|
21)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Initial Replication
(Message 18306)
Posted 19 Oct 2007 by  CoM
Post: all these arguments, day after day started because ONE person cant get everyone else to think like him,.. what a shame!!! Thats right, seems like he conducts. I looked around and discovered that Dagorath is arguing (quite unkind) with other users in several other project forums (i.e. ABC@home, BOINC,...). And that he´s unhappy with the way of some projects are managed (i.e. QMC@home), so why you don't get your own project instead? Seems like squealing, but i had to quote this nice post of Dagorath from the ABC@Home forum:
P.S.: Why you think i am one of your students. You aren't that popular, are you? |
|
22)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Initial Replication
(Message 18291)
Posted 18 Oct 2007 by CoM
Post: Anybody who is unhappy with my posts is welcome to either ignore me or kiss my ass. The issue, C0M you insufferable twit, is primarily to save CPU cycles and secondarily to save electricity, if you would care to read the thread (though I doubt reading is one of your basic skills. Wow, sounds like schoolyard, i didn't expect to hear something like that here, its even worser than one of our Collaboration Meetings.(Yes, i am a particle physicist. And i doubt you really know what this project wants to accomplish.) By the way, i had to look up some of these nice/nasty words, cause thats not the language i am used to. |
|
23)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Initial Replication
(Message 18265)
Posted 18 Oct 2007 by CoM
Post: Dagorath could you please shut up, you spam in every thread. If you are not happy with the IR so please disconnect and go away. Having some redundant results have some advantages, you can read the statements in this thread. There are projects with an IR of 1, like QMC, but thats a Monte Carlo methode. Your reason to save energy is feigned. If you want to crunch more efficient, buy yourself a new more efficient CPU. By the way, i like my CPU´s to crunch LHC cause of energy saving, because doing QMC (which i mostly do) needs much more energy. (measure it yourself there are differences in project work) |
|
24)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Please increase our daily machine quota
(Message 18148)
Posted 14 Oct 2007 by CoM
Post: maybe in the future there will be some more 1 million turn WU´s, that would increase the amount of work by a factor of ten, because now the WU is just a 100.000 turn one |
|
25)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Happenings...
(Message 18095)
Posted 12 Oct 2007 by CoM
Post: now i see it too, thank u guys, well the problem is the 1 hour penalty |
|
26)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Happenings...
(Message 18090)
Posted 12 Oct 2007 by CoM
Post: in my opinion it must be controlled over the daily quota, thats the way to satisfy even users with dial up one important thing i want to promote is: the quota should take into account the number of cores of a CPU, say a single gets X WU´s, so a dual core should get 2X WU´s and a quad core 4X WU´s i hope neasan consider this, cause i want my Q6600 be under heavy duty adjusting X would be difficult, too |
|
27)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
work units??
(Message 18044)
Posted 12 Oct 2007 by CoM
Post: its funny if i think of my quadcore... 2 WU arent much. |
|
28)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
work units??
(Message 18026)
Posted 12 Oct 2007 by CoM
Post: on 3 computers i got 1 WU for each, seems to be a new way of distribute work equally over all users |
|
29)
Message boards :
LHC@home Science :
Any success in creating anti hydrogen?
(Message 17984)
Posted 25 Sep 2007 by CoM
Post: If your interested in information about this, check out the pages of the ATHENA and ATRAP collaborations. |
|
30)
Message boards :
LHC@home Science :
Measured speed of the particle beam?
(Message 17981)
Posted 24 Sep 2007 by CoM
Post: There are charged particles in the accelerators (mainly electrons and protons). And these charged particles induce a signal when they flight cross a capacitance like system. This system is named schottky pick up (if i am right), so you measure the revolution frequency and one know the circumference of the synchrotron, so one can calculate the speed. There are also other possibilities: Taking some detectors like scintillators. But that disturbs the beam. |
|
31)
Message boards :
LHC@home Science :
Measured speed of the particle beam?
(Message 17974)
Posted 24 Sep 2007 by CoM
Post: OK, my answer was quite sensational. You are right that particle with mass will not reach the speed of light, but they come very close 95% up to 99,999...%. Todays accelerators like the LHC or SPS, Tevatron, RHIC, SLAC, KEK, ... are all power full enough. How to measure, well thats easy. You measure the time t the particle takes to travel the distance s and you calculate the speed v = s/t. You should use a very precise stopwatch (TDC with time resolution down to some 100ps). |
|
32)
Message boards :
LHC@home Science :
Measured speed of the particle beam?
(Message 17966)
Posted 23 Sep 2007 by CoM
Post: Has there ben made any measurement of the speed on the particle beam in accelerators and if so, how is it done? the speed is c=3*10^8 m/s (speed of light)!! |
|
33)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
work units??
(Message 17824)
Posted 12 Sep 2007 by CoM
Post: NO! It shows Results ready to send 16,800 but also Upload/download server hepboinc Disabled Scheduler hepboinc Disabled Give them free, please! |
|
34)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Quorate but unvalidated
(Message 16470)
Posted 7 Mar 2007 by CoM
Post: No, there is a lot of work going out. Get some!! |
|
35)
Message boards :
LHC@home Science :
If Neutrinos have no mass, can they escape a black hole?
(Message 16441)
Posted 1 Mar 2007 by CoM
Post: Because the neutrino has a finite mass there exists a system where it is in rest to the observer, which has a speed smaller than c. (in comparison to the photon or any other massless particle, which always has the speed c to the observer) Consider how neutrinos are produced, e.g. the beta decay - its an threebody reaction n -> p e- nybar so there is the possibility that the neutrino doesn't pick up any impulse in this reaction, so it will be in rest. This is actually the way KATRIN (Karlsruhe Tritium Neutrino Experimen) wants to measure the neutrino mass with the tritium beta decay. |
|
36)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
That was fast
(Message 16229)
Posted 5 Feb 2007 by CoM
Post: Yeah, lucky. Will you end all 60 workunits in a sensible amount of time? look at his host stats, he already finished all 60. And i am out of luck, another spill just minutes ago and i didn't get some either. |
|
37)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
That was fast
(Message 16223)
Posted 5 Feb 2007 by CoM
Post: I got nothing, cause i was sleeping and not aware that LHC will spill out work again. I hope there will be more soon. |
|
38)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
30 hours of work availability - did u get some?
(Message 15966)
Posted 2 Jan 2007 by CoM
Post: :-) Electrons or protons? Got another load in which they crashed twenty minutes from start up:-) Getting used to them :-) Someone may have adjusted the magnets a bit to much,:-( Protons, of course!! LHC stands for Large Hadron Collider, a proton is a hadron. |
|
39)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
30 hours of work availability - did u get some?
(Message 15962)
Posted 2 Jan 2007 by CoM
Post:
There are actually protons!! If electrons would run on proton-synchroton settings, they will get lost very fast!! :) |
|
40)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Flood of WU's
(Message 15857)
Posted 21 Dec 2006 by CoM
Post: Seems to be christmas!! CoM |
Previous 20 · Next 20
©2024 CERN