Slashdot Mirror

The guy has a model engine and is trying to raise money in Silicon Valley. What isn't mentioned is that Detroit engineers have worked with pretty much every type of engine over the years, including this type. Maybe this guy's engineers have made a breakthrough but he'll have to prove it first.

And he's been trying since the 70s which means his idea doesn't work in passenger vehicles.

Detroit is begging for any innovation that will put them ahead of the hybrid invasion. They've even gone plug-in hybrid before any other manufacture with the Chevy Volt and GM pioneered the electric car in the 90s which was poor timing since gas was still only about $1 a gallon. If there were some magic engine technology that allowed 50% better fuel economy in cars while maintaining reasonable reliability Detroit would be all over it.

Remember Detroit must average 35mpg by 2016 and 54mpg by 2025.

So anyone saying "Oh I have this amazing engine technology that uses 50 less fuel but no one wants it" is either a liar or crazy.

I think GM said it best:
“There are 50 opposed piston engine companies out there, and they all haven’t gotten to the point where they’ve figured out what their Achilles’ heel is,... there is always a ‘but,’ and most of these companies haven’t gotten to the ‘but’ yet.” says Byron Shaw, general manager at GM’s Advanced Technology division in Palo Alto.

It's been going on since 2008 in Michigan. Enjoy the link:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/news/are-smartphone-searches-legal-5603061

Well, in this article they did some statistics and claim that it's better to sit in the back.

I wonder if in the classes they point out that since they are more valued customers their chances of survival go down. Those customers usually get free upgrades to business/first class seats which have the least chance of survival. The cheapest seats, in the tail end, have the highest rate of survival.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/4219452

There is a program at MIT where the students develop low tech and appropriate technology for the developing world. I guess that teaching locals to make their own biochar that burns cleaner than wood or cow dung and will reduce air pollution inside people's homes so they don't die of lung cancer is an evil plot to support the establishment?

Same goes for water purification systems, grain mills I guess too?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/gonzo/4273674

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/smith-talk.html

Actually, after I made that post, I found a PopMech article debunking several of the more popular internet stories.

I've worked on/in a lot of big steel frame buildings over the last 20 years, and frankly the official explanation never made much sense to me either, but then again I'm not a metallurgical expert like some of the poeple on that site are.

If you're looking for facts I would try the sites below. Unlike the "truther" sites the people at the sites below aren't baffled by things that blacksmiths know - that steel loses its structural strength and bends long before it reaches its melting point.

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation (Updated 09/17/2010)

Al Qaeda only had to keep about 30-40 people quiet for a year to pull off their attack. The movements of the people that did it, their pilot training, are all known. Al Qaeda took credit for it.

If you believe the conspiracy theorists called "truthers", you have to be willing to believe that probably several thousand people, at least, had to play a part in staging an attack on their fellow Americans that killed thousands and nothing has slipped out after 10 years - including the alleged missile attack on the Pentagon - and despite the fact that the government leaks like a sieve. Actually more than that since an attack that elaborate would have taken significant time to plan, prepare, and rehearse. (Sneak into buildings and place explosive charges to implode them, fire a missile at the Pentagon (by who? from where? What type? Why didn't it turn up missing?) as well as fake some aspects of the plane attacks (what about the family members? The recovered bodies?). Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, something the 9-11 "truther" movement doesn't deliver. All they have are "questions" and crank theories.

Well, they managed to figure it out over 100+ years ago and, no, a transmission as found in every modern car is not needed, it is a legacy item. http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/jay-leno/vintage/4215940 There are so many options and ways to do away with many legacy parts not just the transmissions. And since you wanted to show off and be a smart-ass... I have worked on the bullet trains (Shinkansen) as well as some of the most advanced commuter rail cars in the US. So thanks, have a nice day.

So are you arguing that we no longer need any solar subsidies because the economic model is now self sufficient?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/solar-wind/4306443

"First Solar's eventual goal is "grid parity," a phrase that refers to making solar power cost the same as competing conventional power sources without subsidies. Right now the cost of making panels accounts for a little less than half the total cost of installation. The company estimates that it needs to get manufacturing costs down to $0.65 to $0.70 per watt, and other installation costs down to $1 a watt in order to reach grid parity—goals First Solar plans to reach by 2012. "

This is coming from 2009, of course, and the date has no doubt shifted further into the future since then :)

But hey, keep pickin' those cherries!

This isn't really a "we're smarter! no we're smartest!" argument. The Chinese have been doing what every country has done at some point... snatching up all the military tech they can and learning everything they can. We have something of a history of it too, except that at the moment, they're behind and we're not. And the Chinese have a good thing going... because they're great at reverse engineering other peoples' tech. The Japanese were very good at it after WWII, too. Now look at 'em.

This is not new, or a crazy conspiracy theorist thing... it's just common knowledge. We've even caught people selling our tech to them.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/3319656

For just one article on the subject.

Lets make collecting rain illegal.

It IS, in some western states, illegal to collect rainwater. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/water/4314447

I agree with reading about it on the Internet. I like RSS, but I've found it homogenizes my content so that things don't jump out at me and the really interesting stories get buried with all the mediocre ones. So I keep the following list of bookmarks to check on a weekly basis:

ABC (Australia) Science, ABC (US) Science, Air & Space Magazine, ARKive, Ars Technica, BBC SciTech News, CBS Sci-Tech News, Chet Raymo, Cosmos News, Current: Science, Discover, Discovery News, Edge, Economist Science, EurekAlert!, Flyp media, Futurity, h+, Inkling Magazine, LiveScience, Massimo Pigliucci, Mother Jones Environment, MSNBC Science News, National Geographic News, National Public Radio (US), Natural History Magazine, New Scientist, New York Times Science, New Yorker Science, Newsweek Science, Orion, PhysOrg, Popular Mechanics, Popular Science, R&D Magazine, Ripley's Believe It or Not!, Science Daily, Scientific American, Seed Magazine, Science Cheerleader, Science News, Schrodinger's Kitten, Slashdot Science, Smithsonian, Space.com, The Technium, Time Magazine Science, USA Today Science, US News & World Report Science, Wired News, World Changing

The reason is because America applies a small tax rate on gas or diesel, while european countries put a heavy tax on gasoline - but not so heavy on diesel.

Wiith this difference on the tax rate of the diesel, it makes sense to buy a diesel car on Europe (a diesel engine is always more expensive than a otto engine). This article states that in Europe the payback time for a diesel car, in comparison to a similar gasoline car, is two years.

With this difference on demand, even the oil refineries on Europe are built to produce more diesel than the american refineries.

Oh, anecdotal evidence! You're so silly.

They have "daylight" color CFLs that I have secretly tested on friends and family for several years now, and when they don't know its a CFL, they think it's an incandescent (hidden by lampshades or other fixtures). I even tried telling some I switched over to CFLs, and they said things like "Oh, yeah... I don't like the color. I thought it looked different" when in reality is was the same daylight CFL bulb before and after.

A lot of this shit is in people's heads, unless you are using the "pure white" bulbs. I use those in the garage and have been experimenting with a little one for bias lighting behind the TV. A lot of the color of lighting is determined by the lampshade as well.

Let me make this clear, if you have CFLs and they have not failed..... YOU ARE ALONE IN THE WORLD!!!!

Well, I've only had a couple failures over the years, and everyone I know has had great success. Your claimed high rate of failure is the thing that's a statistical outlier. I suspect your dimmers might be at fault despite what the bulb manufacturer claims. My experience with dimmers is that they wear out the filament of an incandescent really quickly. The bulbs work, but they begin to noticeably buzz. I got rid of every dimmer that came with my house. Either that or there's something else wrong, assuming you're not exaggerating.

The CFL on my porch is coming up on 14 years. I'm wondering if I should alert the manufacturer and win a prize or something.

Don't like anecdotes? Here's some testing Popular Mechanics did.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/home/reviews/news/4215199

CFL consistently outperformed incandescent, and this was double blind testing using light meters. The incandescent bulb had a color temp of 2736K. The MaxLite MicroMax CFL was measured at 2738K. You think you'll notice 2 degrees difference?

As for the mercury, power plants emit mercury, too, especially coal plants. The energy savings of CFLs more than offset their minuscule mercury content. Just don't eat the bulbs.

That being said, I would not outright ban any kind of bulb.

Jay Leno owns and drives three street legal vehicles: Motorcycle, Car, and a Pick-up truck, Although I'm not sure the car is on the road yet. http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/jay-leno/4200831

You mean something like this?

VW XL1

Well these aren't the only projects of this type. What about BAE System's Railgun?

With a prototype delivered to the Navy back in 2009.

Seems easy enough for me...

On my Android DroidX
Open phone
Go to My Verizon Mobile app
Look at...
Phone Usage, Text Message Usage, Data Usage

If green, you are under the limit
If yellow, you are at the limit
If red, you are past the limit
If red/green colorblind (as one of my friends is), you have to read the numbers

My grudge is I'd prefer not to have to ever have to look at it for anything. Wireless in particular I feel gouges customers whenever and wherever they can. $30 a month for unlimited, restrictive (i.e. tethering costs another $20/month and as I recall is per device) wireless broadband is silly. If texting was $5 per month I'd consider it, but at $30/month (family plan) I think it's absurd. I actually request people set up their SMS/MMS to send to my email and I send messages back using my data package. The rest is identical to texting - it pings me when I get an email. Texting is a ridiculous overpriced easily replaced feature.

Every landing I've seen was like feather.

That's because you're looking at really good pilots, in really good shape, flying under near ideal conditions, being very careful. Even with that, one test pilot has had six knee injuries. Just walking downstairs with 170 pounds on your back is tough.

AFAIK you need to have the accessory approved by Apple to connect via the docking port and there is a NDA/Licensing agreement that requires you pay Apple a certain amount for each accessory sold. You also have to purchase a chip from them to integrate your hardware. And they require you to submit your financial records/bookeping so that their auditors can be sure you are paying them the fee for every unit of your hardware you sell. This doesnt seem to apply to all accessories, but it does seem to be a real problem for a lot of them. http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/news/4272628 Also, if you dont, Apple will sue you: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/04/apple-gets-go-ahead-to-move-against-unauthorized-accessor-makers.ars

So, yeah, this could have real impact. Going out and grabbing an Arduino board vs all that draconian stuff is gonna be interesting.

Obviously I have a bias here being an Android app dev, but I believe the two approaches to accessory development are vastly different. And just because Apple has a huge lead out of the gate does not mean they will retain it.

I do not trust the government to tell the truth on matters this large. While I doubt bin Laden is alive, I doubt the official version of his death even more.

Let's see..... the US Government announces he is dead:

Obama Announces Death of Osama bin Laden

The terrorist organization he headed announces he is dead:

Text: Al Qaeda statement confirming bin Laden's death

The regional troublemaker with a strong intelligence agency and an avowed enemy of the US announces he was dead before the operation:

Iran's intelligence chief says bin Laden died long before the 'alleged raid'

Family members denounce his death:

My father's death was criminal and I may sue the U.S.: Bin Laden's son slams Al Qaeda leader's killing

The locals are protesting his death:

Pakistani tribesmen protest

At this point, I think anyone doubting Bin Laden's death is about ready to star in their own personal Truman Show, and doesn't really need more news or photographs.... maybe a shrink or philosopher. Cogito ergo Bin Laden moritur.

The looney bin is getting crowded. Sanity: step 1, step 2....

You can say they don't 'need' to steal the research, but the evidence of Chinese born espionage in the US is blatant. And if you follow corporate and government level espionage in the news you would know that you would bet China if betting your life on who did it.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/spy/spies/

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/19/national/main5708534.shtml

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/3319656

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/foremski/chinese-spies-use-cyber-hacking-and-sexual-blackmail/1104

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2008-02-12/news/shuttlespy12_1_space-technology-military-technology-republic-of-china

http://www.haohaoreport.com/ChinaNews/Chinese-spy-gets-more-than-15-years-in-prison

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/fbi-arrests-chinese-spies-over-theft-of-military-data-781090.html .............

Seriously, just open your eyes or start paying attention. NASA has been infiltrated by Chinese spies on several occasions. This policy is rational and safe and is a better/safer choice than any potential 'crippling of research' as you put it.

But go ahead pretending this isn't real... go ahead.. I only copied the first few things I looked up, but the truth is about every 3-4 months I read about another Chinese spy in the US. Yet it takes years before I read about ANY OTHER NATION spying (or getting caught at least).

Actually, Osama never took credit for those deaths, which is why he wasn't formally wanted by FBI for the 9/11 bombings (FBI most wanted [fbi.gov]). The video which was shown on television shortly after the bombings, where he allegedly took the blame, was badly translated.

Personally, I'm not entirely sure if Osama had his hand in the 9/11 bombings, or if other people did it inspired by him

Actually, Bin Laden did take responsibility for the 9/11 attacks, on more than one occasion. Here is one:
Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11

Here are some videos of him with some of the 9/11 attackers:
Video Shows Bin Laden, 9/11 Hijackers
Bin Laden '9/11 video' broadcast

And maybe you should try another page:

Bin Laden was a suspect in a number of terrorist attacks around the world in addition to the 9/11 attacks.

The link you provide is apparently based solely on the federal indictments - that is, a matter of criminal law. More details here.

After the mass attacks of 9/11, Congress responded with the Authorization for Use of Military Force, and Al Qaeda became a military problem. I don't know that the FBI continually updates the crimes section on the most wanted list.

Bin Laden's demands? Americans must convert to Islam, discard the Constitution, and govern with Sharia law, or Al Qaeda will keep attacking the US. Bin Laden's offier - convert or die. Some choice, eh?

For those in need: Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report

Yes, all official stories are true.

Because all conspiracy theories are true?

Asymmetric damage causes symmetric collapse of buildings. It happened three times in one day, it has to be the truth.

I once had an Industrial Arts instructor question my class on what would be a better situation if the building was on fire - that it was framed in wood, or steel. The correct answer is wood, since wood retains practically all of its structural strength until it is consumed by fire, unlike steel, which loses its strength very quickly when exposed to high temperature. So here we come to the heart of the issue - a Roman blacksmith from 2,000 years ago would make a more useful investigator of the building collapse than most "truthers" since he understands the fundamental fact that metals soften and can be reshaped when heated (by the blacksmith's hammer, or the weight of 10 building floors above) - no melting required. When the sprinkler system either doesn't come to the rescue, or is overwhelmed, it's over. For all of the fancy computers, the internet, and leadership of English majors and Philosophy professors, the "truthers" fail to grasp that simple fact. They are baffled by things a blacksmith knows. Because of this they are forced to invent ever more improbable and elaborate explanations that fail the common sense test - "the building was secretly rigged to implode"..... even though when done commercially it requires weeks of work by teams of people, drilling into the beams, stripping away insulation and structural materials, etc., etc. .... all unnoticed. Trapped by the absurdity of it, the escape routes range from magic thermite mixtures to space aliens. All of this, as part of a conspiracy that killed 3,000 Americans, has somehow been kept secret despite the fact that the US wasn't able to keep secret the waterboarding of a total of three people in 10 years without multiple leaks and widespread howls of outrage that the US bordered on being as bad as the worst criminal states ever, worse than even Germany which attempted genocide and killed millions. Ya, it must be "true". My guess is, whatever they're selling, you're buying.

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report

NIST NCSTAR 1A: Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7

There are a lot of records of people who have fallen at terminal velocity and survived, and even walked away from it, if by a lot you mean one in a thousand or so. I enjoy telling all of this to my students when I teach them about drag forces and terminal velocity in intro physics which is why I have a good patter for it. If you look up "g force" and "terminal velocity" on wikipedia they have cross references of some of the people who have survived, by name, but during WW II there were a lot more that didn't get recorded -- people who fell or were shot out of planes at 10,000 to 16,000 feet without a chute but managed to walk away.

There is also a section in the Survival Guide (humor) book that you'll see in bookstores from time to time on this, and articles such as http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/4344036 that again cross-reference previous occurrences. Documented no-airplane instances of survival are pretty rare, but there are a few that stand up to investigative test, and even a website devoted to this one subject (of course): http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/ffresearch.html

Anyway, Enjoy. These sites between them give you most of what is known about what is after all a very unlikely thing. Don't forget your trench coat and "Prove You're No Terrorist -- Fly Naked!" tank-top tee shirt and g-string for your next flight! Just remember that the g-string does not, in the end, help much with the terminal g-force (and what that final pa-da-pam, I'll stop:-).

rgb

How to Fall 35,000 Feet—And Survive

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/4344036

I wonder what would happen if such disasters had hit a dam or a thermal gas/coal plant...

The massive environmental devastation that resulted would once again be hushed up and glossed over by the majority of the media, just like these ones were. Of course, they didn't even have a 9.0 earthquake or a tsunami, just some incompetence, bad safety protocols, and much looser restrictions on how they store and treat their toxic waste products.

Making preparations for emergencies and disasters gives you a greater margin to survive. You might not be getting any help any time soon, if ever. Consider the fact that the states knew that they were responsible for taking care of incidents for four days before FEMA stepped in, and the botched responses by the city of New Orleans (epic fail), the state of Louisiana (epic fail), and ultimately the federal government in Katrina. Not a shining moment for the United States.

However, many police, fire and EMS organizations from outside the affected areas were reportedly hindered or otherwise slowed in their efforts to send help and assistance to the area. FEMA sent hundreds of firefighters who had volunteered to help rescue victims to Atlanta for 2 days of training classes on topics including sexual harassment and the history of FEMA.[12] Official requests for help through the proper chains of command were not forthcoming due to local and state delays in engaging FEMA for federal assistance, even after approached by such authorities. Local police and other EMS workers found the situation traumatic; at least two officers committed suicide, and over 300 deserted the city after gang violence and "turf wars" erupted around the city.[13] A report by the Appleseed Foundation, a public policy network, found that local entities (nonprofit and local government agencies) were far more flexible and responsive than the federal government or national organizations. The federal response was often constrained by lack of legal authority or by ill-suited eligibility and application requirements. In many instances, federal staff and national organizations did not seem to have the flexibility, training, and resources to meet demands on the ground."[14Criticism of government response to Hurricane Katrina]

Think at least five basic scenarios, not all of which you may believe is necessary to prepare for, and you can do it in steps.
- Trouble on the road (breakdown on deserted road, trapped by blizzard or flood)
- Quickly evacuate from home indefinitely (hurricane, tornado, fire, flash flood, industrial accident, terrorist attack)
- Trapped at home for 1-4 weeks with loss of some services (massive blizzard, floods, loss of power, flu epidemic)
- Massive civil disorder (LA riots, Katrina looting & gang activity)
- Society changing event (deadly pandemic, EMP bombs destroy all electronics, major disruption in society)

Preparations can start small:
- For the car: a first aid kit, a couple of space blankets and plastic ponchos, some matches, steel mugs, a few granola bars, a can/bottle opener, bottled water, small tool kit, knife, duct tape, and flashlight.
- For the home: 3 days supply of food and water set aside, a first aid kit, flashlights w/ batteries, battery operated radio, some emergency cash, a fire extinguisher, a small repair kit/tool kit
- Start pulling your documents together in a safe place

Over time, you can build up to prepare to the level you believe necessary, including a one year supply of food for long term storage (just an example - many other vendors / options).

Ready America
Are You Ready? - An In-depth Guide to Citizen Preparedness
How to Disaster-Proof Your Life
How to Survive Anything Mother Nature Throws at You
Blackout Survival Guide
4 Facts You Need to Know About D

Making preparations for emergencies and disasters gives you a greater margin to survive. You might not be getting any help any time soon, if ever. Consider the fact that the states knew that they were responsible for taking care of incidents for four days before FEMA stepped in, and the botched responses by the city of New Orleans (epic fail), the state of Louisiana (epic fail), and ultimately the federal government in Katrina. Not a shining moment for the United States.

However, many police, fire and EMS organizations from outside the affected areas were reportedly hindered or otherwise slowed in their efforts to send help and assistance to the area. FEMA sent hundreds of firefighters who had volunteered to help rescue victims to Atlanta for 2 days of training classes on topics including sexual harassment and the history of FEMA.[12] Official requests for help through the proper chains of command were not forthcoming due to local and state delays in engaging FEMA for federal assistance, even after approached by such authorities. Local police and other EMS workers found the situation traumatic; at least two officers committed suicide, and over 300 deserted the city after gang violence and "turf wars" erupted around the city.[13] A report by the Appleseed Foundation, a public policy network, found that local entities (nonprofit and local government agencies) were far more flexible and responsive than the federal government or national organizations. The federal response was often constrained by lack of legal authority or by ill-suited eligibility and application requirements. In many instances, federal staff and national organizations did not seem to have the flexibility, training, and resources to meet demands on the ground."[14Criticism of government response to Hurricane Katrina]

Think at least five basic scenarios, not all of which you may believe is necessary to prepare for, and you can do it in steps.
- Trouble on the road (breakdown on deserted road, trapped by blizzard or flood)
- Quickly evacuate from home indefinitely (hurricane, tornado, fire, flash flood, industrial accident, terrorist attack)
- Trapped at home for 1-4 weeks with loss of some services (massive blizzard, floods, loss of power, flu epidemic)
- Massive civil disorder (LA riots, Katrina looting & gang activity)
- Society changing event (deadly pandemic, EMP bombs destroy all electronics, major disruption in society)

Preparations can start small:
- For the car: a first aid kit, a couple of space blankets and plastic ponchos, some matches, steel mugs, a few granola bars, a can/bottle opener, bottled water, small tool kit, knife, duct tape, and flashlight.
- For the home: 3 days supply of food and water set aside, a first aid kit, flashlights w/ batteries, battery operated radio, some emergency cash, a fire extinguisher, a small repair kit/tool kit
- Start pulling your documents together in a safe place

Over time, you can build up to prepare to the level you believe necessary, including a one year supply of food for long term storage (just an example - many other vendors / options).

Ready America
Are You Ready? - An In-depth Guide to Citizen Preparedness
How to Disaster-Proof Your Life
How to Survive Anything Mother Nature Throws at You
Blackout Survival Guide
4 Facts You Need to Know About D

Making preparations for emergencies and disasters gives you a greater margin to survive. You might not be getting any help any time soon, if ever. Consider the fact that the states knew that they were responsible for taking care of incidents for four days before FEMA stepped in, and the botched responses by the city of New Orleans (epic fail), the state of Louisiana (epic fail), and ultimately the federal government in Katrina. Not a shining moment for the United States.

However, many police, fire and EMS organizations from outside the affected areas were reportedly hindered or otherwise slowed in their efforts to send help and assistance to the area. FEMA sent hundreds of firefighters who had volunteered to help rescue victims to Atlanta for 2 days of training classes on topics including sexual harassment and the history of FEMA.[12] Official requests for help through the proper chains of command were not forthcoming due to local and state delays in engaging FEMA for federal assistance, even after approached by such authorities. Local police and other EMS workers found the situation traumatic; at least two officers committed suicide, and over 300 deserted the city after gang violence and "turf wars" erupted around the city.[13] A report by the Appleseed Foundation, a public policy network, found that local entities (nonprofit and local government agencies) were far more flexible and responsive than the federal government or national organizations. The federal response was often constrained by lack of legal authority or by ill-suited eligibility and application requirements. In many instances, federal staff and national organizations did not seem to have the flexibility, training, and resources to meet demands on the ground."[14Criticism of government response to Hurricane Katrina]

Think at least five basic scenarios, not all of which you may believe is necessary to prepare for, and you can do it in steps.
- Trouble on the road (breakdown on deserted road, trapped by blizzard or flood)
- Quickly evacuate from home indefinitely (hurricane, tornado, fire, flash flood, industrial accident, terrorist attack)
- Trapped at home for 1-4 weeks with loss of some services (massive blizzard, floods, loss of power, flu epidemic)
- Massive civil disorder (LA riots, Katrina looting & gang activity)
- Society changing event (deadly pandemic, EMP bombs destroy all electronics, major disruption in society)

Preparations can start small:
- For the car: a first aid kit, a couple of space blankets and plastic ponchos, some matches, steel mugs, a few granola bars, a can/bottle opener, bottled water, small tool kit, knife, duct tape, and flashlight.
- For the home: 3 days supply of food and water set aside, a first aid kit, flashlights w/ batteries, battery operated radio, some emergency cash, a fire extinguisher, a small repair kit/tool kit
- Start pulling your documents together in a safe place

Over time, you can build up to prepare to the level you believe necessary, including a one year supply of food for long term storage (just an example - many other vendors / options).

Ready America
Are You Ready? - An In-depth Guide to Citizen Preparedness
How to Disaster-Proof Your Life
How to Survive Anything Mother Nature Throws at You
Blackout Survival Guide
4 Facts You Need to Know About D

Making preparations for emergencies and disasters gives you a greater margin to survive. You might not be getting any help any time soon, if ever. Consider the fact that the states knew that they were responsible for taking care of incidents for four days before FEMA stepped in, and the botched responses by the city of New Orleans (epic fail), the state of Louisiana (epic fail), and ultimately the federal government in Katrina. Not a shining moment for the United States.

However, many police, fire and EMS organizations from outside the affected areas were reportedly hindered or otherwise slowed in their efforts to send help and assistance to the area. FEMA sent hundreds of firefighters who had volunteered to help rescue victims to Atlanta for 2 days of training classes on topics including sexual harassment and the history of FEMA.[12] Official requests for help through the proper chains of command were not forthcoming due to local and state delays in engaging FEMA for federal assistance, even after approached by such authorities. Local police and other EMS workers found the situation traumatic; at least two officers committed suicide, and over 300 deserted the city after gang violence and "turf wars" erupted around the city.[13] A report by the Appleseed Foundation, a public policy network, found that local entities (nonprofit and local government agencies) were far more flexible and responsive than the federal government or national organizations. The federal response was often constrained by lack of legal authority or by ill-suited eligibility and application requirements. In many instances, federal staff and national organizations did not seem to have the flexibility, training, and resources to meet demands on the ground."[14Criticism of government response to Hurricane Katrina]

Think at least five basic scenarios, not all of which you may believe is necessary to prepare for, and you can do it in steps.
- Trouble on the road (breakdown on deserted road, trapped by blizzard or flood)
- Quickly evacuate from home indefinitely (hurricane, tornado, fire, flash flood, industrial accident, terrorist attack)
- Trapped at home for 1-4 weeks with loss of some services (massive blizzard, floods, loss of power, flu epidemic)
- Massive civil disorder (LA riots, Katrina looting & gang activity)
- Society changing event (deadly pandemic, EMP bombs destroy all electronics, major disruption in society)

Preparations can start small:
- For the car: a first aid kit, a couple of space blankets and plastic ponchos, some matches, steel mugs, a few granola bars, a can/bottle opener, bottled water, small tool kit, knife, duct tape, and flashlight.
- For the home: 3 days supply of food and water set aside, a first aid kit, flashlights w/ batteries, battery operated radio, some emergency cash, a fire extinguisher, a small repair kit/tool kit
- Start pulling your documents together in a safe place

Over time, you can build up to prepare to the level you believe necessary, including a one year supply of food for long term storage (just an example - many other vendors / options).

Ready America
Are You Ready? - An In-depth Guide to Citizen Preparedness
How to Disaster-Proof Your Life
How to Survive Anything Mother Nature Throws at You
Blackout Survival Guide
4 Facts You Need to Know About D

Alas, too late for biodiesel :-(

You missed my point. I'd rather we start working on alternative energy now so it will more economical than fossil fuels sooner. Oh, wait, we already are. We now have solar panels that cost $1 per watt of electricity they generate. I'm glad we're working on making alternative energy cheaper and scaling it up before it is economical to do so. We should probably put more money into these projects, because we'll recoup our money and more later by having cheaper energy sooner.

I guess fixing the existing infrastructure in the US is not a sexy headline making theme for politicians but the existing problems should be addressed before we start spending money on random things just to create jobs.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/rebuilding-america/4301459

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2627

http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2009/02/04/americas-bridges-are-falling-down.htm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20095291/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy/

Flywheels don't work too well on a mobile platform

Porsche would tend to disagree with you.

Compressed air has fairly low energy density

Also easy and *quick* refuel ability - so it's quite doable for those in town trips which are the vast majority.

hydrogen fuel cells require very expensive rare metals, with costly and dirty refinement processes

Platinum is rare but is it's refinement any more dirty than coal or oil? (don't see platinum rigs explode and pollute the Gulf much..) This is a scale issue that won't be a complete solution but is a viable one for some installations.

[hydrogen] and [air] of which can be very dangerous in a crash, and thus have to be very strong and mounted in a secure location in the vehicle

Compressed Natural Gas would seem to be a bad thing by your definition and its already in use. Propane too. Hydrogen is no more or less safe than gasoline. When it leaks it goes 'up' and dissipates into the air, not say in a pool under your car. High pressure tanks are decidedly old tech and we know how to make them survive any reasonable accident scenario.

Gasoline has to be vaporized first, so it burns slowly.

Ask owners of the Ford Pinto about that.

Even high density batteries have the nasty problem of short circuiting.

again, we have batteries *today* that seem to work just fine and we can protect sensitive cargo appropriately.

It's going to be hard come up with another energy storage that works so well.

And finally, this is the crux of the problem with your argument. There won't be 'one' storage mechanism; there will be numerous technologies tailored to the needs of the specific case.

My point was getting your cars to *run* on electricity frees you up to using these many different technologies.

Your concerns are justified, but not to the extent you might think.

Also, the F-22 does not represent a "marginal technological advantage", it really is revolutionary. Game changing.

During operational testing and wargames (Northern Edge and Red Flag, that I'm aware of, but possibly others) they'd pit mixed forces of F-22s and F-15s or F-16s against conventional forces without F-22s.

Now, we've all seen the ridiculous kill rations of the F-22. 108:0 in Northern Edge, but what's slightly less well known is this:

These mixed packages of Raptors and Conventional aircraft will typically begin an engagement with the Raptors engaging the aggressor aircraft. The raptors rack up lots of kills, the aggressors rarely score one against the raptors.

But eventually, the inferior numbers of the Raptors means that they'll expend their stores. Out of missiles, they don't just turn and go home, they continue to provide support to their side's conventional fighters. The result is a very lopsided kill ratio. Even when the Raptors don't fire a shot, just having them near by, stealthily providing additional radar data, and pseudo-AWACS support has turned out to be far more helpful than even the most optimistic analysts had predicted.

The results? During that same Northen Edge exercise where the Raptors themselves scored 108 kills against no loss, the team that the Raptors were on had a kill ratio of 241:2.

Here's some more Detail on the Northern Edge engagement:
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123022371

At least in wargames. Obviously we have no idea if it will pan out in a shooting war.

So while the cuts to the Raptor program may seem dire, they're not AS bad as they may seem. The Raptor is even useful in limited numbers in conjunction with conventional warplanes.

Another great data point is this great quote form an Aggressor Pilot at Red Flag from a Popular Mechanics story:

"My F-16 is still a formidable weapons system in its own right. But it is not even in the same league as an F-22," Brenton says. "Technology keeps the F-22 a virtually undetectable and untouchable regime. It is fair to say that unless an F-22 driver makes a mistake, or has a critical system failure, I will always lose a fight against him. That is a good thing. As a nation, we want it this way. We also want him to be able to handle two, six or eight of us completely on his own."

Unlike typical U.S. military pilots, the Red Flag and Top Gun instructors do basically nothing but fly (simulated) combat sorties day in and day out. They're among the best of the best when they start the job, and the nature of the job makes them better. If one of them says he can't kill a Raptor in an F-16 unless something exceptional happens, I believe him.

Of course, as you pointed out, there is a threshold in numbers where you have too few to make a difference, or the numbers you do have become over-taxed, but it seems that between the obscene kill ratio of the Raptor, and it's "multiplying factor" for conventional forces that this it's very hard to say how low a number would be ineffective.

No kidding. And even with the dozens of hybrids out there, the 3rd most fuel-efficient car from the last 30 years (after the Prius and the Insight) is the 26-year-old Chevy Sprint (see http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/fuel-economy/epa-fuel-efficient-cars-chevy-sprint ). Why hasn't three decades of engineering brought more progress?

Blame the curb weight arms race in safety regulations. Since heavier vehicles have better survivability than light vehicles in head-on collisions between the two, we all need our cars to weigh more, right? And you surely wouldn't purchase a car with less than perfect safety ratings, especially if you have a family! Four ton cars for everyone! Oh wait, if other peoples' cars coming at me weigh four tons, mine better weigh eight tons, just in case there's an accident...

Decades of engineering and advances in materials are going mostly towards offsetting higher curb weights "for safety's sake" rather than improving fuel mileage or power. I hope at some point people start to understand the tradeoffs involved and demand revised regulations and lighter, more efficient automobiles rather than taking one look at innovations (e.g. the Smartcar) and dismissing them as death traps just because they aren't heavy tanks.

i was being sarcastic... lol

But this here is dead serious... China is the new big boy on the block, and it's going to take all those "disputed" territories by force or intimidation soon.

About a month ago the White House called TRUtv and told them to stop airing Governor Ventura's show about FEMA internment camps* on TV or their website.

I didn't suppose you have anything resembling a reliable source for this claim about pressure from the White House on the wackos at TRUtv? (No, claims by Alex Jones don't count as reliable, sorry.)

The FEMA camps and coffins BS was debunked long ago. Of course, to conspiracy theory dingbats, that just means they got to Popular Mechanics too. That's the beauty of the big conspiracy theory: it's unfalsifiable.

On the other hand. Amazon deciding the the feds are a more profitable customer than WikiLeaks doesn't take any deep conspiracy theory to explain it

You're referring to this "study", which had a total of twelve data points (four for each of the three carriers). Also, the article says all three carriers were rougher-than-average with "Fragile" packages; it didn't single out UPS and FedEx.

The USPS also had nearly twice as many flips per package and more variance in temperature, both of which can be meangful depending on what you're shipping.

You keep trotting out this "study" but fail to note that there were a total of twelve trips between the three carriers, so you're only looking at the averages of FOUR points for each carrier. Not an excuse for poor treatment, but hardly enough to claim any clear winner. Also, the article doesn't pick out FedEx or UPS as being particularly rough with "fragile" packages -- it says that all three carriers were rougher-than-average on marked packages. Again, this is based on an average of four points, so not terribly compelling. Retest each carrier a couple hundred times and then maybe we'll have a meaningful discussion.

But NK has a huge amount of artillery. If attacked, the regime would know they're going down and they would pretty much level Seoul. I recall reading, though I can't source it now, that there's too much NK artillery to take out in a quick strike, even for the US military. So they can't be taken down militarily without huge sacrifices in the South.

These days, the theory is that isn't really true.

I quote:
Barring the use of nuclear weapons or large-scale bombing runs, destroying a city requires an extended campaign of shelling and demolition, the likes of which the world hasn't seen since WWII. When the Chechen capital of Grozny was all-but-destroyed by Russian forces in 1999, it was the result of months of artillery and missile bombardments, as well as air strikes. There's no doubt that North Korea's massive deployment of artillery, and potential deployment of roughly 300 ballistic missiles, could wreak havoc on Seoul and its population. What's clear, however, is that a sudden barrage of shells and missiles would only mark the beginning of a battle for the city, not an apocalyptic fait accomplit.

The Battle for Seoul would be ugly. Lots of people would die. There would be immense losses of human life, and immense financial losses. But Seoul would emerge on the other side; 98% of the North's artillery would be obliterated within 96 hours, and the joint US/South Korean force would smash through the DMZ and conqueror Pyongyang in a matter of days. There would most likely be quite a few high profile losses in Seoul, but the city would survive.

North Korea maintains numerical parity with South Korea, but much of its' equipment is antiquated. The modern US/South Korean forces would achieve air dominance in a matter of hours, and the rest of the North would fold like a house of cards.

Now, obviously, peaceful unification (and regime collapse) would be preferable. No one, particularly the South, wants a war; but these days, it is pretty obvious who would win the war, and Seoul would not be lost.

I do think, however, that the North shelling Seoul would result in the end of the Northern regime. The South Korean street is known for being very temperamental, and a direct attack on Seoul would result in cries for "rivers of blood".

Popular Mechanics is claiming an Icelandic study showed 10-25x increased rates of skin cancer than the general public.

link

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/the-truth-about-tsa-airport-scanning

A survey of Icelandic commercial flyboys, conducted in 2000 by the University of Iceland's Dr. Vilhjálmur Rafnsson, found that skin cancer rates for pilots were between 10 and 25 times higher than that of the general public.

I hate to tell you this, but the Red Bull Stratos project is on hold due to a pending lawsuit. It's a shame too, because that would have been an amazing achievement.

Well it's not an Atlas but how about a 1/10 scale Saturn V with eight 13,000 Newton-second N-Class motors and a 77,000 Newton-second P-Class motor, that stands 36 ft tall and weighs 1648 pounds and flew to an altitude of 4440 feet?

I posted this elsewhere first- in a discussion about how automakers complain that the MPG targets set for them are unrealistic- but it seems to fit here:

The 3rd most fuel-efficient car in the last 30 years, after the Prius and the Insight, was the 26-year-old Chevy Sprint (see http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/fuel-economy/epa-fuel-efficient-cars-chevy-sprint ). Overall, despite all the progress in engineering over the last 30 years, fuel efficiency hasn't increased all that much on average.

Advances in efficiency are offset by increased curb weight due to overdone crashworthiness standards and a crashworthiness arms race. If _your_ vehicle has a lot of mass between you and the front of the car, you're safer in a head-on collision. But if _everybody's_ cars have that increased mass, then you're not really safer.

Other reasons for a lack of progress include people's demands for higher acceleration performance (leading to big, heavy engines which use a lot of fuel) and other amenities. The automakers are right that the demand for higher efficiency isn't strong enough to outweigh costs and the demands for other amenities, and the only way this is likely to change is if fuel prices increase.

Fuel taxes and more balanced safety standards (recognizing safety v. efficiency is generally a tradeoff and so we really _don't_ want the safest cars possible) are the only things the government can do that will have a reliable and sizable effect in increasing average fleet efficiency. Just yelling at auto manufacturers for selling people what they want to buy isn't going to help.

That doesn't sound like a semi-marginal improvement.

No, it doesn't. It sounds to me like the point of diminishing returns. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/telescopes/4299775 We own or jointly own all five of the top five telescopes in the world. What makes this one so much more beneficial that it's going to help pull our economy out?