It just occured to me that 700 megabytes weighs less
on a cdrom than on your Pc.
because when it burns on the cd it removes matter - hence it weighs less
but still what is the actual weight of a Megabyte?
Printable View
It just occured to me that 700 megabytes weighs less
on a cdrom than on your Pc.
because when it burns on the cd it removes matter - hence it weighs less
but still what is the actual weight of a Megabyte?
Please dont find out. Or the power companies will start charging by weight. Especially if it meant more for them.Quote:
Originally posted by Zedaxax@16 August 2004 - 18:15
It just occured to me that 700 megabytes weighs less
on a cdrom than on your Pc.
because when it burns on the cd it removes matter - hence it weighs less
but still what is the actual weight of a Megabyte?
Well it depends on what the content of that MB is, for example, if it was 1mb full of information on bricks, it's going to way more than 1mb full of information on feathers
d'uh :rolleyes:
I though magnatism was used to store data on your computer how heavy is that and then you have your answer to how heavy is a megabyte.Quote:
#203417 +(402)- [X]
<FirebirdGM> I just called my Futureshop and asked them how much a 20 GB Hard drive weighed when it was full with information, compared to when it was empty. <FirebirdGM> The guy that was on the phone told me that it was only a few pounds difference.
<FirebirdGM> And that's why I don't shop at futureshop.
I dont know. Feathers could put your 'puter down just as quick. :lol:Quote:
Originally posted by Proper Bo, I tell thee@16 August 2004 - 18:30
Well it depends on what the content of that MB is, for example, if it was 1mb full of information on bricks, it's going to way more than 1mb full of information on feathers
d'uh :rolleyes:
I dont know. Feathers could put your 'puter down just as quick. :lol: [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by bigboab+16 August 2004 - 19:36--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bigboab @ 16 August 2004 - 19:36)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Proper Bo@ I tell thee,16 August 2004 - 18:30
Well it depends on what the content of that MB is, for example, if it was 1mb full of information on bricks, it's going to way more than 1mb full of information on feathers
d'uh :rolleyes:
:ghostface:
I dont know. Feathers could put your 'puter down just as quick. :lol: [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by bigboab+16 August 2004 - 14:36--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bigboab @ 16 August 2004 - 14:36)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Proper Bo@ I tell thee,16 August 2004 - 18:30
Well it depends on what the content of that MB is, for example, if it was 1mb full of information on bricks, it's going to way more than 1mb full of information on feathers
d'uh :rolleyes:
<_<
Ahhh...Lounge material at it's best. :D
LOL! :lol:Quote:
Originally posted by 4play@16 August 2004 - 18:33
I though magnatism was used to store data on your computer how heavy is that and then you have your answer to how heavy is a megabyte.Quote:
#203417 +(402)- [X]
<FirebirdGM> I just called my Futureshop and asked them how much a 20 GB Hard drive weighed when it was full with information, compared to when it was empty. <FirebirdGM> The guy that was on the phone told me that it was only a few pounds difference.
<FirebirdGM> And that's why I don't shop at futureshop.
Simple: You take the matter, anti-matter fuel quotient and divide it by the flux capacitor's imbalance. Take the inverse dirivative and take the root then multiply by pi.
BTW, megabyte/any-byte is not a measurement of weight :rolleyes:
Hence, you don't understand the question.Quote:
Originally posted by Darth Sushi@16 August 2004 - 20:49
Simple: You take the matter, anti-matter fuel quotient and divide it by the flux capacitor's imbalance. Take the inverse dirivative and take the root then multiply by pi.
BTW, megabyte/any-byte is not a measurement of weight :rolleyes:
And it's weight, for that matter .
YoGen
This topic is heavy man.
I'm not sure how serious this thread is :PQuote:
Originally posted by 4play@16 August 2004 - 19:33
I though magnatism was used to store data on your computer how heavy is that and then you have your answer to how heavy is a megabyte.Quote:
#203417 +(402)- [X]
<FirebirdGM> I just called my Futureshop and asked them how much a 20 GB Hard drive weighed when it was full with information, compared to when it was empty. <FirebirdGM> The guy that was on the phone told me that it was only a few pounds difference.
<FirebirdGM> And that's why I don't shop at futureshop.
But basically that is it, either a small section of the HD is magnetised or it isn't - (binary) All of the magnetised, non-magnetised bits combined makes up all of the data on your HD.
Each small section of your HD will weigh the same whether it is magnetised or not. The data, in essence, weighs nothing.
So the answer to the question is that a megabyte weighs as much as the media on which it is stored.
in floppy disk (the big ass ones) It about a 2,000 grams..
I didn't see this before I posted. Apologies JP. :">Quote:
Originally posted by Mr JP Fugley@16 August 2004 - 20:36
Data is stored on a HDD by re-alligning the existing matter, therefore it weighs nothing. (You do know that weight is a force by the weigh, I think you are really talking about mass, but we won't quibble).
Data is stored on a CD by burning away some material, as such the media weighs less, so the data has a negative weight (mass)
If we average the two we get a figure less than zero. As such we can demonstrate that data has negative weight.
I could work out the figure for 700 mb, but only as a rough estimate as it really would depend on the specific data. For the HDD it would always be 0, but for the CD it would depend on what it was.
Hope this helps.
A 2kg floppy disk?Quote:
Originally posted by Ariel_001@16 August 2004 - 21:41
in floppy disk (the big ass ones) It about a 2,000 grams..
Where can I get me one of those? :blink:
Actually, it depends on how you look at it, the addition of the data may add nothing to the medium, but once it's there, especially if it's one of those write only things, then the medium is equal to it's information value of something. Regarding pure mass. :blink: I think.
NP, it is unfortunate that we disagree, however I cannot understand your logic.Quote:
Originally posted by Mr JP Fugley+16 August 2004 - 20:50--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mr JP Fugley @ 16 August 2004 - 20:50)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-manker@16 August 2004 - 19:42
I didn't see this before I posted. Apologies JP. :">
If the mass of the HDD is the same after data is added to it than it was before, then surely the data has zero mass. Rather than your suggestion that the mass of the data is equivelant to the mass of the medium on which it is stored. [/b][/quote]
That is what I mean, that data has zero mass. Well deduced.
I said that a megabyte will weigh as much as the media upon which it is stored because a megabyte cannot exist without storage media therefore it seemed logical to me to include that statement.
It's equivalent, btw.
It's medium btw, media is the plural. Or is it are the plural ;)Quote:
Originally posted by Mr JP Fugley+16 August 2004 - 21:05--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mr JP Fugley @ 16 August 2004 - 21:05)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Quote:
Originally posted by manker@16 August 2004 - 20:01
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr JP Fugley@16 August 2004 - 20:50
<!--QuoteBegin-manker
Quote:
Quote:
@16 August 2004 - 19:42
I didn't see this before I posted. Apologies JP. :">
NP, it is unfortunate that we disagree, however I cannot understand your logic.
If the mass of the HDD is the same after data is added to it than it was before, then surely the data has zero mass. Rather than your suggestion that the mass of the data is equivelant to the mass of the medium on which it is stored.
That is what I mean, that data has zero mass. Well deduced.
I said that a megabyte will weigh as much as the media upon which it is stored because a megabyte cannot exist without storage media therefore it seemed logical to me to include that statement.
It's equivalent, btw.
Good answer, specious as feck but I will allow it. Purely on the basis of your bare faced audacity at using it. [/b][/quote]
Thank 'e kindly guv'nor, your generosity knows few bounds.
Wow! does this mean when your computer hard disk is nearly full you should tie it to your desk. :smilie4:Quote:
Originally posted by Mr JP Fugley@16 August 2004 - 19:36
Data is stored on a HDD by re-alligning the existing matter, therefore it weighs nothing. (You do know that weight is a force by the weigh, I think you are really talking about mass, but we won't quibble).
Data is stored on a CD by burning away some material, as such the media weighs less, so the data has a negative weight (mass)
If we average the two we get a figure less than zero. As such we can demonstrate that data has negative weight.
I could work out the figure for 700 mb, but only as a rough estimate as it really would depend on the specific data. For the HDD it would always be 0, but for the CD it would depend on what it was.
Hope this helps.
I'm getting confused here. I blame J P Fugs. :ph34r:
Don't understand that mate. It is simply existing mass re-alligned. The actual mass stays the same it's just a different shape.Quote:
Originally posted by Mr JP Fugley+16 August 2004 - 22:00--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mr JP Fugley @ 16 August 2004 - 22:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SnnY@16 August 2004 - 19:55
Actually, it depends on how you look at it, the addition of the data may add nothing to the medium, but once it's there, especially if it's one of those write only things, then the medium is equal to it's information value of something. Regarding pure mass. :blink: I think.
EDIT for the HDD, I have already covered the CD. I think the CDRW would again be a net 0 result. [/b][/quote]
I was on about the medium becoming the information as the information cannot be retracted without spoiling the medium, making the disk and information into one unit.
Was my thinking, bit silly, perhaps.
Manker seems to be thinking something along the same lines here.