Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 18:05:53 06/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
All the physysist I talked with about it (and I have a lot of friends that are physysists in Russian Academy of Sciences) have other opinion. They thought that supercollider would be the beatiful and very helpful instrument. Unfortunately, they are not voting in the US Congress. Of course that is not strictly computer-chess related... Eugene On June 03, 1999 at 20:57:21, James B. Shearer wrote: >On June 03, 1999 at 18:36:31, Prakash Das wrote: > > >> Building the super collider in Texas (instead of shelving it) would have >>produced some great advances in high energy physics, and many applications to >>other areas. > > The super collider in Texas was the same sort of wasteful megaproject >that you properly object to in space. Both push existing technology well past >the point of diminishing returns. > James B. Shearer
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.