1/9/2002

A couple links

Filed under:General — eric @ 4:49 am

I haven’t been able to write lately. That’s something I hope to rectify soon.

The Hot L Baltimore opens next Friday, and it’s going off as smooth as can be. It’ll be a fantastic show I’ll be mighty proud of. It’s kept me mghty busy away from home, though, which is something a newly-wed with a new farm shouldn’t be.

Not that I’ve been neglecting the farm. (The wife, well, you’ll have to bring that up with her.) We’ve decided on a name, which I’ll keep a secret for now. I’ve bought the domain and am putting the web pages together; I’ll announce it in a couple of weeks or so. We’re sponsors of the forthcoming Georgia Organics resource directory. Seventy-five new chickens are on order and a couple hundred dollars’ worth of seeds are on the way. When the first of February rolls around, getting the place together will be my full-time second job.

Today, I do have a couple links that have come my way:

What Really Happened is a conspiracy theory clearing house, focusing mostly on the events on and after September 11. As with any good conspiracy theory, the people here weave a plausible tapestry.

Word’s Eye is an amazing research project coming out of AT&T labs. You feed the program a text description, and it generates a rendered image that portrays your description. There’s not an on-line demo yet, but they have sample output to view and planty of technical documents. This is one worth keeping up on.

2 Comments »

  1. LOL!

    Give people a little information and they will hang themselves int their theories.

    1) The jet fuel didn’t *melt* the steel in the external skeleton. Steel often undergoes heat treatment to make it harder, but if there is too much heat treatment, then the strength starts to decrease. It was not necessary for the steel to melt; it just needed to reach a temperature where the the heat would cause grain growth (increasing the size of the ordered domains of atoms in the steel - small grains are generally good while large grains is generally bad). The strength of the structural steel in the floors near the impacts eventually decreased past the design limits (generally half the maximum stress as a safety measure) which caused the the top of the building to collapse.

    The collapse changed the loading issues for the structure from a static load to an impact load. A concentrated impact can cause catastrophic failure at lower loads seen for static loads. For example, you can support a person on a bridge of balsa wood if the person carefully loads the structure, but if the person stomps on the same bridge, then the structure could easily collapse (depends on the bridge design and the WTC pushed design limits) After the first set of collapsed floors, it became and chain reaction which overwhelmed the building.

    I suppose I am preaching to the chior here, but those theories really don’t make a great deal of sense. :(

    Comment by satan — 1/9/2002 @ 7:07 am

  2. That AT&T project is old and dead I thought. Maybe it is still being worked on, but I know it is old.

    Comment by Schlake — 1/11/2002 @ 12:24 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>