In case you haven't seen it:

I thought this was just a one-off. Surely it's not an accurate representation of 'US Americans'. (get it?)

Seems that this 'phenomena' is spawning a whole new set of books:

Susan Jacoby: Bemoaning an America that values stupidity

Walking home to her Upper East Side apartment, she said, overwhelmed and confused, she stopped at a bar. As she sipped her bloody mary, she quietly listened to two men, neatly dressed in suits. For a second she thought they were going to compare that day's horrifying attack to the Japanese bombing in 1941 that blew America into World War II:

"This is just like Pearl Harbor," one of the men said.

The other asked, "What is Pearl Harbor?"

"That was when the Vietnamese dropped bombs in a harbor, and it started the Vietnam War," the first man replied.

At that moment, Jacoby said, "I decided to write this book."

Except (judging from the article) she seems to blame the usual suspects - education, the net and pop culture.

Think she's right? Is it really down to just those factors?

Maybe I'm a dill too, but until I saw this article I had never heard of Susan Jacoby.

However I do understand her concern, but I think that the 'Hungry' (type) answer is to be expected from someone who would be prepared to willingly expose themselves to the ridicule and humiliation that comes with participation in American Idol, Australian Idol, Big Brother, etc etc etc.

Except (judging from the article) she seems to blame the usual suspects - education, the net and pop culture.

I think you could add mobile phones, and electronic games to that list, plus a lack of stimulating conversation with their parents. (both of them).

Stupid is the default position - if someone grows up without something happening to ensmarten them, then they become a dumbass.

We have education for that role, to take little kids and educate the stupid out of them.

If they're more interested in something else (be it the net, video games, mobile phones, partying, sports or marijuana) then their education suffers and they stay dumb.

Or, if they get a sub-par education for whatever reason, or have parents who are unsupportive of their ensmartening, that could mean they stay dumb even without choosing to switch off to it all.

ZOMG

I thought Miss Alabama was bad, but this one is worse by far. And the little kid just makes it so much better.  Very nice.

Hysterical.

You might want to think about it as a "need to know" thing.  Like many people I have a broad knowledge of the world, the events, history, geography demographics and so on, but it doesn't seem to earn me a living.  Even the prize money from being on the winning Pub Quiz team won't stretch to more than a round of drinks.

I work with people who don't have the slightest idea of what WW2 was about and stuff like El Nino and the Gulf Stream are a complete mystery to them.  They still earn £100K plus though and (you'll like this Dek) drive BMW's... One of the lads still thinks that "The Tsunami" was a fund raiser to help out with the floods in the Indian Ocean and Indonisia.  The last time I heard him say something was when he sat down and immediately got up and said OUCH having hurt his arse because he'd put his car keys in his back pocket (a BMW 330D driver so he is almost sensible)

Gotta start creatin' jobs for those who know more?

But seriously, it boggles my mind that someone in a developed world could go through life and not pick up bits of information.

Education and knowledge aren't always the be all and end all.  If you gave a well educated and knowledgeable person all the resources they needed to create a freshwater supply for some barren village in Ethiopia they wouldn't have a clue where to start whereas a redneck from some small town in the "deep south" who's never been further away from the homestead than half a tank of gas, never read a book or newspaper would have the water running in no time at all.

I wasn't just referring to scholarly knowledge Arthur.

I include having a clue as to creating a freshwater supply in knowledge as well. Like changing a tyre, or knowing just what WWII was

Have you ever had someone ask you how to boil water and mean it?

Have you ever had someone ask you how to boil water and mean it?

Can't say I have. I tend to try and avoid situations where someone that stupid potentially has access to boiling water... who knows what they might do with it.

Sometimes I'm not just amazed about stupid people's stupidity - sometimes I'm even surpirized about "average" people's stupid reactions on what I say. (But I'm above average anyway, I have actually did an intelligence test - I'm 17 and as smart as if I was 24 - but still....)

Example: One day a few weeks ago when I were in my school, one of my class mates talked about a stealth plane. Then I asked how this "stealth thingy" works.

Him: "It makes the plane impossible to find".
Me: "That's what it does, but how does it works?"

Him: "I just told you! Are you stupid or something?"

Correct answer: It makes the radar rays bounce off.

Surely the radar rays bouncing off of normal objects would be what makes them visible. To make something stealthed you need to produce the same end result as if you weren't there - get the rays to pass straight through without noticing you.

Or rather, bend around you as if they had passed straight through

You know what I meant.

I knew what the correct answer was, but it didn't match with what you said, so I didn't know if it was a smart person making a dumb mistake or a dumb person trying their best 

yes Hungary a country

SK: Hey!? I thougt we were friendes! :'( ...

If I didn't like you, I'd have ignored you 

hahahaha,, clean bOld

Surely the radar rays bouncing off of normal objects would be what makes them visible. To make something stealthed you need to produce the same end result as if you weren't there - get the rays to pass straight through without noticing you.

Or rather, bend around you as if they had passed straight through

Because I'm in a boring mood I'll give you a better explanation of how objects are constructed to make them stealthy, or at least difficult to see on radar.

To be detected by RADAR  an oject has to reflect enough of the electromagnetic energy sent out by the RADAR transmitter to be detected by the RADAR receiver.  If we assume that the stealth properties are derived from mechanical means only - ie. Not by using some kind of electronic intervention then the shape of the object and the materials are critical.  If the object is made of something like glass-fibre or other non-conducting, materiel then its electrical properties are such that there will be minimal reflection and it would be difficult to spot on RADAR.   However, an object made of that sort of stuff is not really much good as a weapons platform (airoplane, boat etc...) and the weapons it carries will also have to have a similar construction.  Also imagine using a non-powered aircraft (glider) or sail boat to attack something, it's not practical.  So we are looking at metal and composite materiels which, unfortunately have excellent properties to reflect radio waves.

So what they do is make a plane or boat which has what's known as a "multi-faceted surface".  You can see this quite well when you look at, say, a diamond, that has been cut (not moulded) into a ball shape.  It has near enough the right shape but when you shine a light on it you see it sparkling (Like one of those 1970's Disco Balls).  By comparison, shining a light at a round object with a smooth surface would produce a nice bright and even reflection.

It would be the same effect if you made the same shape object (or other object using these facets) out of metal and pointed a RADAR transmitter at it.  The radio waves would sparkle, or scatter, in the same way.  Therefore the object can get closer to the RADAR reciever before there is enough reflected signal for it to be picked up.  This of course means that you can put stuff inside the object that is not "stealthy" (bombs, missiles, engines, people, etc) because the RADAR won't penetrate the surface.  Also, there is other materiels which have radiation absorbing properties, these are used to coat the surface.  Again, they reduce the amount of reflected radio energy.

Ok you can wake up now....

SK: And what is that supposed to mean?

Arthur: Was that supposed to be difficult to understand?

@Nat.  I don't find it difficult.  Some may say it is downright condescending, others may say it's too complex while there will be some who think it's somewhere in-between.

What do you think?

ehh, bend the rays around you, bounce 'em off in funny directions.. same difference 

It's like the difference between standing in the dark and turning a mirror away from a person with a flashlight or against him.

@ SK - pull tongues as much as you like.  bending the "rays" or bouncing them is not the same. 

@ Nat - near enough to be correct.

I'm sure I remember seeing something relating to a recently developed "invisibility cloak" (invisibility to some other frequency of light that is) that showed how it distorted and bent the incoming waves around the object in question, but in such a way that they returned to normal on the other side.

That sort of technology has been around for some time now.  The only problem is that within the bounds of practical use (to avoid being observed) it is not practical to use.

Until someone comes up with a way of producing enough energy, within a small enough object, say an airoplane, to cause electromagnetic waves and light photons to bend around an object on a spherical perspective and create the energy (or expend the energy from a storage system, like batteries) needed to cause the bending without any waste product (heat) then it will be fairly useless for an object that can't be detected whilst in motion.  And then there will still be a few more obstacles that physics will throw at us...

I wonder if those people who think that Pearl Harbor was the start of the Vietnam ware are reading this...?

I wonder if those people who think that Pearl Harbor was the start of the Vietnam ware are reading this...?

Indeed Arthur, I also wonder if they can read.  

@SK and Nat......Listen to what Arthur is saying, as he knows his onions when it comes to radar.

Yes Andro, it does make you wonder if they can read.  I suppose it's why they have pictures on the menu in places like Macdonalds...

@SK: Like super-advanced fiber optics?

@Andro: 1) Rotflol. 2) I'm not sure about how much he knows, but I think that I know almost as much.

@ Nat.  1) "Super Advanced Fibre Optics" might be a possibility but there is again a problem with creating a stealthy environment, especially where motion is involved. It would be interesting to hear how the apeture(s) could be managed to give a spherical perspective and keep a low RADAR signature as well.

2) I doubt that your knowledge of RADAR and stealth technology would be closer than a million miles (Swedish Miles that is) to mine - there's a challenge for you.

1: I know that it might take some time to make it work if it's even possible.

2: Competition? ("Swedish miles" = kilometers). Do you work at NASA or something?

I don't work at NASA (I could have done) but I have spent quite a large chunk of my working life deeply involved in RADAR, radio, infrared and associated electronic warfare.

Could have worked at NASA...

How much time a day?

NASA don't pay enough.  Don't know what you mean by "How much time a day"

How much time do you spend daily on radar stuff?

Depends on what project I was working on at the time.  Sometimes all day, every day for ages then maybe no RADAR for a few days.  Sometimes each day was a combination of RADAR and other stuff.  It varied.

Ok, so we have our resident radar-man. If I ever need to sneak past some radar I know who to talk to 

Arthur: Do you know how to construct EMP-stuff using microwave owens and stuff?

I know enough to make it work if I get the right materials and tools (it's actually not that hard at all), but I guess that you knows how to make it safe with "normal garage tools". Or is EMP outside your area?

Anyway, a radar on the door would be super cool. Letting the doorbell go off before they touched the door would be awesome.

@Nat.  The power setting control to obtain the correct power inside the oven cavity is meaningless when the cavity is not there.  It takes account of "tuning" inside the cavity.  Remove the cavity and the power settings can become radically different. So unless you have a fail-safe way of controlling the Magnetron output I would leave it alone. It can be fatal or at least damaging to health (especially eyes). And it's unlikely that you'd have the test equipment in your garage to set the stuff up.

I recommend using a passive infra-red or extremely low power laser system.  You can play with them to your hearts content and get the same effect without the risk of cooking bits of people who turn up at your front door.  Also if you use infra-red you could also build in some other clever bits which would let you turn your lights on inside the house when you turn up and press a button on your little remote control.

By the way. EMP = Electromagnetic Pulse.  Normally associated with a nuclear detonation... don't even think about that, it is definitely dangerous and will almost certainly ruin your day.

...

Okay then. How can I get the same effect with IR?

(I never intended to use the owen for radar stuff...)

Well you could start with a commercially available PIR sensor and re-work the apeture so that it has a narrow detection area.  Some have adjustments to alter sensitivity so that you prevent activation by animals and bits of crap blowing in the wind.  However, black, pink and red shades of permanent marker pens are also good for reducing sensitivity and fiddling around with the apeture size.  Once you have the detection area and sensitivity sorted it will give you a closed relay contact when activated.  You can then use that as your trigger device for whatever else you want to do.

I want to wipe out electronics!  xD

In that case you're back to the EMP

Which was a Bad Idea(TM)

Who cares? (*Ignoring possible negative comments from SK and Arthur*)

Anyway, IR is fun too, but maybe not in the same way. IR controlled EMP, maybe? Then nobody will be boiled. I think...

As long as you do the nuclear detonation at the time of year when the prevalent winds in the UK are from the South West and keep it below a megaton I have nothing negative to say about you nuking Scandanavia

LOL!!

I didn't intend to generate EMP radiation using nuclear devices...

I can just imagine the conversation between Nat and his friends.

Nat:  Fancy coming round to my house for a bit of a party?

Friend:  Yes Ok.  Do I need to bring some food and drink?

Nat.  Don't bother with food, we'll just snack on the bits of your exposed body that fall off after they've been cooked while you approach my front door.   If you bring drink, put it in a lead lined box to save it getting too warm.

LOL!

HAHAHAHA

Hey, at least the invitation comes with a warning!

MIND READER!!!! Ó.ò

Isn't it pretty?

Oh, and one of em crashed

oops

I saw one of those once...They're like pancakes in no way.

hi

Hi Karin...

Heya karin!

hey karin.  ows it goin oi oi LOL

What is up, Karin?

Theres an innuendo in there somewhere...

HAHAHAHA

Nope.

yrs//there is......

my gosh its getting late and i can't type

I understood that...

Haha