Latest post of the previous page:
Ooops, my apologies to NuckAlan C. wrote:Who is this Nock of whom you speak? He was maybe a hard- knock during his rugby playing days, But they are long goneDave
Excellent clip, Nock, bookmarked.
Latest post of the previous page:
Ooops, my apologies to NuckAlan C. wrote:Who is this Nock of whom you speak? He was maybe a hard- knock during his rugby playing days, But they are long goneDave
Excellent clip, Nock, bookmarked.
I always know there's an explanation, Val, but when I don't understand I just accept it as magic.Val wrote:...don't understand how photos work either for that matter. I thought I had got my head around the principle before digital photography came along...
Richard Feynman:Alan H wrote:I never tire of watching these interviews with Richard Feynman:
http://www.feynmanphysicslectures.com/
Both? Computerised driving is going to be a lot cheaper to develop than alternative energy systems. It will, of course, take all the fun out of driving, even for us nonClarksons, as well. I do like to watch the bloke behind me slow down to take the turn into my road which my little Aygo does comfortably at 30 mph.Gottard wrote:Rationality suggests that investment in alternative, clean, cheap fuel overrides computerised driving; at least so I hope!
While what you say is true, the video did explain how millions of litres of fuel could be saved by reducing congestion on the roads.Gottard wrote:Rationality suggests that investment in alternative, clean, cheap fuel overrides computerised driving; at least so I hope!
Ah, wish that I could walk more, Fia, and maybe I will try when the weather gets warmer. At the moment walking half a mile makes my feet feel as though I am wearing shoes two sizes too small!Fia wrote:Yup, Alan, but millions more litres of fuel could be saved by city folk not using their damn cars, and using public transport and bicycles instead
Also my worry about such technology is when it, inevitably at some point, fails. There'd be folk on their mobiles, reading, doing make-up, dozing etc and suddenly there's pandemonium. Doesn't bear thinking about really...
Guilty as charged. But my motorcycle takes less gas than the van; does that count?Fia wrote:Yup, Alan, but millions more litres of fuel could be saved by city folk not using their damn cars, and using public transport and bicycles instead
Also my worry about such technology is when it, inevitably at some point, fails. There'd be folk on their mobiles, reading, doing make-up, dozing etc and suddenly there's pandemonium. Doesn't bear thinking about really...
I just checked our library online (cool or what?)Marian
Not sure if you'll have it at your local library. It's called: Dies the Fire by RM Stirling.