250 feet above the water. Fall time, ignoring air resistance, is about 4 seconds, calculated velocity about

87 MPH. At least 1600 people have made the jump with roughly a 2% survival rate.

John

That's high enough for air resistance to figure into the calculation. FWIW, I estimate 76mph after 4.1 seconds, at which point acceleration is down to 0.6g (5.8m/s/s).

Also, energy is proportional to speed squared, so you have twice as much energy at 120mph compared to 85mph, and 2.5 times compared to 76mph.

Water has the added drawback that if you survive the impact but are unconscious, you're likely to drown. Actually, being conscious and in perfect health won't help much if you're in the middle of the ocean, particularly if it's cold, or shark-infested.

My idea of fair includes disclosing all the information used in the comparison.

Varies with mass-to-surface area ratio, naturally. A big sturdy coat would help. And you could skip the in-flight meal service, just in case. :)

That still sounds better than "whack" + (A320 + avgas) piled atop.

Doubtful? Then just jump on a handy flying human.

See 3:40-3:47

--
Cheers,
James Arthur

Rationalize all you want, cast all the insults you want, that doesn't alter the fact that in the USA, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed.

Cheers! Rich

Is this really a fair comparison? I mean, if you're jumping off the Golden Gate, do you really _want_ to survive? ;-)

Cheers! Rich

Several of the survivors have states that they realized that they had made a terrible mistake immediately after they jumped.

John

20-20 hindsight? ;-)

Cheers! Rich

...except that it is.

Are there even enough of them to qualify as "several"?

Dreaded

Unless you are "one of them".

2% of 1600 is... wait for it... 32!

Any time you need help with math, feel free to ask.

John

Living? All feeling the same way?

The question was how many felt that way, as that is what you attributed the "several" moniker to.

So the number is likely far smaller. You see, I do understand math, despite your ribbings.

"Several actually tried again". Would then likely also be a true statement, even if the same method was not employed.

When one changes one's mind in mid air, what would one do to alter the impact event? Make all pointy like?

One guy deliberately tried to hit feet-down. That may not be optimum, but 4 seconds isn't a lot of time to plan or practice stuff like this.

John

Thunks were in Windows from the beginning. They were an ugly kludge.

--
    W
  . | ,. w ,   "Some people are alive only because
   \|/  \|/     it is illegal to kill them."    Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------