The battery came encased in a simple thin plastic deliver bag with no
protection around the battery. Sorry ECell but taking the slow boat
from China (Literally) I would expect a little more protection. So...5
points off for shipping style.
What was fairly impressive was the time to ship from England to Canada
less the days the post was closed for weekends and holidays totalled 7
business days. So...5 points back for delivery as promised.
The battery is currently doing it's initial charge on the universal
charger before I pop it in, clear my stats and start testing.
The first thing I can say about it is...Wow...Shiny. I like shiny things. :P
Aesthetics aside, it fits properly, nice and snug under the original
rear housing. I will have to get used to a "thin" phone again at least
for a while...
Ok. Prediction time...
I don't see this battery making 2430 mAh but who knows. Li-Pol is
different stuff and hopefully it's what slim dreams are made of.
For $17.00 US, including shipping, I won't complain if it hits 1700-1800 mAh but here's hoping.
Attached are some photos of the HTC Stock, The Cameron Sino Technology
and the ECell batteries side by each and parallel for your enjoyment and
viewing pleasure. :P Notice the dimensional similarities between the
stock and the ECell.
I don't have my scales of power and wisdom handy so I was unable to
weigh the batteries but it feels slightly lighter to the touch but not
by a considerable amount.
Right now it is at 3.85 volts and rising and very cool to the touch.
Once it's done it's initial charge I am going to run it dry under normal
use a few times to calibrate the battery and post the results for
average longevity, coolness to the touch during use, charging, and
charge while using.
I will also post the calibrated mAh reading as well as any temperature fluctuations, etc.
2011-12-31:
-Battery took 4 hours to charge up to 4.218 volts
-Estimated full from empty AC charge is 4.5 hours
-No heat generation to speak of during charging or use so far.
2012-01-02:
-Battery has been charged and fully discharged 3 times now. Reset all
stats and running an Antutu Battery Test on it that I will also run on
the stock and CS 2200 mAh to have some comparisons that mean something.
Testing setup is as follows:
-Same phone with CM7.2 overclocked to 806 mhz to speed up the testing process for all three batteries
-Batteries all conditioned and then charged for 8 hours prior to testing
-No changing of configured apps, services, etc on phone during testing
-batterystats.bin and Battery Monitor Pro history is wiped between batteries
-Wifi and data turned off so the phone does essentially nothing
-Antutu stops phone from locking, dimming, downclocking etc. so it's basically running all out for the entire duration
-No one seems to know what the scores are or how they relate to anyone else but I figure they will relate to each other.
-Once test is complete run Antutu again to run the battery down to 1%
for shutdown and get final burn time results from Battery Monitor Pro
TEST 1: ECell Gold 2430 mAh replacement battery
Test start time: 03:03 AM
Test start %: 100%
Test end time: 06:40 AM
Test end %: 19%
Antutu Test duration: 03:37
Rundown end time: 07:22 AM
Rundown end %: 1%
Total test duration: 4:19
Test score: 652
TEST 2: HTC 1230 mAh stock battery
Test start time: 12:58 PM
Test start %: 100%
Test end time: 03:48 PM
Test end %: 19%
Antutu Test duration: 03:00
Rundown end time: 4:32 PM
Rundown end %: 1%
Total test duration: 03:44
Test score: 508
TEST 3: Cameron Sino 2200 mAh replacement battery
Test start time: 05:10 PM
Test start %: 100%
Test end time: 11:31 PM
Test end %: 19%
Antutu Test duration: 06:21
Rundown end time: 12:45 AM
Rundown end %: 1%
Total test duration: 07:35
Test score: 1145
Final Results For ECell Gold, HTC Stock, and Cameron Sino:
-3 Hours and 44 Minutes For HTC Stock Battery
-4 Hours and 19 Minutes For ECell Gold Battery
-7 Hours and 35 Minutes For Cameron Sino Battery
-The ECell Gold, at 13.34% more capacity than the HTC Stock battery, comes in at far less than it's advertised 2430 mAh.
-The Cameron Sino, at 50.52% more capacity than the HTC Stock battery,
comes in at more than it's advertised capacity of 2200 mAh
The Conclusion:
You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear and you can't cheat physics.
Applying the same battery technology you can really only expect marginal
performance gains in the same form factor as is shown with the
underachievement of the ECell Gold compared to it's advertised capacity.
There were no surprises here.
Double the form factor brought double the capacity. If you're cool with
a "Fat Phone", the Cameron Sino Technology 2200 mAh battery lives up to
it's expectations and puts some reality back into things. You get a
very high capacity battery at a very reasonable $22.00 US
In it's own right the ECell Gold 2430 mAh is a great idea for a cheap
and higher capacity replacement battery and that's really the positive
in that storyline.
The price is right for a slim replacement battery but they need to stop the gimmickry and advertise it for what it is.
I notice the French and British behavior recently. The French really believe in leisure but are very intelligent and productive people. They are better models for the world. The British and Germans are disciplined but do not enjoy life. 8 September 2013Last updated at 23:01 GMT
Every day the possibility of the US
and France leading military action against Syria edges closer. If it happens, it
will mark another twist in a long and complex relationship.
Barack Obama and Francois Hollande were the only two leaders at the G20
meeting in Moscow committed to using force against Syria.
They make a pretty unexpected coalition of the willing, when you remember the
American anti-French backlash over Iraq a decade ago, when french fries were off
the menu and French wine down the plug-hole.
But the image of the two presidents with fortunes entwined provides a neat
historical symmetry. After all, if it wasn't for France then George Washington
might today only be a name known to avid history students.
In 1778, a fledgling nation called the United States made its first alliance,
an event that many experts believe altered the course of its war of independence
with Britain.
In the late 1700s both countries used revolution to overthrow tyrants and
establish democracy, or a "social contract" - a popular catchphrase of the
day.
America's social contract was based on the ideas of the English philosopher
John Locke (left). Locke imagined a society that maximises
individual freedom. While we all agree that it's necessary to give up some
freedoms for the common good - like the "freedom" to steal or the "right" to
kill - Americans try to preserve the individual's freedom to pursue happiness.
For Locke, government is, at best, a necessary evil whose control over our lives
should be kept to the minimum.
The French social contract is different, requiring more individual
compromises for the common good. When Simone fills her Renault at le pump, she
pays more than twice for that gas than I do in America. And she does it
willingly, knowing the built-in gas tax will be used to maintain roads, design
the latest TGV bullet train, and pay city bus drivers.
France was influenced by the social contract of philosopher Jean
Jacques Rousseau (right). Stressing that man is, by nature, not a
rugged individualist but a social creature, he saw government as not merely a
necessary evil, but as the embodiment of the communal will.
Steve Smith, travel writer
The treaty signed by Francophile Benjamin Franklin in
Paris meant France recognised the United States as a sovereign nation and was
committed to the defence of its new ally. In effect, it brought France into the
war against its long-standing enemy, Britain.
"It was the first formal alliance for the US, this treaty of alliance and
friendship and it probably made the difference between victory and defeat," says
Gregory Urwin, a professor of history at Temple University in Philadelphia.
"They were already providing covert aid, shipping weapons and munitions to
Americans though front trading companies, but once they entered the war it
changed the entire dynamic because Britain could no longer count on mastery of
the sea."
Every American is taught about the famous victory at Yorktown and the heroics
of a dashing Frenchman, the Marquis de Lafayette, the young idealist who joined
the Americans before his country had even entered the war.
But it's another Frenchman, the Count of Rochambeau, who is the real French
hero, says Urwin, because as commander of the French forces he had a decisive
influence on Washington's triumph at Yorktown.
The friendship between the two nations didn't last long. France expected
American assistance in the wars that followed the French Revolution but
Washington was reluctant to get drawn into a European conflict in the 1790s and
chose neutrality, ignoring the terms of the treaty and sparking a quasi-war with
France.
But the mythology of Lafayette was set in stone in 1824 when the park
adjoining the White House on its northern side was renamed Lafayette Square, in
a city designed by another Frenchman, Pierre L'Enfant.
Lafayette was further immortalised in World War I when, on American
Independence Day in 1917, US troops paraded through Paris and stopped at his
tomb, where at his request he was buried in soil brought from the US. The shouts
of "Lafayette, we are here!" symbolised a country repaying its debt 140 years
later.
By then, the Statue of Liberty was already fast becoming one of New York
City's most visible landmarks. It was a gift from "the French people" in 1886
that expressed the two countries' shared values.
The second world war of the 20th Century offered another chance for American
soldiers to be warmly welcomed on French soil. In Normandy, the Stars and
Stripes can still be seen fluttering from homes on the anniversary of the D-Day
landings.
Supping lunchtime drinks in the Baltimore sunshine, yards from statues of
Washington and Lafayette (above), Declan Shaughnessy echoed the thoughts of
several present when he said the support of the French provided no consolation
for critics of intervention like himself. "If Russia and China were leading the
way, countries bigger than France, I might think differently."
"I thank the French," says Chuck Merton, who supports a military strike. "I
was never against the French over Iraq. The French are like us. They speak their
own mind and follow their own beliefs, and I don't blame them. Just because
we're the USA doesn't make us right all the time."
But there persisted a belief among some Americans that
the French were too ready to give up without a fight, a sentiment that entered
popular culture in a Simpsons episode in 1995 that characterised the French as
"cheese-eating surrender monkeys".
This phrase was further popularised on the eve of the Iraq War, when France
refused to support a US-led invasion, sparking a backlash against all things
Gallic.
The freedom fries episode came as a surprise to us, but we were vindicated by
history so it doesn't really matter and the joke was on them.
There was some sadness because we felt close to them.
Generally speaking, the French are not anti-American. There has been a
tradition of anti-Americanism among the left-leaning intelligentsia since the
Second World War but it's not shared by the wider public. We've always been
drawn to them culturally even though there have been some foreign policy
differences.
Charles de Gaulle wanted to stand independent from the US but French foreign
policy has been largely Atlanticist for the last eight years.
Syria won't have any bearing on how we feel about Americans - 68% of the
French are opposed to military action and that has nothing to do with the US and
everything to do with the way this policy has been conceived.
The most memorable expression of this came when a
restaurant in North Carolina, now closed, changed "french fries" to "freedom
fries" on its menu. Others followed, including the canteen at the
House of Representatives. The presidential plane Air Force One served
"stuffed freedom toast topped with strawberries," instead of the usual French
toast.
France was added to a new "Axis of Weasel" with Germany, by satirist Scott
Ott. After coining the phrase in his blog, it was on the front page of the New
York Post two days later.
But Ott doesn't believe a joint operation against Syria will mark a new love
affair with France. On Iraq and on Syria, the French have been on the wrong side
of the argument, he says.
"So France will find itself against American public opinion again," he says,
adding that he loves France but makes a distinction between its government and
country.
French fries were soon back on the menu but many Americans were embarrassed
by the headlines it generated around the world.
"Iraq was a ridiculous over-reaction to what could be considered a rational
response by the French government and French people," says Steve Smith, an
American who writes about France for Rick Steves' guidebooks.
American tourism to France dropped, he says, either because Americans were
angry with the French or embarrassed. Some that did visit pretended they were
Canadian. "There was a huge drop in business. The number of tours to the country
and guide books sold fell off the table, although it recovered years later."
He thinks Americans love France but don't really understand the French.
"There's such a fundamental difference in outlook. The French are driven not by
how much money you make but what's on the menu for dinner tonight and what you
are reading."
Americans will ask early on what do you do for a living but the French won't,
he says. And an American suspicion that French people are lazy exists because
the French are more appreciative of leisure time.
"They also expect more from government. The French are more willing to
sacrifice the rights of the individual for the good of the community."
American artists and writers have long been drawn to Paris
Henry James and James Fenimore Cooper fell for its charms in 19th
Century
A later wave included F Scott Fitzgerald, Ford Madox Ford, Ernest
Hemingway and Gertrude Stein
After the war, came Allen Ginsberg, William Burroughs,
James Baldwin
"We always returned to it no matter who we were or how it was changed or
with what difficulties or ease it could be reached. Paris was always worth it,"
said Hemingway
The French played a leading role in Libya but it's the
prospect of the two nations standing shoulder to shoulder on Syria that has
ministers gushing.
US Secretary of State John Kerry has talked fondly of the nation's "oldest
ally" and spoke French as he made the case for military action while in Paris.
One security analyst in Washington said: "We're all over here learning French,
saying 'Vive la France!' That's the new thing."
The rapprochement between the two leaders over Syria will matter to public
perceptions, says Smith, because Americans love it when other people are on
their side.
"I feel it, listening to Hollande's words on the radio. And I think the
average American is listening and will pay attention."
The man who took french fries off the menu at the House of of Representatives
says it's ironic that the French are now leading the charge.
"What a turnaround," says former Congressman Bob Ney, who maintains that what
he did was a gesture to the troops in response to the heated anti-Americanism
coming out of Paris at the time.
And then, with a joking reference to the British, he adds: "Maybe we will
have to ban fish and chips now."
We, Muslims, only say Allahu Akbar when we expect miracles. God help us in invisible ways.
We, Muslims will only say, Alhamdulillah, after we have worked hard,
and we are successful. Although we work hard, we still cannot attribute
it to our own efforts at all.
Allahu Akbar means just Allah is great,
never greater or even greatest.
It will be utterly stupid to say Allah is greatest when we see and expect miracles.
Not that I think Allah is not the greatest even without the adjective greatest.
And Allah is greatest, not only to Muslims but also to non-Muslims
as well i.e. followers of Moses and Isa, which are the Jews and
Christians, but only the true ones.
We are all taught this way in sermons, even for those who do not go
to Islamic schools. Of course there are the conditionals "only the true
ones" but this apply to Muslims as well. Only true Muslims will go to
heaven.
Can you find any religion that allow other religion or followers of other prophets to go to heaven? None at all.
This kind of stupid interpretations by non-Muslims is just preposterous and filled with dishonest and intolerable intentions.
Just like the translation of La Ilah Ha Illahah as a thanking to god
in one of the Egyption pilot's airplane disaster. Muslims say it when
we are dying, not to thank god, but to affirm the belief in the ONE GOD,
the last time. To translate it to mean thanking is just preposterous
and dishonest.
"Like it, Allahu Akbar has clear hostile religious overtones. It’s
used to denote the religious supremacism that is the fundamental mission
of Islam."
This is just utter nonsense. Since I was a child, I was told that
the final saviour of Muslims will be isa, the prophet of the Christians,
and you call that religious supremism.
Muslims are also taught that true Jews and Christians will go to
heaven and so are many other groups who believe in monotheism, and this
is never taught in any religion at all, ONLY ISLAM. And you call Islam, a
religious supremism? Judaism is the worst in this respect. They think
that they are the only chosen people. Even Jesus despised this view as
documented by the New testaments.
No John, “Allah Akbar” Does Not Mean “Thank God” and It Matters
September 3, 2013 By Daniel Greenfield 57 Comments
?
Print This Post Print This Post
27342
What’s in a word?
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) blasted Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade on
Tuesday for questioning members of a Syrian opposition groups’ use of
the phrase “Allahu Akbar” after what Kilmeade said “looks like a fighter
jet being shot out of the sky.”
“I have a problem helping those people screaming that after a hit,” Kilmeade said.
McCain criticized Kilmeade for his skepticism of the phrase,
which means “God is greater” or “God is the greatest” in Arabic.
“Would you have a problem with an American person saying ‘Thank
God? Thank God?’” McCain said. “That’s what they’re saying. Come on! Of
course they’re Muslims, but they’re moderates and I guarantee you they
are moderates.”
They’re not saying Thank God. They’re not even saying Thank Allah.
If they wanted to praise Allah for surviving, they would say
“Alhamdulillah”.
The difference is significant. Allah Akbar is a proclamation of
Islamic superiority in line with its Koranic mission of making Islam
superior over all religions.
Koran 61:9. “He it is who has sent his Messenger with guidance and
the religion of truth to make it victorious over all religions even
though the infidels may resist.”
It’s not merely a praise of their deity, Allah. It’s a mission statement.
“We killed this man. This proves that our god is greater than his.”
McCain is being willfully ignorant when he conflates Thank God with Allahu Akbar.
The origin of Allah Akbar, which does not appear in the Koran, comes from the Hadith, during Mohammed’s genocide of the Jews.
“So, when the day dawned, the Jews came out with their bags and
spades. When they saw the Prophet; they said, “Muhammad and his army!”
The Prophet said, Allahu–Akbar! (Allah is Greater) and Khaibar is
ruined, for whenever we approach a nation (i.e. enemy to fight) then it
will be a miserable morning for those who have been warned.” Sahih
Bukhari 4:52:195
Khaybar, Khaybar Ya Yahud Jash Muhammad Saya’ud, Khaybar, Khaybar, O
Jews, Mohammed’s Army Will Return is still used as an anti-Semitic
battle cry by Muslims today.
Like it, Allahu Akbar has clear hostile religious overtones. It’s
used to denote the religious supremacism that is the fundamental mission
of Islam.
Until Senator McCain gets that, he’s as clueless as any of the 1920s
politicians who pretended that the Bolsheviks were just a bunch of
social reformers.
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/no-john-allah-akbar-does-not-mean-thank-god-and-it-matters/
GOD in Arabic is ILAH, the additional A is just the article THE in Arabic.
GOD in Malay is TUHAN, Allah is interpreted in Malay just as in Arabic, the special god.
Just because there is a word ALLAH existing in other languages does
not give you the right to mistranslate it opposite meanings. Would you
like me to call you a bastard person, but to mean it as honourable
person.
GOD and THE GOD are two very opposite meanings. It is particularly
insulting to Muslims who pray 5 times a day, saying these two words,
more than 10 times per day, to have these words mistranslated and
explained to other people as having the opposite in meanings.
In Arabic it is called: LA ILAH HA ILL ALLAH.
Translated in Malay in becomes, NO GOD BUT THE GOD.
There is no conflict in meaning at all with non Muslim Arabs in
using ALLAH because they also use ILAH to mean gods but reserving Allah
to the special god.
To downgrade ALLAH to just GOD, is downright insulting and blatantly lying.
You have no right to misinterpret words which means that you lie.
Freedom of speech does not equate to the freedom to lie, even in
private. You cannot even teach yourself to lie by using translating GOD
to ALLAH in Malay, instead of TUHAN which is the correct Malay word for
GOD. Translating GOD to ALLAH is both wrong either in Arabic or Malay.
Just because there is a word BASTARD, does not mean that I can call
you a BASTARD, but pretending it to mean HONOURABLE especially by non
Malay and non Malay habitual speaker, like this Bob Teoh and Catholic
translators, who insist that GOD means ALLAH, not TUHAN. What right have
you to misinterpret the Malay language.
Because there is a very strong case for people to misuse words as
clearly shown in the present case, articulated by the article below,
then it is right to the Malays especially the Muslim authorities to
control the use of words especially in Malay so that people will not be
lied to, not even in private.
Do you like people to talk bad about youself, even though it is done in private?
LORD in Malay is also translated as TUAN, not TUHAN. It is absurd to any Malay that LORD can ever be translated as TUHAN and preposterous. Another attempt at lying is very clear here.
So LORD GOD, can easily be translated to TUAN TUHAN, and any stupid person can immediately see that this is the correct translation, instead of TUHAN TUHAN, which this Bob Teoh keep on insisting.
If you are that stupid, let me explain clearly the original words which are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WHICH IS "LORD" and "GOD", how can it ever be translated into "TUHAN" "TUHAN" which are exactly the same words. Different words need to be translated into different words, as simple as that, you idiot.
Translating LORD GOD in English to TUHAN TUHAN in Malay, is BEYOND STUPIDITY. This cannot be tolerated at all.
Side Views
The Allah case at a glance: Part 2 - Bob Teoh
September 07, 2013
Latest Update: September 07, 2013 08:02 pm
Allah is just a word in the Semitic languages to refer to the
English word God. Languages like Malay borrow this word from Arabic.
Thus, whether it is in the Malay language Qur'an or the Malay language
Bible, or Alkitab as it is known, the word for God is Allah.
But it is more than just a word. The government and the religious
establishment are perceived by non-Muslims, especially Christians, as
taking all available means to stop them from using this word. This makes
Malaysia the only Muslim-majority country to make it an offence for
non-Muslims to use the Allah word as well as a slew of other common
Arabic words like doa (pray), iman (faith), and nabi (prophet).
Allah is a shared word among People of the Book, a centuries-old
common heritage. Only in Malaysia do we refuse to understand this.
But, as the Kuala Lumpur High Court judgment on the Herald case
pointed out, the battle over the Allah word is not about Islam as the
religion of the Federation or the Sultans' authority over it but whether
the government can lawfully prohibit non-Muslims from using the Allah
word.
Writing on his blog following the Herald judgment and subsequent
fire-bombing of churches, Dr Mahathir Mohamad said, “This controversy
actually began when I was prime minister. The Cabinet at the time held
the opinion that its use in the Bible is a sensitive matter. Sensitive
matters such as this cannot be resolved by simply referring to the law.”
According to the Herald judgment, “A mere statement by the Home
Minister that the exercise of power was necessary on the ground of
national security without adequate supporting evidence is not sufficient
in law.”
Mahathir also sees a hidden Christian agenda for wanting to use the Allah word.
“Perhaps the word Allah is to equate Christianity with Islam so it
is the worship of the same God. With this, acceptance of Christianity by
Muslims can be so much easier. This translation is incorrect. In fact,
the word Tuhan should be used for God.”
Like Mahathir, others have also suggested that Christians should use
Tuhan to refer to God. However, this is flawed advice. The Bible often
refers to God, especially in the Old Testament as the LORD God. In other
words, this would have to be translated as Tuhan Tuhan. Not only will
this sound silly, it is also bad grammar.
In Malay, a repetition of a noun renders in from a singular to a
plural. In other words, Christians worship many gods; making it into a
polytheistic religion; God forbid, nothing can be further from the
truth. Let there be no confusion over this. The Bible is explicitly
clear on the one-ness of God. This is clear in the Old Testament book of
Deuteronomy 6:4 and in the New Testament Gospel of Mark 12:29.
The fear of conversion out of Islam, especially to Christianity, is
understandable. But the hysteria whipped up by the religious
establishment and the ultra right-wing is wholly unsubstantiated. The
fact remains that the opposite appears to be true.
In Sabah alone there were 117,579 conversions to Islam from 1970 to 2009, according to official statistics.
Yet lies are repeatedly spread about massive conversions of Muslims
to Christianity. Take for instance, the Mufti of Perak. His allegations
have even riled some Muslims to the extent that the Sisters in Islam was
prompted to issue a press statement on 6 November 2006 to refute his
allegations.
It would not be right to put all the blame on Dr Mahathir. He was
not the only Prime Minister to ban an indigenous language Bible. His
successor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, banned the Bup Kudus, the Iban Bible,
while in his capacity as acting Prime Minister and Home Affairs
Minister. According to a research paper by Tsunashima-Miyake, Ikuko in
early 2003, the ban was imposed on the Iban Bible by the Ministry of
Home Affairs but was withdrawn within two months.
Indeed, the problem will continue to persist. But the government
knows and has the answer. It only needs the political will and goodwill
to put matters to rest. All 14 component parties of the ruling Barisan
Nasional coalition except one have distanced themselves from this highly
divisive and irregular policy.
There is no reason for one party to hold the whole nation to ransom
any longer. Thirty-three years is long enough for people of other faiths
to carry this cross. The present generation of believers don't even
know the genesis of this plague but they inherit the pain all the same.
It is time to bury past mistakes. It is time to bring forth
reconciliation. Therein lies the redemption of our nation. - mysinchew.com, September 7, 2013
* This is an extract from Allah – More Than A Word (2010 Zomiky Media) used with permission.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does
not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/the-allah-case-at-a-glance-part-2-bob-teoh
Notes by Dr. Optoglass: The Resolution of the Human Eye
Topics Covered:
The average and maximum resolutions of the human eye
PPI and DPI at various distances
Beauty is all very well at first sight; but who ever looks at it when it has been in the house three days? – George Bernard Shaw
As we have seen earlier, the average visual acuity of the human eye is one arc minute. The maximum possible is 0.4 arc minutes. It would be a very rare human indeed who can beat 0.4 arc minutes!
Therefore, we can safely say that the average resolution of a good eye is between 0.4 and 1 arc minute. Before these figures can be translated to pixels or displays, one needs to realize that the size of the pixel will vary with distance.
What’s the formula?
where
d is the distance in mm
α is the angle in degrees
A very young child can focus at about 2 inches, but the average adult can focus no closer than 4 inches (100 mm). We can assume the lowest value of d to be 100 mm. At this distance, the pixel/dot size p is 0.0116 mm or 11.6 microns – for 0.4 arc minutes. For 1 arc minute, it works out to be 29 microns.
An inch is 25.4mm. So how many of our pixels can fit into an inch? @0.4 arc minutes, it is 2190 ppi (dpi). @1 arc minute, it is 876 ppi (dpi)
Maximum Resolution of the Eye
So this is how it is. If a healthy adult brings any display screen or printed paper or whatever 4 inches (100 mm) from his or her face, the maximum resolution he/she can see at is 2190 ppi/dpi. It doesn’t get any better than this for 99.99% of us, except maybe during pre-kindergarten years.
But the legally accepted norm of 20/20 vision only asks for 876 ppi/dpi at 4 inches!
Let’s have some fun:
Magazines and Fine Art Prints
If the average reading distance is 1 foot (12 inches = 305 mm), p @0.4 arc minute is 35.5 microns or about 720 ppi/dpi. p @1 arc minute is 89 microns or about 300 dpi/ppi. This is why magazines are printed at 300 dpi – it’s good enough for most people. Fine art printers aim for 720, and that’s the best it need be. Very few people stick their heads closer than 1 foot away from a painting or photograph.
Computer Monitors
The average computer monitor viewing distance is about 2.5 feet (762 mm). p@0.4 is 89 microns or about 300 ppi/dpi. p@1 is 222 microns or about 115 ppi/dpi. Now you can understand why most consumer computer monitors are about 100 ppi, and most professional computer monitors are slightly higher, but not by much.
The new iPad (3) has a resolution of 264 ppi, which isn’t as good as 300 dpi print but is much better than the average computer monitor. The new Eizo 36.4″ professional air traffic control 4K monitor is at 128 ppi.
Home television
Assuming the average viewing distance for television is 6 feet (1830 mm), p@0.4 is about 120 ppi and p@1 is about 50 ppi.
Most consumer large screen LCD and LED panels are about 50 ppi to 90 ppi, and average about 72 ppi. Now you know why. If your television gets smaller in size, then the higher ppi doesn’t really help. This is why 1920×1080 (at 100 ppi at 6 feet for a 50″ LCD/LED television panel) is good enough. The eye can’t really resolve a lot more at 6 feet.
Cinema
The width of a cinema screen can vary from 30 to 70 feet (360″ to 840″, 9144 mm to 21,336 mm). The closest viewing distance recommended is about 40 feet (3x height) – 12,192 mm. If one is projecting 2K on these screens, the ppi is about 2.4 ppi to 5.7 ppi. If one is projecting 4K, it is about 5 ppi to 11.4 ppi.
Is this what the eye needs?
p@0.4 works out to be 1.4 mm or 18 ppi.
p@1 works out to be 3.5 mm or 7 ppi.
As you can see, 4K comes very close to what the human eye can fully resolve in a cinema screen at average viewing distances. Obviously, many people sit in the front row, and they’d definitely appreciate higher resolution. Which is why we are moving towards:
8K and UHDTV
A 30 to 70 feet screen at 8K (8192 horizontal) gives me from 9.75 ppi to 22.8 ppi. This resolution beats what the eye can resolve at these distances. The future belongs to 8K.
But, to get 18 ppi (the best possible resolution) for a 70 feet screen, we’ll need a horizontal resolution of 15120 or 16K. This is about 128 Megapixels. Is anybody working on this?
IMAX film is supposed to resolve between 10K to 12K (theoretical maximum)
The Phase One IQ180 digital back is 80 Megapixels.
The Red camera company did announce a 28K camera!
This is as good as it gets in 2012.
Takeaways:
The maximum visual acuity of the human eye is 0.4 arc minutes.
At 4 inches, the maximum the human eye needs is 2190 ppi/dpi.
Next: Airy Disk and Pixel Density of the Eye
Previous: Focal Lengths of the Human Eye
If this primer helped you, please buy me a
Please share this primer with your friends:
Related posts:
Notes by Dr. Optoglass: Focal Lengths of the Human Eye
Notes by Dr. Optoglass: Eye Geometry
Notes by Dr. Optoglass: Angle of View and Aspect Ratio
Notes by Dr. Optoglass: The Human Eye – Part II
Notes by Dr. Optoglass: The Human Eye – Part III
July 21, 2012
2 comments
Sign in4
Post comment
Newest | Oldest
Vimal Gopal Apr 11, 2013
Under the "Home Television" section, you mentioned that a 1920x1080, 50" display is 100 dpi. But, according to pxcalc.com, that combination only gets you to 38.4 dpi. How are you getting 100 dpi?? Thanks.
LikeReply
Sareesh Sudhakaran moderatorApr 11, 2013
@Vimal Gopal The formula is available, Vimal. What results are you getting?
LikeReply
Trackbacks
Too many Pixels? |SamMobile says:
February 17, 2013 at 1:01 am
[...] with perfect 20/20 vision would theoretically be able to see individual pixels at a density of 2190ppi on a screen just 4” (~100mm) from their eyes, and for the average person with 20/20 vision, it’s about 876ppi. The [...]
Too many Pixels? | The Smartphone World says:
February 17, 2013 at 8:25 pm
[...] with perfect 20/20 vision would theoretically be able to see individual pixels at a density of 2190ppi on a screen just 4” (~100mm) from their eyes, and for the average person with 20/20 vision, it’s about 876ppi. The [...]
MICROSOFT SURPRISED NO ONE on
Tuesday when it announced that it picked up Nokia's devices unit and
licensed some of its software for a cool £4.6bn in cash. While many see
the deal as two struggling companies merging for a final shot at
success, we think the deal should have Apple and Google worried.
First off, Nokia pretty much is Windows Phone. Ask somebody
in the street to name a Windows Phone maker and they're unlikely to
mention Samsung or HTC, with the Finnish phone firm accounting for
around 85 percent of Windows Phone handsets sold and its Nokia Lumia 520
smartphone ranking as the best selling phone running the Microsoft
mobile operating system yet. With Microsoft taking Nokia under its wing,
it's hard to see Samsung, HTC or even Huawei or ZTE continuing to
develop Windows Phone devices, despite Microsoft claiming that the deal
will "help the market" for its other OEM partners.
This could be a worry for Google. When the firm bought handset maker
Motorola last year, Google reassured Android OEMs that it would not
favour the company in any way. However, after Microsoft's buyout of
Nokia, perhaps other Windows Phone makers can't feel quite so assured.
So why is this bad for Google? Samsung and HTC are unlikely to want
to rely on only the Android mobile operating system, and could avoid
throwing all of their eggs into one basket by branching out elsewhere.
This, for example, could see Samsung focusing more heavily on its Tizen
mobile operating system and distancing itself from Android somewhat,
which could spell bad news for the Android ecosystem, given that the
firm accounts for 95 percent of profits in the Android smartphone market.
There have been some rumours recently that HTC could be planning to
launch its own mobile operating system, and Microsoft's acquisition of
Nokia devices could see the firm looking to focus on this to avoid
reliance on Android.
That's not the only reason Google should be worried, and Apple should
be too, as the buyout finally sees Windows Phone becoming an exciting
third player in the smartphone market, looking to end the duopoly
currently held by iOS and Android. The pairing of the two companies
might be just what Microsoft's mobile operating system needs to extend
its reach beyond the present 9.2 percent marketshare it holds in the UK. In fact, Microsoft has already said that it wants to see its market share triple by 2018 following its purchase of Nokia.
The deal sees Microsoft taking back control of the Windows Phone
market, with Steve Ballmer already voicing that he wants to use the
buyout to boost the number of big-name apps in the Windows Store,
including apps like Instagram. Up until now, apps have been Windows
Phone 8's main downfall. We've long praised the Windows Phone interface
as one of the best on the mobile market and we've rarely had complaints
relating to Nokia's hardware, so if Microsoft can stick to its promise
here it could see Windows Phone getting a lot more competitive in the
apps market.
In fact, we could go on. There are a number of factors that should
have Google and Apple worried: Nokia bringing its distribution reach to
Microsoft, the amount of money Microsoft can pump into Nokia, and the
fact that Microsoft now owns Nokia's extensive patent portfolio, which
could see Microsoft going after its rivals in other ways.
Today's deal also effectively writes off Blackberry as a major player
in the smartphone market, as Microsoft picking up Nokia sees the firm
combining the Finnish firm's hardware division with its software and is
likely to make Microsoft the number one choice in the enterprise market.
Of course, we could also list many risks that both Microsoft and
Nokia face, and Stephen Elop said on Tuesday that there is both
"ambiguity and concern" among employees because neither firm knows what
the future holds.
Done right, however, the future could present a shot at success in the mobile market for both companies. µ
Several new versions of the flu vaccine are debuting this year —
more powerful, more protective, even a version for those with egg
allergies — but they are so new they are not yet widely available.
Health
experts, however, say you still will be able to get the traditional flu
shot this year, which you should if you are at least 6 months old.
The
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the state
Department of Health both are urging people to get a flu shot as soon as
it's available.
"It's not too early to get it," said Dr. Carrie DeLone, the state's physician general.
Pharmacies
are now giving the shot, as are local physician offices. Hospitals will
start to vaccinate employees next month, and the state health
department is rolling out its clinics.
Limited supplies of the new types of flu vaccines will be available locally, including:
n A high-dose vaccine for people age 65 and older.
The
new vaccine contains additional amounts of vaccine that stimulate the
production of antibodies to marshal a stronger defense against the flu
in the elderly, who are the most at risk for a severe illness or death
from the flu.
n A quadrivalent form of the vaccine, which protects against two A strains of flu and two B strains of flu.
Traditional
flu vaccines are trivalent, protecting against two A strains and one B
strain. It is the A strain that causes severe illness, but the B strain
also can sicken people.
n An egg-free version of the vaccine.
Up until now, people who were allergic to eggs could not get a flu vaccine because the vaccine is made using eggs.
Local
hospitals say they will not be offering the high-dose or quadrivalent
forms of the vaccine on a wide basis. The two new versions were not
available when they ordered their vaccines in the spring.
State
health department clinics will offer the quadrivalent vaccine, in both a
nasal spray version and an injectable version. But only about 115,000
of the quadrivalent vaccines will be available, compared to about
400,000 of the trivalent vaccines.
DeLone said the CDC does not
recommend the quadrivalent vaccine for any particular type of patient so
whoever can get it, and wants it, can take it.
People who are uninsured or underinsured and are looking for a flu shot at a state health clinic can call 1-877-PA HEALTH.
At
pharmacies, the quadrivalent vaccine is available on a limited basis,
and will cost about $10 more than the trivalent version.
Pharmacies also are offering the high-dose vaccine for the 65-and-over crowd.
Some
soon-to-be-published reports show that the high-dose vaccine does
appear to be effective among senior citizens, said Dr. Neil A. Greene,
chief of the infectious disease division at Lancaster General Hospital.
If the high-dose vaccine continues to prove to be effective, it likely will become more widely available next year, he said.
While
nobody knows how bad the upcoming flu season will be, last year's
outbreak still is fresh in the minds of many local caregivers.
The worst season in at least a decade, the 2012-13 flu killed 10 people here and sickened more than 1,800.
"After
last year, I think more people will be willing to roll their sleeve
up," said Peg Holland, infection control coordinator at Ephrata
Community Hospital. "It was rough."
Last year, LGH required its employees to get the flu vaccine to protect its patients and staff. Ephrata is doing so this year.
Heart
of Lancaster and Lancaster Regional Medical Centers do not require
their employees to get the shot. But they do require them to a submit a
reason if they do not get the vaccine, and to wear a mask around
patients and other employees during flu season, said Marla Konas,
infection control nurse.
Even employees with an egg allergy may
not have an iron-clad reason not to get the shot anymore, as this year a
new egg-free shot became available.
Egg allergies are rare —
only 20 to 30 people out of the 8,000 or so Lancaster General Health
employees last year got deferments for the allergy, Greene said.
In
addition to getting vaccinated, you can do other things to protect
yourself from contracting or spreading the flu, DeLone said.
Wash
your hands often. Cover your mouth when you cough. Don't go to work or
send your children to school if flu symptoms develop.
And if you
do develop the flu, get to your physician as soon as possible for
anti-viral medications, which can lessen the severity of the illness,
Greene said.
Assad allegedly hiding troops, weapons among civilians
Two
young Syrian soldiers ride a motorcycle past a huge poster bearing a
portrait of President Bashar al-Assad next to a painting of a Syria's
national flag in the Christian town of Marmarita in the central Homs
region, about 200 kms northwest of the capital Damascus, on August 19,
2013. /Getty Images
BEIRUT As the Obama administration tries to prod Congress into backing armed action against Syria, the regime in Damascus is hiding military hardware and shifting troops out of bases into civilian areas.
Politically, President Bashar Assad has gone on the offensive, warning in a rare interview with Western media that any military action against Syria could spark a regional war.
If the U.S. opts for missile strikes, Assad's reaction could have a major effect on the trajectory of Syria's civil war.
Neighboring countries could get dragged into a wider conflict, or it
could be back to business as usual for a crisis that has claimed the
lives of more than 100,000 people over 2.5 years.
The
main Western-backed opposition group says that during the buildup last
week to what seemed like an imminent U.S. attack, the army moved troops
as well as rocket launchers, artillery and other heavy weapons into
residential neighborhoods in cities nationwide. Three Damascus
residents, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals,
confirmed such movements.
One man said two members of the
elite Republican Guards broke into an empty house he owns and showed
him an official document stating they were authorized to do so because
Syria is at war. A woman in another area said soldiers moved into a
school next to her house.
That trend is likely to continue in the coming days after the regime won a reprieve following President Barack Obama's decision to seek congressional approval for military action.
"The
Syrian regime knows there are 30-40 potential targets for U.S.
airstrikes, and they have had ample time to prepare," said Hisham Jaber,
a retired Lebanese army general and director of the Middle East Center
for Studies and Political Research in Beirut. "Half of them, if not
more, have been evacuated, moved or camouflaged. This is the natural
thing to do."
Obama said last week that he believes the U.S. should strike Syria for what the administration says was a deadly chemical weapons attack by Assad's forces
on rebel-held suburbs of Damascus. The administration has stressed,
however, that any operation would be limited and not aimed at tipping
the balance of power in Syria's civil war.
In an
interview published Monday with the French newspaper Le Figaro, Assad
refused to say how Syria would respond to Western strikes, but warned
that "the risk of a regional war exists."
The regime has a
range of options if the U.S. does bomb. It could retaliate with rockets
against U.S. allies in the region. It could unleash allies like
Hezbollah against Western targets abroad. Or it could do nothing — and
score propaganda points by portraying itself as victim of U.S.
aggression.
Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad told CBS News' Elizabeth Palmer over the weekend the regime could use all options if the U.S. attacks, and that the "Middle East will be on fire."
"We
have an army, we have our people, we have our capabilities, we have our
friends, and all these means will be used to stop such an aggression,"
said Mekdad, adding the U.S. "cannot control what will happen" in the
aftermath of an attack.
The regime's choice, analysts
say, will probably depend on the magnitude of the American military
action: The bigger and more sustained the strikes, the more likely the
government in Damascus will feel compelled to respond.
If Washington follows through with calibrated strikes, analysts say, Assad may reach for a political card, not a military one.
"His
first option is propaganda value," said Salman Shaikh, director of the
Brookings Doha Center. Assad could try to foster the notion "that the
West is again attacking a Middle Eastern state, an Arab state, without
the right international legitimacy. And he can bolster that dynamic,
that narrative, by showing that it's had a cost on innocent civilians."
One way to achieve that would be to show the world images of civilians purportedly killed by American strikes.
"If
he's able to score points from this, he will feel that he's actually
won without actually engaging in a military response," Shaikh said.
Assad charted a similar course after Israeli airstrikes in May
that targeted advanced weapons destined for Lebanon's Shiite militant
group Hezbollah. His regime portrayed the attacks as proof of the
rebels' collusion with Israel, denounced the strikes as a violation of
Syrian sovereignty and dispatched an obscure militant group to threaten
retaliation.
In terms of military responses, Assad could
launch rockets at U.S. allies Turkey, Jordan or Israel. But that could
touch off a prolonged military engagement with an outside power at a
time when the regime is already in a bloody fight for its survival.
An
attack against NATO-member Turkey could trigger a response from the
entire military alliance, while Jordan hosts about a dozen U.S. F-16
jets, a Patriot missile battery and around 1,000 American troops.
As
for Israel, the Assad regime could launch rockets at the Jewish state,
or turn to Hezbollah to do so. The militant group, which fought Israel
to a standstill in a 34-day war in 2006, is believed to have a
well-stocked arsenal of missiles capable of hitting the country's major
cities. While Iran has directly threatened to strike at Israel should
the U.S. attack Syria, the Assad regime has been noncommittal about what
would happen in regards to the Jewish state.
But
analysts say Syria is unlikely to pursue an aggressive course against
Israel unless the U.S. strikes pose an immediate threat to Assad's grip
on power.
Hezbollah would have a lot to lose. The group
is already facing flak at home for fighting alongside Syrian government
troops against the rebels. A full-on confrontation with Israel on behalf
of Syria would probably be a tough sell to its Shiite constituents at
home, let alone the broader Lebanese public.
"I can't see
a situation whereby they would accept an order from Assad to, say,
attack Israel or attack some domestic enemies. I think that would be too
damaging for their position," said Chris Phillips, a Syria specialist
at Queen Mary University in London.
Israeli defense
officials also say the odds of retaliation by Syria or Hezbollah are
very low. Still, Israel has deployed Iron Dome anti-missile batteries in
the Tel Aviv area and toward its northern frontier with Syria.
Between
these two extremes lies a middle path for Assad, which would involve an
attack such as a car bombing carried out by a sympathetic militant
group.
"Something to indicate to the outside world that
it's dangerous to mess with the Assad regime, that they have levers that
can cause damage elsewhere, while also plausibly denying that they've
had direct impact," Phillips said.
As an example,
Phillips pointed to a double car bombing earlier this year in Turkey
that killed more than 50 people. Turkey blames Syria, while Syria denies
any role.
Most muslims don't understand the sacrifices make by US. Hopefully this article will summarise it all in one emotional letter. Muslims should't expect other people to defend their interests.
See the letter to Obama from A.J. Spiker and David Fischer of the Iowa GOP
An Open letter to President Obama from A.J. Spiker and David Fischer Chairman and Co-Chairman of the Republican Party of Iowa.
President Obama: We oppose the president beginning another war by bombing Syria.
As fathers we believe our children’s lives are worth far more than the
price you’ll pay for admitting you’re wrong when it comes to dragging us
into war in Syria.
We believe the prosperity of America’s next generation is worth more
than profits for defense contractors and the bump in the polls you and
your fellow politicians may receive from portraying yourselves as
wartime leaders.
We’ve been at war for over ten years now, costing
us trillions of dollars and resulting in the death of thousands of
American soldiers and untold numbers of civilians. Many of those who
survive come home with debilitating injuries, strained families, and
emotional scars.
Our troops have been called up again and again as
we continue to engage in wars that pose no threat to American security,
fighting to control the borders of other countries while our own
borders at home remain unsecured. We proclaim to set the standard for
freedom and liberty, yet we trample our Constitution, spy on our
citizens, engage in nation building, and continue to police other
countries whether the people of that country want us there or not. What
we have to show for all these military engagements is death,
destruction, more enemies, and a broken economy, with a national debt
that is over $17,000,000,000,000 and climbing. Syria
is mired in a dangerous civil war and while the news of the conflict
there is troubling, it does not present a threat to American security.
In fact, American intervention is likely to make things worse and create
new enemies. Some intelligence reports even indicate the rebel forces
you’re contemplating helping may actually be made up of Al-Qaeda itself.
There are few things in politics that actually bring Amerians together, but 90% of Americans oppose a war in Syria.
Yet somehow, Mr. President, you and some of our other so-called leaders
are gearing up to take us into an unwanted, undeclared,
unconstitutional war in Syria. It’s time to put an end to this nonsense and mind the store here at home.
Together
with our wives we have five children aged 10 and under. They have never
known a world in which the United States was not at war. It’s marked
their childhood and surrounded them with a pervasive “War on Terror”
culture that benefits politicians who are ready to support this
narrative, particularly at election time. America’s children inherit the
bills for this recklessness and an economy so damaged they will
struggle to achieve the prosperity enjoyed by their parents’ generation.
For
some the cost of yet another war will be the economic drain, as
countless billions of taxpayer dollars are diverted from productive
uses. But for others, the cost will be the loss of sons and daughters,
brothers and sisters, and (hitting closest to home for us) fathers of
children who just want their dads to come home and won’t understand why a
President who pledged to end unnecessary wars sent their fathers to
fight in a country that posed no threat to American security.
Even
if you somehow support using money we don’t have to unnecessarily send
our troops into harms way again, the decision to take the country to war
rests with the Congress, not the President. It wasn’t long ago that as a
U.S. Senator you stated, “The President does not have power under the
Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation
that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the
nation.” We couldn’t agree more, Mr. President, and if you want to take
us to war you need to honor your oath to the Constitution and go to the
peoples’ representatives in Congress for a declaration of war.
As
fathers we work to help our children achieve the American dream of
freedom, prosperity, and peace. But if that dream will include a
lifetime of debt and endless wars, then we will have to tell our
children that the elected officials who took an oath to defend the
Constitution have failed them. For the sake of our troops, our economy,
and most importantly our children, we need to look for opportunities to
end wars, not start new ones.
Sharks and Nature Cooperate for Solo Cuba-to-Florida Swim
Andy Newman/Florida Keys News Bureau, via Associated Press
Kayakers helped escort Diana
Nyad about two miles off of Key West, Fla., on her way to becoming the
first swimmer to cross the 110-mile Florida Straits without the
protection of a shark cage.
MIAMI — This time, nature tipped its hat, and Diana Nyad finally
conquered the 110-mile passage from Cuba to Florida that had bedeviled
her for 35 years.
Spectators in Key West, Fla., cheered Ms. Nyad at the end of her 53-hour swim from Havana.
Sharks steered clear, currents were friendly, and storms took most of the Labor Day weekend off.
The 64-year-old endurance swimmer emerged dazed and sunburned from the
surf on Smathers Beach in Key West, Fla., just before 2 p.m. on Monday
after nearly 53 hours in the ocean, a two-day, two-night swim from her
starting point in Havana. She had survived the treacherous Florida
Straits, a notorious stretch of water brimming with sharks, jellyfish,
squalls and an unpredictable Gulf Stream. And she became the first
person to do so unaided by the protection of a shark cage.
It was her fifth attempt, coming after four years of grueling training,
precision planning and single-minded determination. Her face scorched
and puffy from so many hours in the salt water, she leaned on one of her
friends and said from the beach:
“I have three messages. One is we should never, ever give up. Two is you
never are too old to chase your dreams. Three is it looks like a
solitary sport, but it takes a team.”
Coming at an age when few people try to set endurance records, Ms.
Nyad’s swim lit up Twitter and Facebook with postings about perseverance
and grit, including a tweet from President Obama: “Congratulations to
Diana Nyad. Never give up on your dreams.”
Ms. Nyad’s success was built on her failures — the first in 1978, when
she was 28, and the most recent last year at age 62. After each attempt,
she improvised, learning what to adjust, whom to consult and which new
protective protocol to consider.
“Diana did her homework,” said Bonnie Stoll, Ms. Nyad’s friend and chief
handler, shortly after Ms. Nyad completed her swim.
Two summers ago, she was felled midswim by a long asthma attack, her
first ever. This year, she added a pulmonologist to her 35-member
support team, Ms. Stoll said.
Box jellyfish, which are especially venomous, have been a constant
source of danger; Ms. Nyad was stung so badly on previous swims she had
to stop. To break that cycle, she found an expert on box jellyfish this
year to help her contain the threat.
In the evenings, Ms. Nyad donned a special suit with long sleeves and
pant legs to protect her. She slathered “sting stopper” gel to form a
barrier to keep out the venom. On Saturday night, she also wore a
special mask that covered her face. But the mask proved uncomfortable,
cutting her mouth and tongue so badly, and impeding her breathing, that
she discarded it after the first night.
The course was mostly clear of box jellyfish this time. When she finally
encountered a cluster, it was on her approach to Key West. The shark
divers swam ahead of Ms. Nyad to disperse the swarm.
In 2011, Ms. Nyad decided to use a team of shark divers who carried
special zappers to ward off the predators. Trial and error also
presented new options. She learned which wet suits were more forgiving
on her skin in saltwater and which special drinks and nutrition gels
best fueled her. (She ingested them, sometimes through a tube, while
treading water.)
But there were two things Ms. Nyad could not control: the weather and the current. This time, both cooperated.
“I think that Mother Nature said, ‘You know what? Let her go,’ ” Ms. Stoll said.
Unlike past swims derailed by squalls that pushed her off course, only
one storm hit this weekend. It came on Sunday night and lasted a little
under 90 minutes, Ms. Stoll said. Ms. Nyad followed her protocol and
swam through it, accompanied by shark divers.
Sharks, always a menace, were nowhere to be seen this time.
The favorable currents carried her along so swiftly that Ms. Nyad
finished her swim a day earlier than expected, Ms. Stoll said. On
average, Ms. Nyad swims about 1.6 miles an hour. With the current
propelling her, she cruised at 5 m.p.h. during one stretch, Ms. Stoll
said, adding, “Everything was in our favor.”
To help her focus, Ms. Nyad relied, as she always has, on her favorite
songs. Over and over, she hums them in her head, her strokes falling in
time with the music’s cadence: “Ticket to Ride” by the Beatles echoed on
one stretch, “Paperback Writer” on another.
“Swimming is the ultimate form of sensory deprivation,” Ms. Nyad said in
the month before her 2011 swim. “You are left alone with your thoughts
in a much more severe way.”
Through the years, others have tried to swim from Cuba to Key West and
failed. In June, an Australian, Chloe McCardel, swam 11 hours and 14
miles before jellyfish stings forced her to stop.
In 2012, another Australian, Penny Palfrey, swam 79 miles until strong
currents waylaid her. In 1978, Walter Poenisch, an Ohio man, said he
made the swim using flippers and a snorkel, but he lacked independent
documentation to verify it.
Susie Maroney did complete the swim in 1997, but she did so inside a
shark cage that was being pulled by a boat, providing a draft that made
swimming much easier. The first time Ms. Nyad attempted the swim, in
1978, she also used a shark cage. She did not use a shark cage this
time.
Whenever Ms. Nyad scrambled, heartbroken and exhausted, onto a boat
after a failed attempt, she vowed it would be her last. “It was a fairy
tale,” she said after her second attempt, in August 2011, “but the fairy
tale didn’t come true.”
After last summer, Ms. Stoll said she was convinced that the Florida
Straits were unswimmable. “I thought it wasn’t humanly possible or she
would have done it,” Ms. Stoll said. “I was glad to be wrong.”
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction: Correction: September 2, 2013
An
earlier version of this story incorrectly stated the time of Diana
Nyad’s arrival from Cuba on a beach in Key West, Fla. The swimmer
arrived just before 2 p.m. on Monday, not at 1:20 p.m.
WASHINGTON — The White House’s aggressive push for Congressional
approval of an attack on Syria appeared to have won the tentative
support of one of President Obama’s most hawkish critics, Senator John
McCain, who said Monday that he would back a limited strike if the
president did more to arm the Syrian rebels and the attack was punishing
enough to weaken the Syrian military.
Representative Gerald E. Connolly of Virginia before a security briefing on Syria on Sunday.
In an hourlong meeting at the White House, said Mr. McCain, Republican
of Arizona, Mr. Obama gave general support to doing more for the Syrian
rebels, although no specifics were agreed upon. Officials said that in
the same conversation, which included Senator Lindsey Graham, the South
Carolina Republican, Mr. Obama indicated that a covert effort by the
United States to arm and train Syrian rebels was beginning to yield
results: the first 50-man cell of fighters, who have been trained by the
C.I.A., was beginning to sneak into Syria.
There appeared to be broad agreement with the president, Mr. McCain and
Mr. Graham said, that any attack on Syria should be to “degrade” the
Syrian government’s delivery systems. Such a strike could include
aircraft, artillery and the kind of rockets that the Obama
administration says the forces of President Bashar al-Assad used to
carry out an Aug. 21 sarin attack in the Damascus suburbs that killed
more than 1,400 people.
The senators said they planned to meet with Susan E. Rice, Mr. Obama’s
national security adviser, to discuss the strategy in greater depth.
“It is all in the details, but I left the meeting feeling better than I
felt before about what happens the day after and that the purpose of the
attack is going to be a little more robust than I thought,” Mr. Graham
said in an interview.
But Mr. McCain said in an interview that Mr. Obama did not say
specifically what weapons might be provided to the opposition or discuss
in detail what Syrian targets might be attacked.
“There was no concrete agreement, ‘O.K., we got a deal,’ ” Mr. McCain
said. “Like a lot of things, the devil is in the details.”
In remarks to reporters outside the West Wing, he called the meeting
“encouraging,” urged lawmakers to support Mr. Obama in his plan for
military action in Syria and said a no vote in Congress would be
“catastrophic” for the United States and its credibility in the world.
Mr. McCain said he believed after his conversation with the president
that any strikes would be “very serious” and not “cosmetic.”
Although the words from Mr. McCain and Mr. Graham were a positive
development for Mr. Obama and a critical part of the administration’s
lobbying blitz on Syria on Monday, the White House still faces a tough
fight in Congress. Many lawmakers entirely oppose a strike, and others
favor a resolution that would provide for more limited military action
than what is in a draft resolution that the White House has sent to
Capitol Hill. The conflict of opinion underscores Mr. Obama’s challenge
in winning votes in the House and Senate next week and avoiding personal
defeat.
A Labor Day conference call with five of Mr. Obama’s highest-ranking
security advisers drew 127 House Democrats, nearly two-thirds their
total number, after 83 lawmakers of both parties attended a classified
briefing on Sunday. Pertinent committees are returning to Washington
early from a Congressional recess for hearings this week, starting
Tuesday with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which will hear
from Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and
Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“The debate is shifting away from ‘Did he use chemical weapons?’ to
‘What should be done about it?’ ” said Representative Adam B. Schiff, a
California Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, in an interview
after the Monday conference call.
The push in Washington came as reaction continued around the world to
the president’s abrupt decision over the weekend to change course and
postpone a military strike to seek authorization from Congress first.
In France, the only nation to offer vigorous support for an American
attack, there were rising calls for a parliamentary vote like the one
last week in Britain, where lawmakers jolted the White House with a
rejection of a British military attack. But the French government, in an
effort to bolster its case, released a declassified summary of French
intelligence that it said ties Mr. Assad’s government to the use of
chemical weapons on Aug. 21.
In Russia, Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov dismissed as unconvincing
the evidence presented by Mr. Kerry of chemical weapons use by the
Syrian government. “We were shown certain pieces of evidence that did
not contain anything concrete, neither geographical locations, nor
names, nor evidence that samples had been taken by professionals,” Mr.
Lavrov said in a speech at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations.
In Israel, President Shimon Peres offered strong support for Mr. Obama’s
decision to seek the backing of Congress, saying he had faith in the
president’s “moral and operational” position. “I recommend patience,”
Mr. Peres said in an interview on Army Radio. “I am confident that the
United States will respond appropriately to Syria.”
In Washington, the White House’s “flood the zone” effort, as one
official called it, will continue. Classified briefings will be held for
all House members and senators on Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.
On Tuesday, Mr. Obama has invited the Republican and Democratic leaders
of the House and Senate defense, foreign affairs and intelligence
committees to the White House. But that night, he will depart on a
long-planned foreign trip, first to Sweden and then to Russia for the
annual Group of 20 summit meeting of major industrialized and developing
nations, a forum that is sure to be dominated by talk of Syria, and
bring Mr. Obama face to face with Mr. Assad’s chief ally and arms
supplier, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
House Democrats on the conference call with administration officials,
which lasted 70 minutes, said Mr. Kerry, who has been the most
aggressive and public prosecutor for military action, took the lead.
Democrats said he had portrayed not only the horrors of chemical weapons
inflicted on Syrian civilians in the Aug. 21 attacks outside Damascus,
but also the potential threat, if left unanswered, that such weapons
posed to regional allies like Israel, Jordan and Turkey.
Mr. Kerry argued that inaction could embolden Iran or nonstate
terrorists to strike those allies, and further encourage Iran and North
Korea to press ahead with their nuclear programs.
“One of the important propositions that Kerry put to members was, are
you willing to live with the consequences of doing nothing?” said
Representative Gerald E. Connolly, a Virginia Democrat.
The secretary of state addressed lawmakers’ concern that the United
States should have international support. “The United States will not go
it alone,” he said at one point, according to a senior Democrat who
declined to be identified. Offers of “military assets” have come from
France, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, he said,
without identifying the assets, and more are expected.
In the week since the Obama administration began moving toward a
military strike on the Assad government, Mr. Kerry said, the Syrian
military has had about 100 defections, including 80 officers.
General Dempsey reviewed the range of possible targets and how the
Pentagon is planning strikes that would minimize risk to civilians.
Despite reports that Syrian commanders were moving troops and equipment
into civilian neighborhoods, General Dempsey told lawmakers, as he had
assured Mr. Obama, that delaying military action would not weaken the
effectiveness of any military attack. He suggested that military
officials would adjust their targets to address changes on the ground.
The general acknowledged that the United States could not prevent the
Assad government from using chemical weapons again, but said the
military had “additional options” should a first missile strike not
deter a retaliatory strike by Mr. Assad, including in defense of
critical allies, presumably Israel, Jordan and Turkey. That possibility,
however, describes just the escalating conflict some opponents fear.
“My constituents are skeptical that a limited effort will not mushroom
into a full-blown boots on the ground,” said Representative Elijah E.
Cummings, a Maryland Democrat.
Mr. McCain, who has been arguing for two years that the United States
should support a moderate Syrian opposition, said he strongly urged the
president on Monday to provide anti-tank and antiaircraft systems to the
opposition and to attack the Syrian Air Force.
Mr. Obama indicated that “he favorably viewed the degrading of Bashar
al-Assad’s capabilities as well as upgrading the Free Syrian Army,” Mr.
McCain said in an interview.
Administration officials have told Congress that the C.I.A.’s program to
arm the rebels would be deliberately limited at first to allow a trial
run for American officials to monitor it before ramping up to a larger,
more aggressive campaign. American officials have been wary that arms
provided to the rebels could end up in the hands of Islamic extremists
with ties to Al Qaeda.
David M. Herszenhorn contributed reporting from Moscow, Jodi Rudoren from Jerusalem, and Scott Sayare from Paris.
[BATTERY REVIEW] ECell Gold 2430 mAh Lithium Polymer Battery
In the late 1700s both countries used revolution to overthrow tyrants and
establish democracy, or a "social contract" - a popular catchphrase of the
day.
