Fill Sign Word Fast
Make the most out of your eSignature workflows with airSlate SignNow
Extensive suite of eSignature tools
Robust integration and API capabilities
Advanced security and compliance
Various collaboration tools
Enjoyable and stress-free signing experience
Extensive support
Fill Sign Word Fast
Keep your eSignature workflows on track
Our user reviews speak for themselves
Fill Sign Word Fast. Check out probably the most user-pleasant exposure to airSlate SignNow. Handle your entire papers finalizing and expressing method digitally. Move from hand-held, papers-centered and erroneous workflows to computerized, electronic digital and perfect. You can easily produce, deliver and sign any files on any gadget everywhere. Ensure that your important enterprise cases don't slide over the top.
Discover how to Fill Sign Word Fast. Keep to the basic information to start:
- Design your airSlate SignNow bank account in clicks or log in together with your Facebook or Google profile.
- Take advantage of the 30-working day free trial version or go with a costs prepare that's great for you.
- Locate any legal format, build online fillable types and reveal them firmly.
- Use advanced features to Fill Sign Word Fast.
- Sign, individualize putting your signature on order and acquire in-particular person signatures ten times faster.
- Established automated alerts and get notifications at every step.
Transferring your activities into airSlate SignNow is simple. What follows is an easy method to Fill Sign Word Fast, together with recommendations to maintain your colleagues and partners for better partnership. Inspire your staff with all the finest tools to stay on the top of organization processes. Improve efficiency and size your small business quicker.
How it works
Rate your experience
-
Best ROI. Our customers achieve an average 7x ROI within the first six months.
-
Scales with your use cases. From SMBs to mid-market, airSlate SignNow delivers results for businesses of all sizes.
-
Intuitive UI and API. Sign and send documents from your apps in minutes.
A smarter way to work: —how to industry sign banking integrate
FAQs
-
How does breaking writing into paragraphs work?
A paragraph is a block of text that addresses a certain topic in one or several sentences. Typically, a paragraph is as long or as short as it needs to be for its purpose, with sentences more or less as thoughts, and the paragraph collecting thoughts on the same topic. This paragraph here has introduced the idea behind breaking text into paragraphs and is now discussing their structure in a more specific sense. It won't go on for much longer, because the idea itself is pretty general. What I want to do is give you clear examples of use.See what happened there? I started on the general idea, broke it into a bit of detail and followed it down to where it naturally led to a different idea. This is actually part of the fun and creativity of writing: there are rules; some strict, some less so. You could even say that most of them are often just guides, with the goal being that what you produce is clear and readable.In other words, it has to be written with the reader in mind.While short paragraphs can serve a purpose, one of my favourite books of all time has paragraphs that go for longer than a page. Don't worry, I won't replicate that here! I just hope that this discussion gives you some food for thought.Best of luck!
-
Did India give up the thorium reactor in the exchange of civil nuclear deal with the USA?
NO, NOT A CHANCE.Civil nuclear deal was never signed, nor it is signed right now, it always remained a MoU not a firm deal. What exists between US and India is something other than the CIVIL NUCLEAR DEAL. CND was a Sheet filled with $hit unloaded by US that only took care of interests of US and completely sidelined India, hence the deal never happened and remained a MoU.India has Three Stage Nuclear Programme in place.STAGE I: PHWR i.e Pressurised Heavy Water Reactor;India has already achieved self-reliance in this.(NOTE: Please don’t ask if ours is better than this or that, this not a mobile phone, this is nuclear reactor). 16 More indigenous Reactors has been sanctioned last year, 4 more under construction. This stage has been successfully completed.STAGE II: FBR i.e FAST BREEDER REACTOR;This uses a mixture of Uranuim and Plutonium( Final Product from Stage I) as it’s fuel. This plant is made in Kalpakkam and is set to go online tentatively by first quarter of 2018. This plant is almost ready. Although a prototype functional reactor already exists in IGCAR since 1985. The Stage II of Indian has always been kept under tight wraps and it still is least discussed.STAGE III: THORIUM BASED REACTORS;This will be the worlds envy, hence the least talked about and the most secretive.Now,The BARC AHWR a.k.a Advanced Heavy Water Reactor design to use Thorium was already approved by AERB and NPCIL in 2014 and in early 2017, GoI gave approval for contruction of 300 MWe reactor in Tarapur.So we silently don’t give $hit about US when it comes to future our nuclear field. They are as useless as the word “EA” in “TEA”.In the end all thanks to this Genius, who planned all this:Mr. Homi Jehangir Bhabha
-
What are the biggest signs that someone has narcissistic personality disorder?
Narcissists move VERY fast in relationships. It's not uncommon to hear, “I love you" and/or be bombarded with love songs/texts/memes a few weeks after meeting them. By rushing into sex/intimacy, they can fast-forward the relationship. They get their targets to fall for them faster without realizing something is amiss. This is also the reason they tend to be VERY good lovers. It's usually the “hook” in toxic relationships.Narcissists lack genuine personalities. So, they mirror their targets. If you find you have “so much in common" with a new person and your likes are their likes and your dislikes are coincidentally their dislikes as well, raise your antennas! They may be mirroring you. This is the “soulmates" hook… You'll also notice that they'll spend more time telling you who they are verses showing you. As time goes on, you'll notice the words they use to describe themselves do not fit their personality — at all. But, they will fit YOURS!!!Passive aggressive behavior and irrational/unexplained anger are also major red flags. Pay attention to how a person treats you the first time you say, “No”, and/or, when things don't go their way… If they give you the silent treatment, grow cold, and/or, pull away, do not overlook it! Most importantly, if someone pulls away, or, goes silent after you set a boundary, DO NOT pursue them! This is how they groom you to be the chaser in the relationship. It's emotional abuse/manipulation!Pay close attention to people who portray themselves as victims. NOTHING is EVER their fault! EVERYONE (including the family pet) has done them wrong… ALL of their ex's are “crazy” and mistreated them… Simply put, it's bullshit! No one should have a laundry list of bad experiences. If they do, RUN, because they're the common denominator! Narcissists tend to have a history of failed/short-term relationships. Believe it or not, it's hard for Narcissists to find people to deal with them long term due to their instability and poor behavior…Superficial relationships/friendships. I've noticed they don't have anyone they're genuinely close to. This is due to their inability to bond and form true attachments to people. Their relationships are shallow and based on surface-level bs. They'll refer to someone as their bestfriend, but you’ll notice they barely speak. Or, that the person is never really around. Or, only shows up when it's time to party, etc. They may also speak down on/poorly of said “bestfriend” behind their back. They tend to be very condescending, two-faced and downright mean.In my experience, they cannot talk about deep subjects like their feelings/emotions. Or, how a situation made them feel. Or, what their childhood was like in detail… They don't want to go there. I suspect it's because they can't. They don't know themselves. They can't connect with themselves, either. They live in a world of dishonesty. They're very dishonest with themselves about who they truly are.A poor relationship with their Mother/primary caregiver. Underlying issues between Narcissists and their Mother's (abuse, neglect, don’t get along, etc.) seems to be common. People that I've known who've displayed strong Narcissistic tendencies, ALL had bad relationships with their Mothers! I think it's worth mentioning that their Mother's also displayed strong Narcissistic traits… I'm fully aware and understand that there are healthy adults who have toxic Mother's. However, if you're spotting several red flags in an individual, including this one, pay closer attention!They're selfish! Some are selfish from the very beginning. Some start out generous and slowly begin witholding. Some act helpless and needy. They manipulate people into doing things for them. But, they never give back. It's not only financial and material selfishness. They're selfish emotionally, affectionately, conversationally. sexually and with their attention. They slowly withhold validation and support. EVERYTHING is about them, their needs, their wants... Everything happens on their terms. Anger, rage, silent treatments and disappearing acts are common when they don't get their way.Pathological lying. Narcissists are professional liars. It's their second nature. If you call them out, they'll take no issue with staring deep into your eyes and telling another lie to cover the one you called them out on. You'll never get the truth. Even with unchallengeable proof of the truth, they'll hold on to the lie. It's actually quite fascinating to watch them in action - once you know what your dealing with. They also have the uncanny ability to provoke doubt in their victims (even when you KNOW the truth), because their lies are so convincing.Beware of people who do not seek conflict resolution. Many Narcissists enjoy drama/chaos! Remember, these are high-conflict personalities. Many of them NEED to argue and fight! Peace to them, is what chaos is to us - unsettling. This is why they repeat behaviors that trigger a negative response. They need tension, anger and high/out of control emotions. They're known for calling people crazy, filled with drama, insecure, etc., when you attempt to discuss/resolve something THEY said/did. They're extremely disrespectful and rude people who lack self-awareness. They have an issue with being called on their behavior and project/deflect to avoid accountability. Normal people want to get along. They seek a fair compromise. Narcissists want to win. Conflict wears normal people down. This is how Narcissists get their way.Immaturity. It’s one thing to be playful and lighthearted (in appropriate settings) as an adult. It’s something completely different to be immature. Narcissists suffer from arrested development. They do not know how to respond to situations/people/stress/life appropriately. They have a child-like mindset. They truly believe everything is about them and have no concept of the needs of others. By nature, children are takers. They have no concept of reciprocation. They believe their Parents (and everyone else) exists to meet their needs. When their needs aren’t met, or, when they don’t get what they want/their way, they get mean and throw tantrums. They cannot think outside of themselves and their wants/needs in the moment. Narcissists are like children. They’re completely unaware that people are individuals with their own agency, needs, wants, opinions... They truly believe people exist to serve them. They believe their job is to receive. They really are children trapped in adult bodies who cannot consider anything/anyone other than themselves.Above everything I've stated, trust your intuition. Narcissists give off an uneasy vibe. They try to appear cool, calm and collected on the surface, but you can feel their energy. It's very off-putting. They have far more negative qualities than most people - and, they're noticeable. But, you have to stop justifying and making excuses in order to see people for who they really are. Accept people for who they are and not who you want them to be. Observe, listen and trust yourself. No one should be allowed to grant themselves a position in your life. Vet people and YOU decide if they'll be a liability, or, an asset to you. Lastly, take cues from your body. If you ever feel your mood change, feel anxious or feel your stomach knot up in the company of someone, don't ignore it. It could be a sign that you're in bad company!!!
-
How many words are in LOTR books?
Interesting question. I’m a word cruncher and statistician, so I think I can answer it. I’ve distilled full LOTR text from my PDF edition, I’ve eliminated obvious junk from the digital text (page numbers, headers and footers, wrapped lines and words, and so on), and I’ve treated it with a textual analysis professional software. Beware: I have taken Tolkien’s foreword into the analysis, but not the Appendixes, since my PDF edition lacks them. The LOTR text has 482,058 occurrences, with 12,972 distinct lemmas. To make the concept clearer: in a text, every word can be used more than once, of course: in the LOTR, the lemma and is used 19,987 times; that makes 19,987 occurrences and 1 lemma. In LOTR, Tolkien uses 4,470 hapaxes (a hapax, a Greek word meaning once, for one time only, is a word used just once in a text): that means that one word out of three (34.51%, to be more precise) is used just once in the book; this is really a huge amount of hapaxes, for such a massive text: a sign of Tolkien’s great lexical mastership (some hapaxes, of course, are Elvish, Dwarvish or Orkish words: isn't that a sign of Tolkien’s great lexical mastership too?). What are the most used words, excluding conjunctions, prepositions, modal and temporal adverbs, articles and pronouns? The list is not particularly surprising: 1. frodo 1991 2. long 1351 3. sam 1290 4. great 1283 5. down 1203 6. like 1146 7. gandalf 1123 8. think 1107 9. man 1106 10. back 1007 11. know 938 12. day 841 13. fall 827 14. time 825 15. dark 818 16. way 800 17. find 790 18. eye 790 19. pass 783 20. hand 780 21. leave 760 22. stand 757 23. hear 756 24. well 749 25. aragorn 722 26. pippin 685 27. light 683 28. lie 679 29. turn 667 30. thing 665 31. speak 642 32. ring 639 33. tree 637 34. road 628 35. merry 603 I like the fact that the three substantives contained in this list that point to concrete things are ring (obviously), tree and road. Tree! How nice is it this? Tree is one of the most used words in LOTR, and one of the three top names of things! Being a tree lover myself, I enjoy this result a lot. There are a lot of words (verbs, prepositions and substantives) concerning movement, of course (LOTR is a book about a journey, after all), lot of verbs concerning human communication, and some word concerning the process of perceiving the world through the senses: eyes, dark, light, hear. A methodological note about lie: the software I used for the analysis performs a process of lemmatisation (before the analysis, each word is turned into its dictionary lemma: plural nouns to singular, and conjugated verbs to the infinitive form: this, in order to reduce the data matrix, and to make results less dispersed, and more meaningful). BUT the software is not able to perform a semantic analysis, so it cannot tell the present form lay, from to lay, from the past perfect form lay, from to lie. I should have performed a disambiguation, but I think that that would have largely overdone the purpose of this answer: anyway, the software has lemmatised under lie the further occurrences: 373 lay, 110 lie, 89 lies, 84 lying, 22 lain and just 1 lied. We can say that lying is a process not unknown to the LOTR narrative development. It would be very interesting to analyse the hapax too: for example, (just trying to empty the sea with a spoon), there is one tax word, used in a figurative sense: %3E ‘You lie’, said Wormtongue. ‘And this sword your master himself gave into my keeping.’ ‘And he now requires it of you again’, said Théoden. ‘Does that displease you?’ ‘Assuredly not. lord’, said Wormtongue. ‘I care for you and yours as best I may. But do not weary yourself, or tax too heavily your strength. Let others deal with these irksome guests. And there is just one bastard word, referred to the offspring of Ungoliant: %3E Far and wide her lesser broods, bastards of the miserable mates, her own offspring, that she slew, spread from glen to glen, from the Ephel Dúath to the eastern hills, to Dol Guldur and the fastnesses of Mirkwood. But none could rival her, Shelob the Great, last child of Ungoliant to trouble the unhappy world. There are lots of adjectives starting with un-, I think that Tolkien should have utterly loved them (so do I, as a not native, or unnative, or unconnate, English speaker and reader): ungracious, unfading, unexplored, unreasoning, uneventful, unearthly, unheeding, unhopeful, and so on. I’ve tried to perform a cluster analysis too. In a textual analysis, the clustering process produces maps that indicate which words are used in strict proximity with which other words: the map makes us possibile to individuate some content areas that share lexical affinity; and, in direct consequence of that, this analysis enables the scholar to spot out the main themes present in the analysed text. You can easily spot out four main classes from the cluster analysis of the LOTR text; two classes (those located in the upper part of the map) are, in turn, split into two subclasses. * The Red Class refers to the journey of Frodo and Sam into Mordor. As you can easily see, this cluster is filled with short, “cracked” words touching on the desperate moral and physical efforts of the couple, in their moving towards Mount Doom, and on the desolate landscape of the volcanic wasteland. Lots of body parts, lots of verbs expressing pain, lots of onomatopoeia (hand, hiss, head, moment, Gollum, drag, gasp, neck, step, back, leg, shout, Shagrat, grind, orc, hideous, arm, cry, knee, grip, sound, breath, eye, grope, blade, struggle, yell, whip, tie, stench, crawl). * The Pale Green and Aquamarine Class refers to the Fellowship journeys. In particular, the Green subclass allude to the “proper” journey, and it’s filled with lemmas dealing with movement, and connoted by fatigue and difficult hiking (slope, hill, road, climb, stream, down, mile, tree, side, mountain, path, bank, steep, valley, cloud, rise, ridge, wind, narrow, rock…). On the other hand, the Aquamarine subclass deals with the “magical interludes” that spangle the journey: in particular, the Old Forest, Lórien and the Grey Havens. This subclass is filled with lemmas that allude to colours and to Nature, and are connoted by beauty, clarity, and freshness (silver, leaf, white, green, star, shine, sing, flower, hair, Goldberry, gold, water, sun, sweet, tree [again], light, yellow, clear, ship, bright, fountain, basin, sail, grey, sea, foam, song, summer, golden, wind, jewel, dew, rain, blue, candle, warm, slender, shimmer). * The Grey Class refers to the Shire and Bree, and it is filled with cozy, homely, practical, everyday words, and with words about human communication: Hobbits are very talkative people, after all. It is the vocabulary of the “starting situation, so calm and boring” that you can spot in every adventures tale. Nevertheless, this Class contains some little creeping words, foreseeing the shape of the things to come (Strider, good, Bree, think, talk, suppose, know, story, food [could you have had any doubt about this?], Sir, worry, bite, afraid, business, ferry, ask, tell, deal, real, fellow, laugh, time, queer, landlord, inn, adventure [how queer], news, affair). * The Blue and Purple Class refers to the proper War of Men against Sauron. In particular, the Blue Class alludes to the evil influence of the Ring, with its victims and its enemies (Sauron, Boromir, power, enemy, evil, Isildur, ring, Saruman, Elrond, wise, Minas Tirith, Moria, peril, destroy, perish, lore, purpose, Mordor, servant, doubt, fear, bane, wisdom, bearer, fate). The Purple Class alludes to the actual acts of war, the very battles in Rohan and in Gondor (Lord, King, Éomer, Théoden, Éowyn, ride, man, Denethor, son, city, Gondor, house, Faramir, Beregond, heal, battle, Rohan, Steward, Mark, Imrahil, captain, Aragorn, war, prince, knight, warden, horse, love [not such a romantic word, in Tolkien works], sister, Edoras, healer, service, honour [not a overused word: just 40 occurrences in the whole book: LOTR is not about honour, it’s about duty], bid, woman, haste). So long for how many words in the LOTR books. Hopefully, my answer is of some interest for Tolkien’s fans and, maybe, scholars. If someone has any curiosity not directly related with the answer, about results of analysis, or about methodologies, feel free to DM me.
-
How does an atheist explain Paul the Apostle's sighting of Christ, his immediate conversion and his records of risen Christ's ey
Paul never made an unambiguous claim to have ever seen a physical, bodily resurrected Jesus, not even in 1 Cor 15.And Acts three times denied that Paul on his way to Damascus ever saw a physical, bodily resurrected Jesus.Nor in 1 Cor 15 did Paul make the claim for Peter or James or the rest of the Apostles. Indeed, Paul equates his own experience—whatever it was—with the experiences of those apostles, and makes no distinction of shape or type or form.And if the “more than 500” in Corinthians is authentic to Paul, he also never made an unambiguous claim that a literally and bodily resurrected Jesus appeared physically to them, either.Furthermore, we don’t have even one, reliable 1st-hand, 1st-person eyewitness report of such an event by any of those supposed 500, nor by an apostle or by any follower of Jesus.The ὤφθη/ōphthē of Paul’s “appeared” (or “was seen”) in 1 Cor 15—for both his own experience and that of the apostles and the 500 — is totally consistent with a spiritual or visionary or revelatory theophany, hallucination, dream or imagination.Paul does not distinguish in any way his own experience—whatever it was—from that of Peter or James, and he nowhere mentions an “empty tomb.”Plus, 1 Cor 15:35–38 is totally consistent with Paul imagining and teaching some sort of spiritual resurrection, not a physical bodily resurrection. Even if Paul was imagining the resurrection to be physical and bodily, he never made an unambiguous claim to have actually seen such a bodily resurrected Jesus.And in 2 Cor 12:2–4 – *if* this represents Paul’s reference to his own conversion experience – it still isn’t a physical, bodily appearance of Jesus. Indeed, it sounds more like, say, an alien abduction. Or a strange little man who was just prone to intense, dream-like, psycho-emotional religious visionary hallucinations.Whatever, specifically, was in Paul’s character or nature that caused him to convert to something he’d previously opposed is lost to history.Perhaps Paul found relief in Jesus more than he ever did from “the Law” from his chronic and recurring sense of wretched carnal sin & guilt. Perhaps Paul was a chronic guilt-ridden masturbator. Or perhaps Paul was a hyper-religious and self-loathing homosexual and just realized in Jesus more relief from the wretched and relapsing religious carnal guilt that plagued him over his warring carnal member.In a sudden flash of insight, while fighting this little heretical Jewish movement, the conflicted, hyper-religious, sin-obsessed Paul somehow imagined a way to rid himself of the religious and sexual guilt that plagued him, and which he could never get rid through “the Law.”Whatever were the reasons, this strange, obnoxious, argumentative, zealous and fanatical, hyper-religious and self-righteous little Jew, obsessed both with being 100% “right” (always!), and obsessed with sin, and with fighting against Jesus Jews — after some overwhelming visionary religious hallucination or feeling — suddenly switched from Torah to Jesus. Bang! …it was done.One can imagine that Paul's strange and strained exegesis came later as an exercise in explanation and self-justification. There’s no reason to doubt that Paul, himself, believed it. But that doesn’t make it gospel.
-
Why do adoptive parents tell their adopted kids that they are adopted? Is it actually necessary?
Let’s try flipping the scenario. Imagine a couple adopts a baby. The adoptive parents agree to never tell the child that she is adopted. Some years go by. The baby becomes a child and finally a young teenager. Like any other kid, she attends school and that includes a life sciences class. Eventually, the teacher begins the section on genetics, and uses basic human blood types to explain the concepts. As an assignment, the students are told to find out their parents blood types. Like everyone else, the girl goes home and gets her parents blood type information. Her dad is a proud blood donor, type AB. Her mom is type B. In class the next day, the students are instructed to predict their own blood type and to perform a test to validate their type. The girl follows the instructions, expecting to be either a type A, B, or AB. When the test result shows type O, she’s sure she must have made a mistake. So she repeats the test, checking the instructions over carefully as she works through the test. And gets the same result. Confused, she calls the teacher over and asks him to just watch her do the test to make sure she is doing it right. The teacher watches, and sure enough, the test comes up as type O again. The teacher confirms the test is correct. The girl then asks, “But I thought you said that you can’t get an O if a parent is an AB. My dad is type AB”. The teacher asks the girl, “Has anyone ever mentioned adoption to you?” Stunned, the girl says “No.” The teacher, realizing he may have just ruined a closely-guarded family secret, stammers that maybe the girl should talk to her parents that night and leaves her there, shaking, having just realized that she has been lied to about who she is all her life. And yet, she’s expected to go about the rest of her school day as if nothing had changed in her life. As if her parents hadn’t lied to her every day of her life. This really happened. To me. I was adopted, and my adoptive parents agreed that they would NEVER tell me that I was adopted. They never expected that I might find out, and certainly not through a lab experiment in school. I stewed all day in school about this. The rest of my school day was a blur. When I was finally able to confront my parents about what I’d learned - their response made it even worse. My adoptive mom first tried to tell me that genetics isn’t science, it’s just theory, and denied I was adopted. When I refused to believe that, she tried telling me that I must have done the experiment wrong. I re-explained that the teacher had confirmed I’d done it right. Then she started telling me I was stupid for believing the teacher, that I was crazy, that the teacher was crazy. Then she wanted to know the name of the teacher, because she felt he had no right to be teaching the crackpot-so-called-science called genetics and she wanted him fired from the job. I couldn’t understand why they just didn’t say “Yes, you’re adopted” and instead were trying to make me think that I was nuts. I finally had to get unbelievably rude - and said “Mom, according to the way blood types work…. In theory, I could be your child, but there’s no way you get an O child out of an AB parent, so I can’t be Dad’s child… so what, did you have a thing with the mailman or what?” That’s when my dad finally had had enough - and admitted I was adopted. My mom turned on my dad like a viper, and screamed at him “We swore we would never tell her! You broke your promise!”…. And so on. Not only had they decided they would never tell me, but they had pretty much destroyed any paper trail of information that they’d had about my origins. Trust me, this was a pretty traumatic way for me to discover that I had been adopted, and to find out the fundamental building blocks of my own self-identity had been built on a lie. You don’t want a child to find out they are adopted this way. And yet, they managed to make it even worse. You see, my adoptive parents had adopted a baby boy a few years before they adopted me. So naturally, once it was confirmed that I was adopted, I asked about my older brother - was he adopted too? Were we biologically related? Yes, he was adopted too - and no, we weren’t biologically related (which actually made a ton of sense, because we were nothing alike). And no, he didn’t know that either of us were adopted, and no, I was not to tell him either. What I didn’t know is that sometime later on - perhaps a few days later - my dad had a private moment with my brother, where he called my brother into the den, told him he was adopted, and then dismissed him from the room. Fast forward about 30 years. My brother and I were sharing a rare moment of honest communication while our adoptive mother was battling terminal cancer. Out of the blue, he told me that he had something to confess - that he’d always been jealous of me. I was stunned - him? Jealous of me? Why on earth would he be jealous of me? Then he went on to say - I’m going to tell you something you didn’t know - I’m adopted - he says. And I look at him and said - and…. so? He said well - you know, I’ve always been angry and jealous, because I’m adopted and your our parent’s real kid. It turns out, it had bothered him enough that he had taken to drinking as a young adult to help deal with his anger, and he’d eventually become a full-fledged alcoholic, complete with a DUI list as long as my arm. I was floored, because growing up, our parents had always put him first for anything, so for him to say he was jealous of me made no sense. And it made even less sense, since we were both adopted. So I looked at him and said - Umm. you know, I already knew you were adopted. I thought that you knew I was adopted too though. He was stunned - he had no idea that we had BOTH been adopted. He had spent some 40 years of his life being angry at our parents and jealous of me, thinking that he was a “fake” kid and I was a “real” kid.. when in fact, that wasn’t the situation at all. He might have become a raging alcoholic no matter what - but his belief, all those years, that I was a “real” kid and he was a “fake” kid certainly contributed to it. Ask me again… why would anyone ever tell their child the truth about being adopted? Because you don’t want your kid to find out from a teacher that the kid was either adopted or the product of an affair. Because you don’t want to have your child find out someday that you’ve lied to them and withheld information about them. And as genetic testing becomes increasingly more mainstream and accessible to the general consumer, you don’t want your adult child finding that they were adopted through some program. Your adoptive child deserves honesty about their origins, and that honesty should come from the adoptive parent, not some random school teacher, or some service such as Ancestry or 23&Me.
-
When will electric cars recharge in less time than it takes for an equivalent gasoline-powered car to fill up?
Great responses from the others! Since I work with Li-ion cells (all 6 chemistries) , I'd like to clarify a few things and perhaps offer some hope to a better life on this little planet of ours.Chemical batteries (e.g. lead-acid, NiCad, NMH, Li-ion and a host of others) produce electric power by ion-exchange between the electrodes. Each year, improvements are made in materials to store more energy, charge-up faster and higher cycle-life. Typically, the higher the capacity (e.g. J, Ah, Wh, etc.), the slower the the charging rate; and frequently, lower the cycle-life. Sure, you can force-feed them at a higher rate, but that will degrade their chemistry, and service life reduced.The highest charging rate capability for chemical batteries is the LTO (lithium titanate) chemistry. You can charge and discharge at 1-20C, and it will last over 10,000 cycles of deep discharging in its 1-10C comfy zone . Due to the lower internal resistance, much less heat is generated during fast charging and discharging. It only take about 10-minute to do a full charge (95%).LTO cost is nearly double that of other Li-ion chemistries. Worse yet, its specific-energy (Wh/kg) is only around 80Wh/kg as compared to around 120-180 Wh/kg for other more popular Li-ion chemistries for EVs like the LCO, LMO, NMC and LFP. Since LTO can charge and recharge so fast, I designed a pack using a small portion of the pack with LTO and the rest LFP (LiFePO4). LFP is the next safest Li-ion after LTO. This way, all of the (high stress) fast initial acceleration and regen braking will get power from the LTO pack. Then, the LFP pack takes over during cruising. This way, you can maximize the life of the LFP, and see ICE muscle cars in your rear view mirror after the light turns green.So, 8 years or 100,000 miles+ is no problem with this combo pack; which would also store enough energy for at least 250-300 miles. Charging will still take about 4-6 hours for a slow charge to maximize life for the LFP. When the LFP pack signNowes its 80% capacity in about 2,000-3,000 cycles, the LTO is just getting warmed up. So your LTO can last 4-6 replacements of the other Li-ion chemistries.Although Li-ion chemistries are making good strides in improvements, but there are other chemistries that are coming up to compete. Mg-ion, K-ion, Mg-air, K-air, Li-air. The other non-lithium chemistries are not so reactive with oxygen or water; so, they will be much safer (performance might match Li-ion pretty well).I also work with supercapacitors.The reason why I feel the new generation of supercapacitors will share at least 50% of the EV market is because of performance and cost. I anticipate the new supercaps made from carbon nanotubes (CNT) and graphene (let's call it the X-Cap) will be at least 100Wh/kg to over 350Wh/kg (someday). The cost of producing CNTs and graphene will be much lower than that of lithium or other chemical battery electrode materials.While many discussed the convenience of recharging at home after work, but there are also many people who drive more than 150-300 miles per day away from home. Many of them (incl. me) don't have a Tesla that can go 250-miles per charge or the time to look for a supercharging station in the middle of the Adirondacks.Many of us drive more than 300-miles a day for some trips, and can't afford the time to stop overnight just to recharge. Any fast charge will require at least 220VAC with lots of current, and a dedicated plug. Not many of those around.I think most or all of us would want the following:< 5-minutes to fully charge up our EVs at public charging stations (just like gas stations).Life-time warranty on the power pack.Fast acceleration and recover 99% regen/excess energies (e.g. brakes, shocks, solar, etc.).No over-heating, no smoke, no fires, no explosion, no toxicity, non-carcinogenic materials.Inexpensive to replace, if necessary (e.g. accidents).Capable to operate from -40C to 150C (no worries about parking at Death Valley, outdoors, in the Summers, with the windows closed....).I recently patented a new generation supercapacitor using CNTs and graphene, so I feel confident all of the above is on the horizon, not too far away.To further test your sincerity about wanting to do good for mankind (and reading stamina), I'd like to tell you how, many other problems mentioned by others can be solved with this new supercapacitor.The U.S. produces roughly 1TW of power during the day. The national peak-hours are 8am to 9pm M-F. To make this simple, let's include weekends and holidays. So, 13-hours/day are peak-hours. Let's also assume power consumption during off-peak hours is about 20% that of peak-hours.Peak-hour energy consumed: 1TW x 13-hrs = 13 TWh/dayOff-peak-hr energy consumed: 1TW x 11-hrs x 20% = 2.2 TWh/dayIn case, you did not know this, but nuclear and coal-fired power plants can only reduce their energy production or consumption by 15% during off-peak hours whether they are producing power or not. The reason is if you dial-down their "boilers" more than 15%, then they would not be able to come back up in time for the next round of peak-hour power demands.Nuclear and coal produced about 52.7% of our electric power in 2015.52.7% of 13TWh = 6.85TWh of electrical energy was produced by nuclear and coal during peak-hours.If turned down by 15%, the nuclear and coal energy production during off-peak hours will be: 85% x 6.85TWh = 5.82TWh.If all other power production facilities turned off their production of electricity during off-peak hours, then: 5.82TWh - 2.2TWh = 3.62TWh of wasted energy going up into the atmosphere.If an average EV has a 60kWh power pack: 3.62TWh/60kWh = 60 million EVs/day can be fully charged (not counting losses in the system).Since few EVs will require a full charge everyday, we can guestimate that all of this wasted energy during off-peak hours would probably be enough to support over 100 million EVs per day in the U.S. without increasing current generation.Yes, numbers are easy to to paint a rosy picture. Here is the way to reality. I've already spoken with a couple of utilities, and they concurred and encouraged my proposed concept, and would support beta testing as soon as I can get the hardware validated.Here is the plan. Please recall that the X-Cap can transfer electricity at an extremely fast rate. The choke point is the size of the conductor between the X-Cap cells and the supply or load. To keep the cost and the ease-of-handling the charger plug, we estimated a 5-minute charge might be a good place to start.A full charge of a 60kWh pack is really 85% of the pack (90%DOD and 95% SOC), so 51 kWh.If charging at 480V: 51kWh/480V = 106.25AhFor a 5-min. charge: 106A/(5/60) = 1,272A at 480VThis can cook a buffalo in no time, but still safer than smoking while topping off your car at the gas station.Let's make believe the oil companies will come to their senses about EVs exceeding ICE vehicles in numbers in the future. It would be ideal for them to convert a % their gas station to electric charging stations. Here is why the gov't would support this idea (aks subsidize). If these charging stations installed about 10MWh of X-Cap storage each, that would be about 360,000 charging stations to download the 3.62TWh of nightly wasted energy. However, there are only about 168,000 retail gasoline stations in the U.S., at this time.So, here is the solution. We estimate there will be over 1-million charging posts in the U.S. within 15-20 years. A charging post is an above ground EV charger that can accommodate 2-EVs, and each post can have a 1MWh X-Cap pack underground. This would allow about 33 EVs to be charge with 30kWh of energy per day. So, that's about 1TWh/day (there are 19,354 incorporated cities in the U.S. at the moment). If half the gas stations converted to electric charging stations at 10MWh each, that would be about 0.84TWh/day.With the X-Cap in both the charging station and in the EV, energy transfer can be very quick (5-10 min.). The charging stations charge its X-Caps during off-peak hours at a lower rate, and sell it at an appropriate markup.The largest utilities in the country has been working on a CES (community energy storage) concept; where every four home has a 100kWh battery pack installed in their backyard. If the power goes down, this CES will be able to keep the four home running for at least 6-12 hours. They estimated that if only 10% of this market gets the CES, that alone is 44GWh. As more PowerWalls or the like are sold, the more people will appreciate some backup power. And, all the better if the utilities will pay for it. So, if 50% of the market goes for the CES, then that will be around 220GWh.Here's the tally:Charging Posts: 1TWh/dayCharging Stations: 0.84TWh/dayHomeowners: 0.18TWh (25% of 70-million detached homes in the U.S.)Total: 2TWh of energy storageThis is not counting all of the energy storage for commercial establishments, gov't facilities, hospitals, etc. I think 3.62TWh can easily be stored for the next day's use, each night with all of these applications. This will provide the utilities a new revenue stream for all of the energy lost during the off-peak hours, a double gain.For those who received gov't subsidy or tax credit to install the X-Cap, they are obligated to be connected to the smart grid to help out with any peak-shaving or load shifting during the peak-hours. With 3.62TWh in storage, it can cover peak-shaving or load-shifting in any part of the country at any time without feeling a hiccup.There, that was a quick-n-dirty synopsis of how we can save the day for the grid, which will encourage EVs to become a practical reality. Hopefully, we can help to reduce air pollution, which tragically kills about 7-million people each year.Lastly, will the X-Cap be affordable? Yes, we are projecting it to be less than $100/kWh, but we still need time (and $$) to optimize its performance (and production efficiency).
-
Who is the greatest fast bowler of all time?
Contrary to the popular myth, there has not been an alpha male that will prevail over everyone on every pitch. Speed, swing (conventional and reverse), bounce, accuracy and naked aggression- take your pick and you can end up with different bowlers.It is important to note that statistics doesn’t really do justice to Malcolm Marshall, Joel Garner, and Michael Holding who only had 10 wickets among themselves to share, and also to the poor subcontinental bowlers whose figures were muddled by SG balls and bald pitches custom made for spinners. Still each on the WI quartet averaged under 21 and raked in nearly 4 wickets per match.Most would consider 90mph a threshold for fast bowling and skills more critical than sledging when picking the greatest fast bowler.On each of these attributes, let us find some contenders-Speed: Jeff Thompson >> Shoaib Akhtar > Brett Lee > Shaun TaitJeff Thomson by a long shot. Not even a fair competition.My words might mislead you to believe that I have a huge man-crush on Thomson. I also risk my reputation for bringing out that at his peak, Thomson was rated at 180 kmph by Rod Marsh (kept stumps to both Jeff and Lillee), Ian Chappell, Geoff Boycott and Michael Holding himself. Though Viv Richards, Martin Crowe and Sunil Gavaskar shied away from putting a number to his pace, they agreed he was a league faster than Lillee, Marshall, Hadlee, Wasim and Donald.Importantly, Martin Crowe faced Jeff in 1982- three years before Jeff’s retirement and played Donald (155k maximum), Wasim (150+ max) and Waqar Younis (150+) at their peak. I WOULD NOT DOUBT these credentials.Jeff Thompson generated quantum speed not from his run-up or jump (unlike Shoaib and Lee) but an intense action that started with a knee jerk, leaned into a svelte wavy spinal flow and finished with a wild slingshot release. Imagine the skid, bounce and pace. “I like to see blood on the pitch”- he really made many bleed on the pitch.He had the most quirky and to me the most beautiful action ever that will shatter the spine, the clavicle and hamstring of any other athlete. A more intense Shaun Tait action with a shorter run up, a quicker release but higher speed.Compare Jeff’s whole body slingshot with Lee’s jump and shoulder release, and Shoaib’s wide chest release action.Unlike Shoaib and Shaun, he did not bowl two loose deliveries every over and unlike Brett Lee, he could keep distance from pads consistently. However, his pace was a nightmare for the entire slip cordon and the poor keeper as well. He had a reputation and a knack for bouncing balls regularly over the keeper and his edges will elude slip too. Explains an average of 28. By the way, his bouncers were reported to jump over back screens too.A typical Tommo field setting: 9 men slipI started by rubbishing claims about how great an Australian from 1970s can be but then I watched his videos, read testimonials on him and I want to see him bowl again despite my strict aversion to Australian bullying. I am most surprised not by claims about his speed but that the only time he was injured severely was in 1976 while attempting a catch and not while bowling. A feral demigod indeed!Unfortunately, he wasn’t measured in his prime to quell doubts over his fastest ever tag. Even though he was clocked at the batting end in his 30s, he still raked in 148 kmph. At his prime, he could be anywhere between 160 to 180 (sic Roebuck). Shoaib (just 46 tests), Brett (30+average), Bond (only 18 tests) and Shaun (only 5 test wickets) will always be after Jeff for me exactly in that order for speed with Lillee closing the ranks.2. Swing: Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, Richard Hadlee, Imran KhanThere will be other contenders as well but I am siding with Imran Khan. He swung both ways, taught the world how to reverse swing and averaged 22.8! And yes, over 50% of test matches he played were in sub-continent.Waqar comes a close second with his beautiful banana loop, but Imran mastered conventional swing and pioneered reverse wing to the point that it sparked a major controversy. Wasim is tied with Waqar after Imran although he didn’t run through line-ups with Waqar’s aggression. He was a thinking bowler- a magician with the swing and was a safer bet to pull a wicket when Waqar would give up. Waqar had lull episodes in between when he will wait for reverse swing to turn up. Wasim had a reputation of persistence. And that is why the great batsmen of 90s (Tendulkar, Gilchrist, Ponting, Dravid) rated him higher. They have nearly identical statistics although Waqar has higher wickets/test. Without Imran’s tutelage, it is unlikely Wasim and Waqar would have tasted the same success they did over their illustrious careers.Dale Steyn does not have the swing range that Wasim and Imran had. And those who ever kept stumps at even club cricket will know that you don’t need snake swings or double loops to take a nick. Steyn’s swerve is sometimes too much to take a nick though it looks beautiful on HD TV screens. Steyn however has bowled with better support seamers, surgical precision (especially that center-pitch out-swinger to a right hander) and higher pace. And he tries even on dry wickets.James Anderson is probably smarter with his control and range but only when he finds the right wicket. Has a reputation of shying away from tours (latest- 2016 Indian tour) to “maintain’’ his stats. Such manipulations can’t be a sign of the greatest bowler and especially for this reason, he falls below Steyn regardless of his career haul. Lillee could do precision, control and range at express pace even without the “right” pitch. Hadlee played half of his tests on NZ’s greentop pitches with an amazing mountain wind running in (best swing conditions) and he exploited them consistently with swing, pace and bounce. Probably explains his unusually high 36 fivers in just 86 test matches.Hadlee’s typical NZ cricket stadiumBut Lillee and Hadlee will always be the once in a generation legends that will find mention in any top 10 bowling list.Ideal swing should be unpredictable (range helps) and should be as late as possible at suitable pace.Imran Khan > Waqar, Wasim, Steyn, Hadlee, Mcgrath, Sarfaraz Khan, Zaheer, Ambrose, Marshal> Lillee, Anderson, Kapil Devin that order with some honorable mentions in no order: Holding, Pollock, Srinath, Asif, and Gillespie.3. Bounce: I am not talking about the bounce Gavaskar can duck under or Ponting can hook over. Imagine a bounce that happens so late that your spine is writhed into a painful contortion as you close your eyes and move away from the ball.Who did that best?Joel Garner, Michael Holding, Curtly Ambrose, Andy Roberts, Allan Donald and briefly Mitchell Johnson.Sadly the swing hype of 1990s and one bouncer an over rule killed this art of bouncing the ball close to the pitch. Mcgrath kept it alive but only in a narrow corridor outside off.Bounce is as important as swing if not more but the viewing angle change around 1987–90 made it look like a nondescript factor.This angle (first two images) reveals bounce as a beauty when cricket was still a bowler’s game and you can see the ball climb towards you.The umpire back view (prevalent now) undermines vertical movement as the camera looks down on the climb which also moves away from the camera. No wonder current generation does not understand the beauty and mechanism of bounce due to a simple perception issue!I am not arguing against the numerous advantages of umpire back angle- swing is clearly visible, pitch of ball easily visible and you can see for yourself where the ball hit the pad in case of LBW. But bounce is less distinctly visible on screen.No batsman wants to play a ball beaming into his rib cage or the skull after bouncing from good length especially if swinging too. No one did that better than Garner, Holding, Ambrose and Roberts. Malcolm Marshall, considered the best bowler of all time by many could not bowl them as good at only 5′10′’.At 2.03m, Garner could. Ambrose too. If you consider that Garner special toe crusher tying batsmen across the crease against the bouncers, Joel Garner wins over Holding and ties with Ambrose.4. Accuracy: No one comes even close to Joel Garner, Glenn Mcgrath and Curtly Ambrose on landing red cherry on a coin entire day for that entire week on any pitch. Steyn doesn’t really get credit for his pin-point accuracy due to his limited range however he is a separate league here.In addition with the pitch and the length of fall, it is critical to balance the swing and the bounce as well. Apart from Ambrose and Garner, Walsh and now Rabada have demonstrated this skill over a great variety of deliveries.Tie between Garner, Ambrose and Steyn as Mcgrath and Walsh do not bsignNow the 90mph threshold.5. Naked Aggression: Croft, Garner, Hadlee, Thompson, Donald, Younis, Johnson, Steyn, Ambrose with Holding and Marshall holding a very special place in the league.Caution: Not every man on this list would qualify as a gentleman cricketer.I am not talking about chest thumpers or sledging wimps. I am talking about beasts that ran riots on the pitch. The X factor in their bowling made batsmen cower and feel their overs down to every millisecond. They all tore through English batting line-ups so frequently and consistently in the 80s that the perception of an English batsman changed from that of an accumulator to a soft duck very quickly.Did Steyn, Waqar and Mcgrath give terror-filled sleepless nights to an entire team? Griffith, Garner, Holding, Marshall, Donald and Johnson, at various points of time, did. When you toured WI in 70s, your families prayed for your safe return. The WI attack was so threatening that any fast bowler that played at least 20 tests during 70s and 80s can walk into any test squad of any era.Donald came for your skull at 93mph with a high jump release and had no qualms about it. Contest between Griffith, Garner, Ambrose and Donald! Actually Garner wins with Donald tied with Marshall and Holding. Colin Croft and Mitchell Johnson do not bring the consistency to make the cut. Moreover, Johnson had limited success against English and South African batsmen.VERDICT:I can’t take you seriously if you pick outsideMarshall, Akram, Imran, Thomson, Donald, Lillee, Ambrose, Hadlee, Holding, Steyn and GarnerDonald had express pace, aggression and skidding bounce but lacked swing range and could be played on full. It is a shame that he debuted at 26 in 1992 due to the apartheid ban on SA, peaked at 28–29 and missed all-time greatness by a whisker. Waqar, Imran, Wasim could not extract stinging bounce as Donald and WI greats did consistently. Not entertaining Anderson, Chaminda Vaas, Kapil Dev and Botham for the lack of bounce, aggression and/or express pace.If the bowler can’t swing both ways, averages over 25, bowls under 90mph, can’t bounce NORMAL pitch (not short pitch) into ribs and doesn’t have a reputation for running through entire line-ups, he can’t be the GREATEST fast bowler.My ideal all-pace attack (5 seamers) has Imran Khan/ Wasim Akram with Lillee/ Donald/ Hadlee with a certain Malcolm Marshall and a Jeff Thomson.Lillee and Marshall can be the tearaway new ball bowlers with express pace, great control and bankable consistency. Jeff brings in a very different skiddy pace which is difficult to pick even when your eyes have settled in and can be the first change with Wasim swinging and reversing balls after 25 overs from a different angle.But the first bowler on my team isJoel Garner aka The Big Bird258 test wickets in 58 matches with pace, bounce and swing at 20.97.That is 4.5 wickets per Test match in an all-time great bowling line-up! Not known for swinging like Imran or Wasim but did I talk about that toe crusher? And that bouncer at 150k+ with a nagging accuracy hinting a swing that no one bothered to notice because everyone closed their eyes fearing the worst for the batsmen.Oddly enough, he deliberately under-bowled. He reserved his enforcer best performance only when anyone bowled bouncers to WI batsmen. Garner alone was the reason no one dared bodyline with Llyod, Richards and Co.Still not convinced? Most would agree great bowlers change the way batsmen bat. He is the only bowler who dictated how opposition bowlers will bowl to his team. Malcolm Marshall, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding didn’t hold back. Marshall bowled and troubled many, so a lot remember him as a bigger threat than Garner. What they don’t realize is that Garner was the reason Marshall could go crazy with his bouncers and still Viv could walk in without helmet, munching a mint gum because of the Garner threat. For this exact reason, I count Joel Garner higher than Malcolm or any other bowler. The only bowler asked by his captain to under-perform!Add to this his credo- Garner never bowls bouncers to tailenders, and now take a look again at his stats. His gentle giant mode fetched 258 wickets at under 21. As a captain, I would love to have this guy with me in any format.Regarding his skills, he was a pure attacking bowler who did not tie himself to a corridor outside off (unlike Dale Steyn, Mcgrath, Hadlee, Imran). He would come straight for your stumps or chest and walk away with your wicket. And he would not leave that corridor too.With other great bowlers it was a challenge to score. With Garner survival was the first challenge. Certainly, you could survive with some pluck and a lot of luck, but could never thump him. Your only chance was to play on pads when he didn’t bounce looking for that inswinging LBW or nudge him softly to square off. Sometimes leg glances fetched fours too. Gavaskar and Greg Chappel did that brilliantly. He still had a career economy of only 1.8 and never sledged a single batsmen. He just smiled and you would immediately forgive him for that last delivery.All bowlers try bowling that bouncer or that in-swinging yorker. He tried not to and others prayed he didn’t.Incoming from 11 feet at 150 kmph. Impossible to pick that length. Btw this will crash at batsman’s left toe. And yes it will swing too!Notes:I will continue to ignore ridiculous comments and PMs and respond only to sincere and/or intelligent responses. Loving cricket and understanding the game can be two different things. I am somewhere in between. If your cricket jargon is borrowed from IPL commentators, you never actually read Wisden Almanac and you pride yourself for following cricket since only 1996 or even 1992 WC, it is highly unlikely that you will get a response from me.I was amused by ridiculous comments clubbing Lasith Malinga, Shoaib Akhtar, Chaminda Vaas, Makaya Ntini etc. with these greats. Just as Enzo Ferrari raced a different game than Alonso, cricket also has changed remarkably (not for the better though) with different conditions: less bouncers, better and lighter helmets, shorter pacers with even shorter runups, practice guns and obviously Kookaboora.I have excluded some obvious greats like Sidney Barnes, Kapil Dev, Courtney Walsh, Glen Mcgrath and James Anderson from the final contender list for good reasons.Courtney Walsh deserves a special clarification. I regret not putting him in the list. Walsh had 519 test wickets at an average of 24 with 22 five wicket hauls but earned them across 132 matches, often as a side kick to Garner, Marshall and later Ambrose. Garner was your first change in 80s but he promised bigger threats not respite. This costs Walsh a spot when you pass him through the burner with greats. He was reliable but was never really a phenomenon. Remarkably, as his pace dropped in 90s he bowled more like Garner in his last years. Any article on Walsh would feature words like workhorse, countless overs from other end and stock/ reserve seamer summing up what could have happened with his remarkably long career. A selfless cricketer who held the line for sometimes 12 over spells with his 2m frame and posed challenges outside off with seam and variable bounce but not swing.In my view, Mcgrath was a great bowler with amazing control and swing but he barely touched 140 kmph, and relied a lot on channel outside-off and sledging to pull in a wicket. With drastically improved fielding standards of 90s, most of his nicks were taken. I often wonder where Lillee, Thomson and Hadlee would have ended with such airtight slips. Especially Thomson. Critically, Mcgrath relied a lot on disturbing a batsmen with an inappropriate remark (the entire slip cordon contributed towards this Australian brand of cricket) to pull in a wicket. Someone who nipped fair share of his tally through these tactics can’t be the greatest ever. There is no dearth of better bowlers who played honest cricket.signNowing out to offended Indians, I find Kapil Dev a fantastic all-rounder but he was not even the best bowler of his own time. He took 434 wickets from 131 tests (3.2 wickets per test) in 50 additional tests than Richard Hadlee (5 wickets per test) at an average of nearly 30 and mostly bowled at 130–135 kmph. Honestly, he was not even the best all-rounder of his time. Try comparing his stats with Kallis’ to get an idea. He did for India in 80s what Shakib al Hasan is doing now for BD cricket. Definitely, the greatest Indian all-rounder though.For offended Pakistanis, I did consider Akram, Imran and Waqar very carefully. They all were fairly lethal, gifted and successful, but lacked Garner’s sting. Imran leads the pack as he did on field and deserves credit for Pakistan’s fast bowling pedigree. I did the trio a justice by not even including Shoaib Akhtar (fast but occasionally brilliant) in the same sentence with them. It was annoying to see a remarkable Mohammad Asif pull on an early curtain on his career. I believe he had enough ammo to dwarf Wasim if he would have played 5 more years at his peak despite losing his pace.It is almost surprising that England, India and Sri Lanka have not produced a single fast bowler that consistently bowled 90 mph+, took 200+ test wickets and averaged under 25 during the last 40 years. Swinging tracks in England and spinner friendly subcontinental conditions have massively contributed to this. Indian dressing room has certainly overcompensated by producing legions of batsmen that could take on these bowling greats in their own den. In fact, Sunil Gavaskar’s ability to score 34 test hundreds at an average of 51 in 70s tells you how better he was compared to anyone after him. Richards would not even wear a helmet and take the fight to the bowler’s end. Remarkable batsmen who were bigger than their stats!For Mcgrath, Hadlee and Steyn fanboys, I rank acid-tipped aggression that induced error and created doubts, higher than containment with skill and patience in a narrow culvert heading to slip cordon. There is a difference between hunting and ambushing. If you were okay with maidens, great batsmen negotiated these three very well. Steyn and Hadlee still find place in the list but I have my reservations.James Anderson bowls in 130s, averages 27+ and picks wickets on greentops with a Duke (among Duke, SG and Kookaburra, Duke swings the most). But when he fails, he fails miserably. Interestingly, he always chimes in with the breeze supporting him leaving the other end for Broad and others, and has built his record hiding on swinging tracks. Look into his records at small English grounds and contrast with his performance in subcontinent and UAE to get an idea. Probably the best weatherman that played international cricket but his 560 test wickets are a greater function of his remarkably long injury free career (140+ test matches) than some prodigious fast bowling skills.Again, Brett Lee averaged 31 for his 300+ wickets while none among Shane Bond, Shoaib Akhtar, and Shaun Tait lasted even 50 tests to merit a place.Finally, I stand by my claim that Thomson was a whole league faster than other pace bowlers. Bowlers lose at least 10–15 kmph between muzzle and batting ends and even more as they head into 30s. 147.9 kmph at batting end and at 32 years of age? My guess (also claimed by Tony Greig) would be 165 kmph+ at peak for Jeff.Even that is not enough to be the best ever, unless you can make the ball climb in or dart off like Big Bird did.
-
If GPUs have better and faster single purpose performance than general purpose CPUs, why aren't modern computers replacing proce
Imagine that you’re a bloated plutocrat in 1913.(I promise this has something to do with computers.)You have almost everything a robber baron could ask for. You have an executive office in a bank and a luxurious penthouse in a skyscraper. You have a fat bank account and a generous stock portfolio. You have a beautiful wife and a beautiful mistress. You have spectacular wax on a spectacular mustache.But your pride and joy is your collection of three-piece suit vests, all in different colors, handmade by the finest tailor in New York. They all look great with your suit jacket and top hat. The only fly in the ointment is that, when you want a vest in a new color, you must wait three weeks for the tailor to sew it for you.One day, as you’re thinking about the lovely plum-colored silk of the dress your mistress wore the night before, Henry Ford comes to you to secure a loan. He tells you about his company’s new innovation: the assembly line, a way of organizing laborers which makes it possible to assemble a car in 90 minutes.A whole car! If an assembly line could build a car in ninety minutes, imagine how quickly it could sew a new vest! You barely listen to his explanation and absentmindedly sign off on the loan; then you quietly hire his factory manager behind his back and tell him that you want him to make one of these “assembly lines” to give you a nice plum vest.“It will take a few weeks to set up,” he tells you, “but once it’s finished, we should be able to produce a vest in five minutes.”Five minutes! you think, rubbing your hands together. Imagine all the lovely vest colors I’ll have!The man is as good as his word, and a few weeks later, a beautiful plum vest is in your hands. You are delighted. “Well done,” you tell him, “now give me one in crimson.”The man frowns. “We can do that, sir,” he says, “but we’ll have to get the new fabrics and shut down the line to change things out. It’ll be ready in six weeks.”“Excuse me, good man,” you reply, “didn’t you say it would only take five minutes to make a vest with your assembly line?”“It does, sir,” he says. “but it produces only plum vests. Look, you can see the next few being worked on right there.”And indeed you can. Your assembly line can fill your closet with vests faster than any tailor—as long as they’re all the same color.A GPU is to a CPU as a clothes factory is to a tailor. GPUs can very quickly perform calculations on millions of numbers—as long as they are performing the exact same calculation on each one. But if they must run different calculations on each number, they are much slower than CPUs.There are tasks in computing which call for the “parallel” computations that a GPU is good at. 3D graphics, for example. Image and video processing. Bitcoin mining. Certain scientific and engineering calculations. These tasks would be very slow if run one number at a time on a CPU; running them with millions of numbers at once on a GPU makes them fast enough to fill a huge screen of tiny pixels, or apply complicated corrections to gigantic photos, or mine Bitcoin blocks faster than the next guy, or simulate the folding of proteins, in a reasonable amount of time.But most of what you do on your computer does not involve the kind of repeated calculations that GPUs are good at; instead, it involves (at some level) examining numbers individually and deciding what to do with them. For that task, a CPU will be much faster. Using a GPU would be as counterproductive as using a whole factory to make one vest.
Trusted esignature solution— what our customers are saying
Get legally-binding signatures now!
Related searches to Fill Sign Word Fast
Frequently asked questions
How do i add an electronic signature to a word document?
How do you do an electronic signature in good docs?
I have a touchscreen how do i sign documents?
Get more for Fill Sign Word Fast
- Help Me With Electronic signature Pennsylvania Legal PDF
- How Do I Electronic signature Pennsylvania Legal PDF
- How Can I Electronic signature Pennsylvania Legal PDF
- Can I Electronic signature Pennsylvania Legal PDF
- Help Me With Electronic signature Pennsylvania Legal PDF
- How Can I Electronic signature Pennsylvania Legal PDF
- How To Electronic signature Pennsylvania Legal PDF
- How Do I Electronic signature Pennsylvania Legal PDF
Find out other Fill Sign Word Fast
- Asset removal form mogalakwena local municipality
- The school board of broward county fl project approval form bcasc
- Workers registration form
- Express scripts prior authorization form pdf 29175210
- Individualized education program iep form pr07 each school
- Honda xr80 manual pdf form
- Texas commercial driver license self certification affidavit form
- Neurotoxin consent form 423808963
- Form st17 commonwealth of virginia sales and use tax certificate of exemption for use by harvesters of forest products spencer
- Referee report new zealand tertiary college form
- I employment agency e newspaper advertising iii friend e form
- Certificato di visita preventiva dimbarco ort datum hajoorvos form
- Dxl return policy form
- Volunteers in pinellas vip county fingerprint card information pinellascounty
- Drug housing addendum form
- Hospital indemnity claim form filing instructions utah health
- Riverdale student handbook pdf form
- Download longman science process skills answer form 4 pdf
- Vehicles for change inc northern virginia family service nvfs form
- Ba uf 1117 form