Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50194234

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Is it hard to understand that for some people it may be difficult to read ? It might be due to motivation issues, thrust issues, or concentration issues. While at the same time they may have a rich inner imagination or thinking that they would like to share.

My impression is that humanity might miss valuable insight by rejecting whatever is not "well written" whatever the reason might be.

You may feel yourself very luck if you don't have any difficulties to read and write. Avoid to judge severely people who don't share the same facilities.

He then developed the Pulsed ElectroMagnetic Propulsion (PEMP) system [3]. The principle is that the vehicle generates an intense alternating magnetic field and ionises the surrounding air at precisely the right time and location. This produces a Lorentz force which, by reaction, propels the craft.

He went on to investigate how such an intense alternating magnetic field could be generated in practice. This led him to discover a new type of oscillator with remarkable properties — one that requires the outer shell of the craft to be superconducting [4]. This has the convenient side effect of shielding the occupants from the intense magnetic field. If correct, this implies that superconductivity at very high temperatures — well above room temperature — is not only feasible but has been mastered by whoever built these craft.

Professor Meessen then turned to the question of how such Very High Temperature Superconductivity (VHTS) might be physically possible. He has just completed this line of research with the publication of a new theory [5] explaining how magnesium could become such a superconductor. In the superconducting state, magnesium would form very strong bonds, which could account for the unusual physical properties reported for the Roswell fragments.

[1] https://www.meessen.net/AMeessen/ [2] https://www.meessen.net/AMeessen/UFO_Evidence_of_Very_Strong_Low_Frequency_Magnetic_Fields.pdf [3] https://www.meessen.net/AMeessen/UFO_Pulsed_EM_Propulsion_of_Unconventional_Flying_Objects.pdf [4] https://www.meessen.net/AMeessen/UFO_Production_of_EM_Surface_Waves_by_Superconducting_Spheres.pdf [5] https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=149827

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47627331

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Go is awesome and I hope it will continue to progress in that direction. Thank you Russ Cox

When the least recently used data does have a lower probability to be requested, than LRU will outperform random picking.

There is no silver bullet algorithm.

The problem with publishing elsewhere is that many people unable to objectively evaluate the validity of the theory juge its value by the reputation of the journal. Also the other journal will most probably have less visibility. There is thus a higher chance that the other theory will not be reported in reviews.

There are many assumptions in the above comment that I can't agree with. But my experience is with physics, not computer science.

Regarding simplicity, there is a simpler algorithm where we don't need the next and prev pointers. We simply replace the non-flagged value at the hand. This is most probably what is used in CPUs.

The client sends a request, the server returns a response that may be big that also contains a random value. The client must return this random value in a thank you message.

If the server doesn't receive the thank you message, it slows down responses to that ip address and eventually blacklist it if it's repeated.

From the client perspective, the answer is obtained in one round trip time. The price to pay on the server is the need to keep track of the expected thank you messages, and the throttled or blacklisted addresses.

Edit: If the server creates the certificate with a three way handshake, it will use the remote IP address. So the client doesn't have to know it's IP address

Revocation is indeed a weak point of this solution as it would take time, probably a transaction, to check. This problem might be mitigated by shortening the certificate validity duration.

I don't see why time synchronization would be critical if the validity periods are slightly overlapping.