SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Maurice Winn who wrote (1532)3/9/2000 11:27:00 PM
From: A.J. Mullen  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 12231
 
Some good ones, and as a reward, I'm going to give you the chance to explain GSRS again. I missed the original.

Meanwhile, let me take the opportunity to pose a problem which aches for a theory. What happens to all those odd socks lost each wash-day? Do they contribute to the missing Dark Matter. Hopefully, now Dr. Viterbi has retired he can address himself to this matter of fundamental importance instead of messing around with theory to build better gadgets. And think of the possible practical consequences. What is the value of all those odd socks?

Actually a friend of mine has a theory that might bear on your graviton spin reversal. He argues that it is all due to the rotation of modern spin dryers. I didn't understand the theory behind it (I think it involved electron spin, but then, he's a chemist). He made a big point of the fact that most modern dryers rotate in a clockwise direction, and that the socks lost are invariably left-handed ones. He claims the problem could be eliminated if only the manufacturers would produce a machine that would rotate a half turn in one direction, and then reverse themselves. He claims that the manufacturers are perfectly aware of this, but are keeping the public in the dark - just to save a few dollars on each machine.

Maybe my friend is right, but I didn't understand. I would feel much more comfortable not understanding the theory of a physicist than that of a chemist. - AJ