Did I miss the thread about the CRU Fraud?

[KrazyHorse]

Also, what then makes up the 15 petabytes of data that the LHC's distributed grid will accommodate annually?

http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/...puting-en.html

The 1 EVENT in a billion that actually makes it past their triggers

[BlackCat]

OMFG.

This isn't a ****ing courtroom. I don't have to convince beyond a reasonable doubt. I have to demonstrate to people who AREN'T pathologically determined to decide I'm wrong that what I've done is reasonable.

Well, there are no problem in you publishing rubbish, that happens often, but it's a reasonable demand that you document it.

You guys should try doing science for a while with the attitude you've demonstrated. Your supervisor would have a VERY long talk with you about how unproductive and pedestrian you were being.

Have you considered kicking your supervisor in the ass ?

[KrazyHorse]

Have you considered that you're a complete moron who wouldn't make it in an academic environment?

[BlackCat]

Have you considered that you're a complete moron who wouldn't make it in an academic environment?

Well, I don't want to call you something, but you seem to have survived - hope you like it

[BlackCat]

Have you considered that you're a complete moron who wouldn't make it in an academic environment?

Honestly, that may probably be the closest evidence that we can get that climate researchers are into some kind of conspiracy

[Darius871]

The 1 EVENT in a billion that actually makes it past their triggers

You're close that only about 1 in 10 million single events will be permanently recorded, but even a single event has to be observed and filtered using those triggers, and the processing allocated to that is thus included in the 15-petabyte total, unless the below quote is a total upheaval of basic English.

Getting off this tangent, not once did I say the LHC should or could permanently record and make public every event anyway; I was only using it and Google as examples of multi-petabyte processing and storage capacities to which climate data (apparently at less than a petabyte) pales in comparison. That's not insurmountable by any means, and you don't seem to disagree.

When the LHC is fully operational, it will produce roughly 1 billion proton-proton collision events per second in the detectors (40 million bunch crossings per second). This data will be heavily filtered so that only about 100 events of interest per second will be recorded permanently. Each event represents a few Megabytes of data, so the total data rate from the experiments will be of order 1 Gigabyte per second.

Including raw data, processed data and simulated data, the LHC will produce each year about 15 Petabytes (15 million Gigabytes) of data, the equivalent of about 20 million CDs! Copies of the data from one or more experiments will be stored at a dozen major computing centres, the so-called Tier-1 centres, and the analysis will be carried out by a Grid of over 100 computer centres in universities and research labs around the world, the Tier-2 centres. This computing Grid will allow thousands of scientists to access and analyse the LHC data, a task which will require a total computing power equivalent to ~ 100,000 of today's standard PC processors.

http://www.interactions.org/LHC/computing/index.html

If you want the raw data then I suggest you PAY SOMEBODY to do it.

Climate scientists don't do it because it's a giant waste as far as they're concerned.

I said no different:

All this really boils down to is how much is budgeted to it.

In other words it's not even up to the scientists; as far as publicly subsidized universities are concerned, it's up to the politicians to decide whether more detailed peer review is "worth it." BC's bi*ching is aimed at the wrong target.

[KrazyHorse]

You're close that only about 1 in 10 million single events will be permanently recorded, but even a single event has to be observed and filtered using those triggers, and the processing allocated to that is thus included in the 15-petabyte total, unless the below quote is a total upheaval of basic English.

I have no idea what you consider to be "basic English", but I know basic mathematics. There are ~3*10^7 seconds in a year. You can expect the experiment to run meaningfully for ~10^7 seconds per year. 10^7 * 1 Gb = 10 pb per year

The 15 petabytes is that produced by the DATA WHICH HAS BEEN TRIGGERED ON



Not just that: the "full event recording" actually ALREADY INCLUDES mounds of data processing. It's cleaned and reduced data (taking primitives such as hits in the tracking system, cals etc and making energies, vertices and such).

[BlackCat]

BC's *****ing is aimed at the wrong target.

Guess it's me Well, I do blame those responsible - if the scientists decide it, they are to blame no matter what - if they are told to do it by politicians, it's their fault - though, the scientists should argue against it.

[BlackCat]

You're close that only about 1 in 10 million single events will be permanently recorded, but even a single event has to be observed and filtered using those triggers, and the processing allocated to that is thus included in the 15-petabyte total, unless the below quote is a total upheaval of basic English.

I have no idea what you consider to be "basic English", but I know basic mathematics. There are ~3*10^7 seconds in a year. You can expect the experiment to run meaningfully for ~10^7 seconds per year. 10^7 * 1 Gb = 10 pb per year

The 15 petabytes is that produced by the DATA WHICH HAS BEEN TRIGGERED ON



Not just that: the "full event recording" actually ALREADY INCLUDES mounds of data processing. It's cleaned and reduced data (taking primitives such as hits in the tracking system, cals etc and making energies, vertices and such).

Yep, and that data processing/compresion are naturally made by some homebrew undocumented fortran progam

[Darius871]

You're close that only about 1 in 10 million single events will be permanently recorded, but even a single event has to be observed and filtered using those triggers, and the processing allocated to that is thus included in the 15-petabyte total, unless the below quote is a total upheaval of basic English.

I have no idea what you consider to be "basic English", but I know basic mathematics. There are ~3*10^7 seconds in a year. You can expect the experiment to run meaningfully for ~10^7 seconds per year. 10^7 * 1 Gb = 10 pb per year

The 15 petabytes is that produced by the DATA WHICH HAS BEEN TRIGGERED ON



Not just that: the "full event recording" actually ALREADY INCLUDES mounds of data processing. It's cleaned and reduced data (taking primitives such as hits in the tracking system, cals etc and making energies, vertices and such).

Of course I came to that ~31 pb/yr based on the 1 gb/yr they attributed to events, but that's only twice as much as the 15 pb/yr you think is attributable to only processed data, whereas you earlier said there's a billion times as many events as processed ones (really only ten million times according to the link)? What's 15pb/yr times a billion (really ten million), smartguy? And why would they distinguish "raw data" from "processed and simulated data" if the former didn't include events?

Come on, you can bi*chslap harder than that. If I wanted a kiss I would have hired your mother.

[Lorizael]

One last piece of bull****...

In that book, smart men in the employ of rich and powerful men, Rockefellers among others, stated:

If you doubt the influence of Rockefellers and their ilk, or of think tanks like The Club of Rome, which Al Gore is a member, I would strongly disagree.

Rockefeller has essentially no association with the Club of Rome. The first meeting of the think tank happened to take place at a hotel owned by the Rockefeller Foundation in Italy. That's it. That's the only connection. The rest is crap filled in by conspiracy theorists.

And even if Rockefeller and Gore are somehow connected to the Club of Rome, it's hilarious to believe that this implies some sort of conspiracy. Oh, no! Two influential men and an influential think tank are associated in some manner! Clearly, there must be something afoot! But even that ridiculous line of logic is flawed. Because there is no connection. It's just a series of fabrications.

[Darius871]

One last piece of bull****...

Rockefeller has essentially no association with the Club of Rome. The first meeting of the think tank happened to take place at a hotel owned by the Rockefeller Foundation in Italy. That's it. That's the only connection. The rest is crap filled in by conspiracy theorists.

And even if Rockefeller and Gore are somehow connected to the Club of Rome, it's hilarious to believe that this implies some sort of conspiracy. Oh, no! Two influential men and an influential think tank are associated in some manner! Clearly, there must be something afoot! But even that ridiculous line of logic is flawed. Because there is no connection. It's just a series of fabrications.

Why do you even bother? HalfLotus has been about as dead-serious in this thread as I am.

[KrazyHorse]

Of course I came to that ~31 pb/yr based on the 1 gb/yr they attributed to events, but that's only twice as much as the 15 pb/yr you think is attributable to only processed data, whereas you earlier said there's a billion times as many events as processed ones (really only ten million times according to the link)? What's 15pb/yr times a billion (really ten million), smartguy? And why would they distinguish "raw data" from "processed and simulated data" if the former didn't include events?

Come on, you can bi*chslap harder than that. If I wanted a kiss I would have hired your mother.

Yes, that's only twice as much. That's my ****ing point, you slowass. The 15 pb is ONLY TRIGGERED DATA

Holy ****.

[Darius871]

Well, this masochistic romp has clearly run its course. Time to grab the popcorn and watch BC/NYE pretend they're serious.

[KrazyHorse]