Explore Related Concepts

a different mirror chapter 2

Best Results From Wikipedia Yahoo Answers Youtube


From Wikipedia

Mirror Ball (Neil Young album)

Mirror Ball is a studio album by Neil Young featuring Pearl Jam, released on June 27, 1995 through Reprise Records. The album has been certified gold by the RIAA in the United States.

Recording

The album's recording sessions took place in January 1995 and February 1995 at Bad Animals Studio in Seattle, Washington. The album was produced by Brendan O'Brien, who had previously worked on Pearl Jam's 1993 album, Vs., and 1994 album,Vitalogy.

Neil Young joined Pearl Jam in the studio in Seattle in January 1995, eleven days after performing with the band at an abortion-rights benefit in Washington, D.C. The album was recorded in four days' studio time (January 26, January 27, February 7, and February 10). Young took the approach of recording the songs live in the studio. Young brought "Song X", "Act of Love", and five other songs into the studio to record for the first session in January. For the second session in February, he brought in two more songs. Young also wrote two new songs during the February recording sessions, and one song from the January sessions was re-recorded. Young said that all of the songs, with the exception of "Song X" and "Act of Love", were written in the four-day time period in which the album was recorded.

Young said he traveled to Seattle to record the record for a "challenge." He said, "Recording Mirror Ball was like audio vérité, just a snapshot of what's happening. Sometimes I didn't know who was playing. I was just conscious of this big smouldering mass of sound." Young called Pearl Jam drummer Jack Irons "unbelievable." He stated that he "played his ass off on every take at every session," and added, "I can't say enough good things about him." Pearl Jam vocalist Eddie Vedder was not around much for the recording sessions. Vedder explained that he was "in the midst of a pretty intense stalker problem," adding that "leaving the house wasn't the easiest thing to do." Vedder would refer to the issue in the song "Lukin" from Pearl Jam's 1996 album, No Code. Pearl Jam guitaristStone Gossard said that Mirror Ball "came at a time when we needed it, that Neil thought we were a band that would be good to make a record with. He probably felt sorry for us. He made it all right for us to be who we were. He's not taking his career so seriously that he can't take chances. Suddenly, our band seemed too serious."

Music and lyrics

Mirror Ball captures a loose rock sound. The album has a very raw sound to it, with songs ending in feedback and band members talking at the start and at the end of many songs, including Young remarking at the end of "Downtown"—"Well, we know that one. That's funky." Young wrote all of the tracks for the album, except for "Peace and Love", which was co-written by Young and Vedder. William Ruhlmann of Allmusic said "[Pearl Jam] boasts spirited rhythms and dense guitar interplay that Young makes excellent use of in a series of songs built out of simple, melodic rifts [sic]."

On the lyrical content of Mirror Ball, Young said, "There's idealism and reality, the two have got to come together yet there are always major problems when they do. Maybe that's the crux of what I'm trying to say in this new album. It's also a commentary of the differences between my peace and love '60s generation and the more cynical '90s generation." "Song X" and "Act of Love" were written about abortion. "Downtown" includes references to Jimi Hendrix and Led Zeppelin. The reference to Led Zeppelin was partly inspired by Young's performance with the band at the 1995 Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony.

Release and reception

Mirror Ball reached number five on the Billboard 200 album chart. Mirror Ball has been certified gold by the RIAA.

NMEgave Mirror Ball a nine out of ten. In the review, Mirror Ball is called "another fine Neil Young album....the record's sound is...big, woolly, live and booming."Rolling Stonestaff writer J.D. Considine gave Mirror Ball four out of five stars, saying, "Though Young is clearly the dominant partner—it's his concept, after all, his songs and his album—it's Pearl Jam who ultimately end up determining the music's shape and feel, providing a level of input and energy that goes well beyond the normal purview of a backing band."Spingave the album eight out of ten stars. The review said, "Sometimes it's easier to string together some...power chords and a few forlorn references to religion, fame and suicide than to actually write songs. And sometimes that's just fine." David Browne ofEntertainment Weeklygave the album an A-. Browne said that "the album has a spontaneous, bang-it-out casualness that is, to say the least, extremely rare for a rock veteran." However, Browne criticized the album's lyrics, calling them "mostly jumbled rehashes of standard Young imagery."TimereviewerChristopher John Farley said that "Pearl Jam serves as an extraordinary backup band on the new album." Farley added that the album is "one of the most consistently rewarding works of Young's long rewarding career."

Allmusic staff writer William Ruhlmann gave the album three out of five stars, saying that "Mirror Ball is typically uneven." Critic Robert Christgau said that Young "was born to lumber—and Pearl Jam


From Yahoo Answers

Question:I have looked all over. Where can I find chapter summaries for this book???

Answers:There aren't any. Not all books have summaries and notes

Question:

Answers:

Question:Need help with science question about periscopes. If you had 2 mirrors, one plane mirror and one a convex mirror, do you think the image produced would be different if you had plane mirror as mirror 1 and convex as mirror 2, or had convex mirror as mirror 1 and plane mirror as mirror 2? Explain please Thanks

Answers:are they "mirrors" or are they "lenses"? i don't think the plane mirror would have much effect, except maybe from refraction, but wouldn't that effect be the same before and after the convex lense?

Question:A version of this question was previously posted, but withdrawn because of lack of clarity. Consider the abstract possibility of a "telescopic mirror" in 4D space (in 3D space, it would be a surface, but in 4D it's a solid). To be "practical", the mirror needs to be compact, i.e., entirely contained within a 4D sphere of a given radius much smaller than the distance to an object, which is also compact in a similiar fashion. We can speak of an infinitesimal linear element of the mirror, which is a tiny flat square for surface mirrors in 3D and a tiny solid cube for solid mirrors in 4D. A telescopic mirror in 3D converts angular information into position information, i.e., the angles ( , ) of the rays, relative to the axis of the telescope, incoming from the object in the distance is displayed as positions (x, y) at the image plane. If we generalize this to a "solid" telescopic mirror in 4D space, we would expect that angles ( , , ) of the rays relative to the telescopic axis would be displayed as positions (x, y, z) at the image volume. But assuming that the telescopic axis extends out to the distant object, while it's not hard to understand angles , what do we make out of angle ? Such a telescope would allow reconstruction of depth information of an object even at a great distance. Any anyone explain or debunk? torquestomp, this is an entirely abstract question, I am only interested "in the mathematics" of this. There is no suggestion of actually implementing such a telescope for practical use. Your answer is on the right track. If we suppose that a "3D" body in 4D space is something that is wholly comprised of coordinates (x, y, z, 0), where x, y, z are orthogonal vectors, then the intersection of an arbitrary line defined by a vector (a, b, c, d) with this "3D" object is just one point, unless either a, b, c, or d is colinear with x, y, or z. That said, we can rotate the coordinate system (x, y, z, 0) to (x', y', z', w'), where w' is definted by the telescopic axis to the 3D object. As an approximation, we can then define 3 distinct "angular separations" ( , , ) as x'/D, y'/D, and z'/D, where D is the distance from the telescope to the object, and there will be exactly one point visible at each. So, in fact, unless the 3D object is "seen edge on" (in which case you will see only a 2D slice), a 4D telescope will in fact be able to construct a 3D image of the object, using ( , , ), building a volume (x, y, z) image. Now, it has already been shown mathematically that there cannot be any 4D version of the Maxwellian electromagnetic waves. However, that is not true of quantum deBroglie wave, which are not traverse waves at all. So, it does leave room for that possibility in quantum physics.

Answers:-- EDIT (+1 hour) -- I'm not really sure what else I can say. Mathematically, a telescope in 3D takes a region of 3D space and maps it onto the 2D projection of a partial sphere, using the defining angular axis and . Likewise, a 4D telescope takes a region of 4D space and maps it onto the 3D projection of a partial hypersphere, using the defining angular axis , , and . In both cases, the "depth" axis, (z in 3D, w in 4D) is lost in the projection. The viewer must obtain information from a different perspective/source in order to calculate the actual depth of the projected objects. Am I missing something? If not, could you be a little more specific as to what Mathematics you are looking for? -- ORIGINAL POST -- The reason we can't easily understand angle is because it's impossible for us to truly visualize 4D space. I'm sure you've seen tesseracts, color-based diagrams, parralel space-time dimensions, etc... These are mere depictions of 4D. Look at a stack of papers. In 4D, one looks at the stack and can see every paper in it simultaneously. Not only that - let's compress the stack into a solid object, such that there is a relatively infinite number of sheets of paper. In 4D, one looks at this stack - and still sees every single paper simultaneously. Granted, you might need a microscope of infinite zoom capability, but for the sake of theory, we ignore the restrictive resolution of biological eyesight for now. So when you say "Such a telescope would allow reconstruction of depth information of an object even at great distance", be careful. To us, the 4D telescopic reconstruction is showing depth, but to a native 4D sentience it is not. When we look at a graph, a photo, or any planar object, the two axis in front of us are what construct this vision. The depth is perceived, generated by our experience of the 3D world and the knowledge that depth does infact exist in this world. Likewise, for a 4D individual, when looking at an object, the x, y, and z axis to them are just constructors. To them, the z axis is not depth - it is just one of the basis vectors for their vision. The distance between the telescope and the object along the w-axis, that is 4D depth. This was certainly an interesting question, but unfortunately, like many other individuals (including myself at times), you are trying to impose 3D logic onto 4D space so you can better understand it. Everything mathematical you've stated in your question is absolutely correct, it's just that the answer you're looking for doesn't really exist. -- For , , and , using the natural extension of spherical coordinates: x = r * cos( ) * sin( ) * sin( ) y = r * sin( ) * sin( ) * sin( ) z = r * cos( ) * sin( ) w = r * cos( ) If this looks meaningless, it's supposed to. We can't actually visualize , only conceive of it as the third angular axis in a 4D hypersphere. I'll try to find some good sources that explain the inconceivability of 4D space well - stay tuned.

From Youtube

HD4850 Gameplay - Mirror s Edge - Chapter 4: Ropeburn (pt.2) :Chapter 4 part 2 *sorry for taking so long guys...* _______________________________________ Heys guys... as requested, i m recording a Mirror s Edge full game "playthrough"... I won t record the Prologue and the Tutorial cause it makes no sense since i already have a video showing a gameplay on the first level. I hope you guys enjoy it as much as i did :) I already ended up this game... it s damn short... i wish it was a LOT bigger, but... well... i guess it s the price you gotta pay for great graphics... I dunno... :) Anways ppl Enjoy! the settings: Res: 1280x720 (for youtube HD) AAx8Q (dunno the difference) AFx16 (CCC forced) My rig: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 (@3.6Ghz - 1.19V) ASUS Silent Square PRO (idle: 29/load: 43) ASUS P5Q-E 4Gb Super Talent DDR2 800mhz (5-5-5-15) Powercolor Radeon HD4850 (@ 700/1183) Zalman VF1000 w/ LED (idle 39 C/Load 45 C) Seagate Barracuda 500gb Samsung Spinpoint 500gb Samsumg Writemaster DVD-RW Creative Live! 24bit with SBS 560 5.1 Corsair TX650w Windows Vista Ultimate x64

HD4850 Gameplay - Mirror s Edge - Chapter 4: Ropeburn (pt.1) :Chapter 4 part 1 _______________________________________ Heys guys... as requested, i m recording a Mirror s Edge full game "playthrough"... I won t record the Prologue and the Tutorial cause it makes no sense since i already have a video showing a gameplay on the first level. I hope you guys enjoy it as much as i did :) I already ended up this game... it s damn short... i wish it was a LOT bigger, but... well... i guess it s the price you gotta pay for great graphics... I dunno... :) Anways ppl Enjoy! the settings: Res: 1280x720 (for youtube HD) AAx8Q (dunno the difference) AFx16 (CCC forced) My rig: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 (@ 3.6Ghz - 1.21V) ASUS Silent Square PRO (idle: 29/load: 43) ASUS P5Q-E 4Gb Super Talent DDR2 800mhz (5-5-5-15) Powercolor Radeon HD4850 (@ 700/1183) Zalman VF1000 w/ LED (idle 39 C/Load 45 C) Swiftech CM8800 VRMs/Mosfets heatsink Creative Live! 24bit with SBS 560 5.1 Windows Vista Ultimate x64