OT - Humor

Is this by any chance the modern version of "Who's on second?" by Abbot and Castello done by one person? ROFLM wipping tears from eye's

Regards, Bernd

Hilarious. Highly recommended. I'm not sure if that is Cheney or George II giving the explanation -- but it sure as hell sounds like it was written by a politician or lawyer.

Boris

If you're flying in combat and see a missile coming up behind you however, it won't be so funny, because that IS how they work. If it's on course to fly up your tailpipe, it's because it's steered so it can't see you.

An ex-missile mechanic.

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:18:59 -0600, "John Hofstad-Parkhill" brought forth from the murky depths:

HOLY SHIT, BATMAN! If that's "significantly reduced", I'd hate to have seen them before! (jewelry by kHP) Your thumbnails are barely discernable and full pictures waaaaay too heavy. Oh, your own gallery is much better, but the thumbnails are pretty pixelated.

Seek professional help. (Waving hand, pointing at self.)

Q: Why are Lise's Jewelry and Karen's page the same?!?

I like your precision level and chariot plane.

HOLY GOVERNMENT CONTRACT GOBBLEDYGOOK, BATMAN! That was clear and concise.

That Vette Killer and Physics warnings were both hoots, too.

Ok, now level with me, was this guy really trying to explain a missile guidance system, or was he doing this for laughs? He sounds serious enough that he might actually be serious. But, of course, nobody could possibly follow what he's saying!

Jon

In fact, if you listen carefully, it's pretty obvious that this is a text originally written with specific symbols signifying missile and target positions at certain times during trajectory, describing how the missile uses relative positioning information, in an integrated feedback loop, to chase its moving target. The symbols have been replaced by words, so that, say, the position of the target at the first discrete point in time of the sequence being studied is called "where it isn't" ("it" being the missile) when discussing that point in time, and "where it wasn't" when discussing the next point in time, i.e. the next loop through the integration process. (That is: "where it wasn't" means "the position of the target during the previous round of calculations" or "where we wanted to get to the last time round".)

Try to visualize the calculations as you hear it, and it makes sense.

There is, however, an error in the translation. Can you pinpoint it?

-tih