Phi for All

Is this for homework?

Iirc, asteroids closer to the sun have more metals and carbon, while asteroids further away have more silicon and oxygen. If this makes enough of a difference, Earth has plenty of silicon and oxygen if it can't be found in sources close to us. Is this what you mean?

! Moderator Note If you reread the OP, you'll find your ignorant, misinformed stance is off-topic here. This thread is about how the climate is changing faster than the models predicted. Further attempts to troll this topic will be removed to the Trash.

Then you definitely want high-pressure sodium vapor, or metal halide lamps. The fixtures are everywhere, and the bulbs are cheap, cheap, cheap. Replacement bulbs and electric costs usually come out of different budgets, so the politician can pretend it's the most cost-effective way to go. This is the American way, go cheap on one-time costs and pay through the nose on monthly fees and maintenance. Ten year plans are for socialists.

Marzipan is made from almonds, and is undoubtedly easier to sculpt with: The big question is, can they get it to taste just like chicken?

Again, better for what purpose? Daylight is better if you want to see true colors. Warm light is more calming. Bright light makes people happier. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3897760/ I think the big question is, do you want people driving vehicles to feel more relaxed, or do you want them more alert? I've seen case studies (there should be more formal experiments available) that concluded higher color temperature lighting increases productivity at work, which they associated with higher alertness. I think alertness is also more important to pedestrians than feeling relaxed, but maybe that's just me.

Anecdotal, of course, but I've experienced plenty of instances where people succumbed to an emotion that was at complete odds with any kind of reasonable, calculated behavior. I've seen people injure themselves severely trying to avoid a bee sting (no, it turned out they weren't allergic). Many people see a wild animal and let their emotions ("look how CUTE!") override their common sense, and they have to approach it like their house cat. In that case, you're purposely using a definition of "calculations" that can be applied to every situation, which renders your opening question meaningless. I've shown there are times when an emotional "feeling" can override a calculated assessment, so I think it's necessary to have a definition of "calculations" that encompasses that. Btw, there are situations where all the calculations in the world can't override what your emotions are doing to you. Did you know it's practically impossible to raise your arms above your head to wave for help when you know you're drowning? If you were doing your version of calculations, you might think that would be a great time to scream for help, but your fear blocks that tactic as well. You can't do anything but push downwards with your arms and gulp air, no matter how you calculate.

I think you're defining "calculation" differently than I am. Do you see fight and flight as equally calculating, or does one involve more uncontrollable emotion?

False dilemma. It doesn't need to be either/or. I think most of what people label "feelings" are really unconscious calculations, but there is certainly an emotional aspect that can override those calculations. You may unconsciously register all the things that are predicting traffic will slow down dramatically very soon, but you may hit the brakes because you flashed on a car crash scene in a movie you saw last night, and got a little scared.

I bid on a design like this for an indoor storage facility. The system lights up the hallway 20 feet in front of you and turns the lights off 20 feet behind you as you walk down the hallway to your storage bay. Very efficient for a business where people are coming and going at all times, and should be viable for street lighting as well. The detectors can be set so smaller animals don't set them off. It could be there's a better, more ideal design out there for LED street lighting, since much of the industry had to start out retrofitting existing fixtures and poles with designs that emulated incandescent bulbs. With street lighting, the strategy is still to put the lamps up high and drive the light downwards in a patterned pool, and the broader the area to light, the higher the pole needs to be. But a single LED lamp can have diodes angled in different ways to cast light in ways a bulb can't. The lenses can emit light in a rectangle for streets and parking lots. I think the strategies need to change to match the capabilities of the technology.

You could be right, moonlight is around 4000K. Hopefully there are some studies addressing this, since many of the LED street lamp replacements I see are a much higher color temp. Of course, you could argue that any city is going to have way more light at night than is natural even if it is a warmer light, so how how important is maintaining those rhythms?

What's the purpose of street lighting? If it's supposed to illuminate so people can be vigilant as they go about at night, you should have light above the 5000K range, which is closer to sunlight. Light under 5000K is cozier and more calming, so I don't think that serves the purpose as well. You don't want light so warm it makes drivers fall asleep at the wheel. One of the best things about this technology is that you can be much more precise about how you throw light. LED street lights can distribute in patterns, unlike the old Cobra heads that only light a circle.

3. Ran out of white Legos 2. Nose from his Halloween costume 1. Weight Watchers merit pin

I sincerely hope this view isn't held by anyone in leadership, being an example of the worst side of partisanism. Silly to think retaliation is necessary over Bill Clinton's impeachment, especially for no reason (which you imply by saying you need no more motivation than that it happened). It also shows a shallow, generalized, and caricaturish understanding of what a Democrat is. The only motivation for impeaching the POTUS should be his actions while in office. This is clearly no witch hunt since there is ample evidence, and it's not a retaliation either, unless you think the charges of tax evasion leveled at Al Capone were in retaliation for all the other crimes he committed. It's an investigation into the clear extortion exercised by someone in a unique position who is held by the Constitution to higher standards of behavior, standards this POTUS has clearly had trouble adhering to. And I didn't imply that at all, unless I misread myself. But they do have different definitions.

If the military aid hadn't already been promised and approved by Congress, and Trump had offered it in exchange for political favors, I would call that bribery. Since the aid was supposed to go to the Ukraine but was withheld by Trump, it seems more like extortion than bribery. But I agree that using the Latin phrase is just dumb, and to me it seems like a tactic meant to confuse Joe Sixpack.