Come and have a look at this web! Amazing for you ,for all of us ,low price ,high quality indeed! Haven't you found anything special gift for your friend for the coming Christams ,if not, go ahead with a nice shoping!Have a look at this web www.sonyele.com£¬Thanks£¡
mail_from_name __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.comTuesday, January 25, 2011
Monday, January 24, 2011
weighty matters
Seems that the kilogram - you know the measurement that is used in all of the world except here in the US of A. It's one portion of the metric system. This is the system that is simple, based on the fact that everything is divisible by ten. No pounds, ounces or any other weird numbering system. Just ten . . . Anyway the kilo is now under attack. Seems that the reference weight has lost about a millionth of a gram.
When is a kilogram not a kilogram? When it starts to weigh less. It came into existence more than two centuries ago and has become the standard unit of weight around the world, from the shopping malls of Europe to the souks of the Middle East, but scientists believe that the reign of the kilo as we know it is about to come to an end.
A group of experts meeting in London today want to redefine the kilogram so that it is no longer based on the mass of a solid cylinder of platinum-iridium alloy that sits beneath three layers of protective glass sealed in a locked vault in Sèvres, France.
This metal block, known as the International Prototype Kilogram, has been used since it was first registered with the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) in 1889 as the definitive unit of mass against which all other kilograms are measured.
In the past 122 years, it has been brought out of storage just three times to calibrate the national prototype kilograms used by countries around the world. However, scientists now believe it is time to redefine the kilogram because there is evidence that the precise mass of the international prototype in Sèvres is not as constant as it should be.
"We think it is losing weight, and we don't know why," says the BIPM's Michael Stock, who is due to attend the meeting at the Royal Society in London that will look again at the kilogram. "From the three times we have had it out to make calibrations, we have had indications that it is not perfectly stable. It seems to have lost about 50 micrograms and there is no real explanation."
The loss of mass, amounting to fifty-millionths of a gram, is equivalent to a small grain of sand, but for metrologists, who make a religion out of measuring things with extreme accuracy, the change represents a disturbing disparity from the expected.
Now it seems to me that if we converted to the metric system, all our weight loss woes would be over. Just eat what you want and get on a kilo scale and automatically lose weight. Killer idea, huh? On another note, Jack Lalanne died at 96 - long life - wonder how many it was in kiloyears ????
When is a kilogram not a kilogram? When it starts to weigh less. It came into existence more than two centuries ago and has become the standard unit of weight around the world, from the shopping malls of Europe to the souks of the Middle East, but scientists believe that the reign of the kilo as we know it is about to come to an end.
A group of experts meeting in London today want to redefine the kilogram so that it is no longer based on the mass of a solid cylinder of platinum-iridium alloy that sits beneath three layers of protective glass sealed in a locked vault in Sèvres, France.
This metal block, known as the International Prototype Kilogram, has been used since it was first registered with the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) in 1889 as the definitive unit of mass against which all other kilograms are measured.
In the past 122 years, it has been brought out of storage just three times to calibrate the national prototype kilograms used by countries around the world. However, scientists now believe it is time to redefine the kilogram because there is evidence that the precise mass of the international prototype in Sèvres is not as constant as it should be.
"We think it is losing weight, and we don't know why," says the BIPM's Michael Stock, who is due to attend the meeting at the Royal Society in London that will look again at the kilogram. "From the three times we have had it out to make calibrations, we have had indications that it is not perfectly stable. It seems to have lost about 50 micrograms and there is no real explanation."
The loss of mass, amounting to fifty-millionths of a gram, is equivalent to a small grain of sand, but for metrologists, who make a religion out of measuring things with extreme accuracy, the change represents a disturbing disparity from the expected.
Now it seems to me that if we converted to the metric system, all our weight loss woes would be over. Just eat what you want and get on a kilo scale and automatically lose weight. Killer idea, huh? On another note, Jack Lalanne died at 96 - long life - wonder how many it was in kiloyears ????
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Happy New Year
Unbelievable - its 2011 already. Gas is over $3.00 again - I use super stuff. Its one of the disadvantages of having an upgrade engine. Anyway, driving a front wheel drive vehicle is certainly different than the ole rear wheelers that I have driven for the last 55 years. Did some skeet shooting yesterday. Real rusty. I should get out to the range more. My O/U shotgun is not the problem, although I do blame it for the misses of those 'tiny' little clay disks flying at supersonic speeds. I keep wrecking cars on the XBox, not because my reaction time has diminished - its just that the cars are . . .
Went to see TRON in 3D and IMAX. Waste of 12 bucks. A mishmash of so-so depth effects. Anything or anyone not speaking was out of focus, or fuzzy double. Shame on you Disney. Remember the old blue/red glasses where 3D was stuff actually flying off the screen into the theater? As I remember, Universal still does a pretty good job of that on some of their rides using the polarizing lenses.
Went to see TRON in 3D and IMAX. Waste of 12 bucks. A mishmash of so-so depth effects. Anything or anyone not speaking was out of focus, or fuzzy double. Shame on you Disney. Remember the old blue/red glasses where 3D was stuff actually flying off the screen into the theater? As I remember, Universal still does a pretty good job of that on some of their rides using the polarizing lenses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)