Slashdot Mirror


Ultra Efficient Chip Cooling Passes Boeing Tests

joelgrimes writes "A company called Cool Chips plc is showing off a cooling device that claims unbelievable efficiencies using what they call 'quantum mechanical electron tunneling'. A choice quote from their press release: "A panel of Cool Chips one inch square will provide enough cooling for a refrigerator; a panel about two inches square will have the capacity to provide the air conditioning for a living room". They also mention using them to cool microprocessors. I used to think this company was nuts, but Boeing is making me think twice. Oh, and by the way, they work in reverse to make electricity from heat. Should I sell my baseball cards and buy their stock now, or can an army of slashdotters poke holes in their claims?" Fascinating stuff. Makes peltier coolers look pretty old school. In the press release they claim up to 80% efficiency, compared to 5-8% for peltier coolers and 50% for conventional refrigeration. I will say the cool chips corporate logo is baffling, though.

573 comments

  1. Baffling logo by Erik+K.+Veland · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    and really awful webdesign.

    Oh well, never judge a book by it's cover nor a company by the use of hard-to-comprehend buzzwords.

    --
    "I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java
  2. The chip.. by VacheRoi · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ..seems to bear a striking visual resemblance to a cross-sectioned hard boiled egg. This has been under our noses the whole time!

    --
    "We do not tremble, we are not sentimental..we are a furious wind tearing the dirty linens of clouds and prayers"- Tzara
    1. Re:The chip.. by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 0

      Actually it looks like a large antiwart/bunion thingy from dr scholls..

      --


      He tried to kill me with a forklift!
  3. Either/or by 00_NOP · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Well, this is either the first great technological breakthrough of the 21st century or this year's cold fusion.

    Presumably the possibilities for this are vast - could it be used to make very strong magnets (through high temperature superconductors) a realistic possibility at last?

    Of course, given the amount of power (some of) you Americans waste on air conditioning and your (government's?) refusal to acknowledge global warming is real, it is good news for just about everyone - until the oil companies close it down, of course.

    1. Re:Either/or by foniksonik · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm thinking we should be coating space shuttles with this stuff, under the first protective layer of course w/ a fluid cooling system to pull the heat away from the cool chip material on the surface straight to another set of cool chip stuff positioned near an exhaust manifold.

      So many potential uses... personal cooling systems, body temp regulated of course (thinking of spinning the material into thread and having it woven into a jacket liner while static/kinetic energy or temp gradients powers it).

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    2. Re:Either/or by Zorquan · · Score: 0
      Of course, given the amount of power (some of) you Americans waste on air conditioning and your (government's?) refusal to acknowledge global warming is real, it is good news for just about everyone - until the oil companies close it down, of course.

      I don't think AC is a waste. When I lived in North Carolina those 100 degree days with high humidity were just a tad bit uncomfortable. And I personally don't put any stock in the predictions of gloom and doom over global warming - there aren't enough facts yet. So, what happens when the ice caps melt? A lot more land area and a greater range of latitude for green plants to grow which suck up the greenhouse gases. And are we in a natural cycle and if so is it stronger or weaker than normal? (And while we're at it, that computer you're sitting at was made with some pretty nasty chemicals, so it'd be best if you just stop using it - you polluter. And paper production causes dioxin (I think) to be released - don't use any paper. And damming up rivers causes high mercury concentrations - don't use hydroelectric power. Don't watch TV - that's an unnecessary drain of electricity. Cows farting releases methane (greenhouse gas) - so don't eat any beef. etc.) I sure as heck am not going to give up my comforts because a bunch of hippies (my term for environmentalists) thinks we ought to hug the planet instead of live. I hugged my last tree long ago (and I hugged lots of 'em when I was young), before I decided that some 'sacrifices' needed to be made for human advancement (preferably the hippies). BTW - there are more acres of forest in the US than there was 100 years ago. Save the forest from those soul-less loggers! Stop supporting them - don't buy lumber, or books, or newspapers, or magazines... The environmentalists have cried wolf far too many times.

      Note that I'm not advocating going out and needlessly wasting resources. (Wasting hippies on the other hand...)

    3. Re:Either/or by benh57 · · Score: 1

      > there aren't enough facts yet Yes, there are. Do more research. In science literature, not republican websites. Don't blindly parrot what your GOP tells you.

    4. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You're the type of person that strengthens the widespread prejudice amongst Europeans about Americans being arrogant, selfish, narcistic, polluting, brute and materialistic airheads with no culture at all.
      But I'm sure most Americans are NOT like you.

      And by the way, next time you vote for Bush, make sure you punch the hole all the way trough - moron.

    5. Re:Either/or by proj_2501 · · Score: 1

      Um, if the ice cap on the north pole melts, we DON'T get any extra green land. If both ice caps melt a little, the sea level starts going up without ANY exposed land. We also lose New York City, the Netherlands, most of New England, and we get a lot more beaches.

    6. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, maybe us Americans, collectively, are all of the above, but you Europeans don't have much room to talk.

    7. Re:Either/or by prisoner · · Score: 1

      I don't think that the southern ice cap melting would have much/any effect. Doesn't the vast majority of that ice already float on the water?

    8. Re:Either/or by @madeus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      MAJOR CORRECTION!
      The polar ice caps melting means the sea level rises and we lose land, and not gain any. That is a very big deal.

      Now personally, I am a sceptical enviromentalist and it's perfectly possible this is all entirely normal behaviour for our ecosystem, but what we are doing is absolutely just making things worse.

      Now I agree that AC is not a waste, it's damn hot in some places and people would die (litteraly) if it wasn't there.

      Also, yes the Kyoto agreement didn't make a lot of sense in the US, because it didn't take in to account how many forests the US plants (or other forms of conservation). In this respect, the Kyoto agreement was fundementally flawed.

      BUT, all that said, the US (in general) seems to have less of an 'public awareness' of this issue. And it's something that all countries need to tackle.

      Even if the melting of the polar caps is entirely natrual, it's surely fair to except we are all only making things worse, and pretending that the issue doesn't exist is not going to make it go away.

    9. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if the melting of the polar caps is entirely natrual, it's surely fair to except we are all only making things worse, and pretending that the issue doesn't exist is not going to make it go away.

      Why is it fair to assume anything? Maybe we are most likely not having any effect at all. None at all. That is just as "likey" as your comment.

    10. Re:Either/or by danro · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Ehm, no... that would be the northern ice cap.

      --

      "First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
    11. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh but yes, to talk we have loads of room. It's in changing stuff to the better we don't have much room for (globally speaking that is). But you probably meant just that.

      Yep, you've got me there...

      And you know what? Most Europeans don't give a damn. There are not a lot of us who would like to see our governments crank up expenditure on defence to the 40% of GNP you Americans spend on it, just to catch up with you. We like having low poverty, high welfare for all (well ok not everyone, nobody's perfect), a clean environment, 38 hour workweeks, lots of holiday, more than 2 political parties, real political debate, etc, etc

      But damn! all the need geek stuf comes from America :-)

    12. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I meant "neath geek stuff"
      I think... euhh..

    13. Re:Either/or by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Don't blame me, I think I voted for Buchanan.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    14. Re:Either/or by DrSkwid · · Score: 2

      Now I agree that AC is not a waste, it's damn hot in some places and people would die (litteraly) if it wasn't there.

      The goldminers of Western Australia didn't have AC for 150 years. I've been to a place where it can get up to a mind boggling 50 degrees Celcius.

      Underground houses/rooms keep the temperatures in living spaces bearable.

      India isn't blessed with AC all over the place and yet the hot streets aren't littered with burnt corpses. (just regular corpses and the living dead)

      I've not been to the inerior of the US but I guess the temperatures are pretty much the same. AC makes the environment less challenging but isn't life or death.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    15. Re:Either/or by @madeus · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      "Most likely we are not having any effect at all"

      Where the HELL did you pull that from?

      You can it with the naked eye!

      If you take a look around London, which has *many* buildings 100-200 years old, you can see the damange caused by Acid rain. There are even stuctures in London over 1500 years old (unlike in the US!) .

      Typical boody Americans think that anything built pre 1950's is old (I even heard one couple in New York saying "You know that church by Central Park, that building is so old, it's amazing!" and the damn thing was only 70 years old - I grew up in a *house* that was older than that!).

      These buidlings have not sustained any damange in the previous hundred years, but because of environmental changes they have been erroded very badly in recent years.

      This has happened across the globe in Italy, Greece and Germany. This is a direct result of the industrialisation of the last 100 years. It's a big problem and were tackling it here in Europe, by cutting down the amount of pollutants we use, forceably, in law.

      Rain is more Acidic and Sea Levels are rising - these are not conjecture, but mesurable and factual. The hole in the Ozone layer is also a recent event.

      So: A gap in the Ozone layer, Acid rain and sea levels rising.

      The first two are, beyond all reasonable doubt (based on a weath of information avalible), caused by us, the second is still open to debate.

      But what do you think the chances are they are related? The evidence is pretty compeling.

      *I'm* a sceptic and YOUR irrational unwillingness to look that facts is scary.

      Do you know ANYTHING about the topic at hand, or are you just a typically uninformed asshole?

    16. Re:Either/or by MeNeXT · · Score: 2

      Also, yes the Kyoto agreement didn't make a lot of sense in the US, because it didn't take in to account how many forests the US plants (or other forms of conservation). In this respect, the Kyoto agreement was fundementally flawed.
      So if we followed your logic Canada does not have to concern itself with pollution?

      --
      DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
    17. Re:Either/or by Erich · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      The theory is: If the ice caps recede, so will glaciers, releasing land for use. I've seen the figure that if all the ice caps and glacial areas melted, the ocean levels would rise only a few inches, not enough to be overly problematic. It is true that most ice is floating, and so wouldn't cause the sea levels to rise any (don't believe me? Fill up a glass of ice water so that the ice cube is sticking out the top and the water is at the brim... and let it melt. The water level will remain constant (minus evaporation). Another theory is that we're coming off of an ice age and so the warming is natural. Given the quality of information I think that probably saying the Truth of being at the end of an ice age or overdue for another one is probably more hype than science. My theory is: Polluting isn't a good idea, but on the other hand, there's no reason to go shoot myself immediately because Waterworld won't happen next year.

      --

      -- Erich

      Slashdot reader since 1997

    18. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans Arrogant? Sounds like the widespread belief in the US that Europeans are self-centered, sour-grapes, low-self-esteeme snobs who are mired in their wish to have centuries old culture back in style.

      And next time you'd like to call an American selfish, narcistic, or an airhead, please pray to my grandmother who lost a brother and two sons defending European property in 1943 and 1944. While I never knew them, I will never forget what they did--for me and for you.

    19. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got the world's smallest bugle here with me, playing a bittersweet patriotic dirge, to make sure future readers of your post are able to read it with all the solemn piety it demands of any good citizen.

    20. Re:Either/or by sessamoid · · Score: 2
      AC makes the environment less challenging but isn't life or death.

      Load of crock. Even during a heat wave in Dallas during my high school years where most of the people still had air conditioning, we had elderly people (who didn't have air conditioning) dropping dead like flies, and many that dropped and nearly died. And this is in temperatures well below your vaunted 50 degrees C. Heat exhaustion and heat stroke can indeed be life or death.

      Heat exhaustion is a fairly common problem seen in the southern US, and I imagine in other hot climes in the world. I'd like to see how long you survive in a place with 50 C temps, no ac, and no wind. Arizona and Nevada in the summer are hot enough to give you first degree burns on the bottoms of your feet through athletic shoes if you stand on the pavement long enough. (Been there, done that.)

      Just because you haven't personally seen any smoking corpses in India doesn't mean that people don't die of heat stroke and dehydration there regularly. And I'm thinking that the life expectancy of the western australian gold miners wasn't all the great either. Underground rooms aren't an option in many warm climes due to swamps/coastline. Where I live, and underground room pretty much turns into an underwater room.

      --
      "No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
    21. Re:Either/or by @madeus · · Score: 2

      What a bizzare statement to make!

      I said the Kyoto agreement was fundementally flawed.

      That's all. It's pretty clear statement.

      It doesnt give credit for the amount of conservation a company does (so even it does more good than harm, you can fail to meet the requirements, and even if you harm the environment without reparing any past damage you can pass it with flying colors).

      Clearly, as it stands, there is no actually incentive or credit given for being a good environmental citizen. Broadly speaking it's a good idea, but the Kyoto agreement was rotten way of doing it (and was lampooned as such by various sources, including a particularly good reponse inThe Economist).

      How the fuck you infered that as 'if we followed your logic Canada does not have to concern itself with pollution?' is beyond me.

    22. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't forget what terrible sacrifices American soldiers made for Europe (and what terrible things Europe did to itself at that time). There's monuments all over the place. As there should be.
      But the stereotypes remain. And by the way, its the French that are snobbish, the English that are self-centered, the Germans that are sour-grapes and the Belgians have low self-seteeme. Don't mix us up, were still not one country :-)

      My condolences to your grandmother.

    23. Re:Either/or by sensate_mass · · Score: 1
      Ocean levels notwithstanding, melting polar icecaps can still cause problems.

      --
      --- Submission is feudal.
    24. Re:Either/or by dbrutus · · Score: 2

      Will Rogers said something like this - It isn't what we don't know that gets us in trouble, it's what we know that just isn't so.

      As far as I know, sea levels are rising in some areas and falling in others. Also, the global warmin zealots have been caught bending the facts to fit their theories. The problem was so bad at the IPCC that one of the scientists working on the main report (which no policy maker reads) actually wrote on the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal that the policymakers summary (which lawmakers, journalists, and interested laymen do read) simply made stuff up about the main report.

      How much of what you know, just isn't so?

      BTW: few on the pro-global warming side made any courageous stands for the truth and the document was not pulled. Until the global-warming advocates give a damn about truth and true science rather than hype and fundraising letters, why should we believe a word of what they say?

    25. Re:Either/or by dbrutus · · Score: 2

      The Canadians didn't have Great Plains Indians burning huge tracts of forests on a regular basis to extend the range of the buffalo over a good quarter of the country (well, maybe a bit in the south of Canada). To the extent that the US increases actual forest land over what was there, I think it's quite fair to get carbon sink credits.

      If some bright fellow invented a general CO2 collector that could be planted on floating platforms in the middle of the oceans and suck up more than all the manmade CO2 that was being pumped out, the Kyoto treaty would *still* require a CO2 emission restriction regimin even though it would be totally useless.

      Yeah, I'd say that's fundamentally and fatally flawed.

    26. Re:Either/or by @madeus · · Score: 2

      Your right to say there are a lot of zelots who bend the facts, I agree.

      There is a book called the Sceptial Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg which I think you might like:
      http://www.easyfiction.co.uk/Bjorn-Lomborg- Sceptic al-Environmentalis-0521804477.html

      It points out "exaggeration and selective quotation" that is often, though some have said the book itself is guilty of just that - YMMV.

      Though personally I think it's understable, given the complete reistance of people to accept some basic facts.

      I would say though that Sea Levels are NOT falling in some areas and rising in others, that is completly untrue. That would not actually be possible (unless you were talking about sea levels in inland sea's, which is attributable to rainfall alone and has nothing to do with polar ice caps).

    27. Re:Either/or by crevette · · Score: 1

      Do you think the US join the war to help Europe only? They did it because the damn war was coming in their own backyard. Nothing to do with 'helping' out other countries. That was simply a nice side-effect.

    28. Re:Either/or by gjhut · · Score: 1

      Yep, but even in the northern hemisphere you have ice that will cause sea level rises when it melts. Think only of Greenland.

    29. Re:Either/or by crevette · · Score: 1

      The ice melting part is wrong for 2 reasons. 1) the density of frozen water is different than liquid water. Try this experience: completly fill a bottle with water and place it in the freezer. There is a chance that, if you picked a glass bottle, it may explode. Reason: ice takes make room than liquid water. 2) there is a part of the ice that is not underwater, hence, that volume is not taken into account in the current sea (glass) level.

    30. Re:Either/or by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 3, Insightful


      If the ice caps recede, so will glaciers, releasing land for use.

      Most glaciers are in mountaine area. Not much use from that aea if the glacier is gone. At least not in relation to the same amount of are in a more asy to farm zone.

      It is true that most ice is floating

      No this is wrong. Would be interesting from where you got that.

      The north polar reagion is only floating ice. So your sample with the ice qube in a glass of water is right, besides the fact that we have in this case "sweet water ice" floating in "salt water". If it melts, the levle rises. ( :-) )
      The south polar reagion is a continent. That continent is a bit bigger than Australia or about 1.5 times the size of the United States. (www.everything2.com)

      That continent is covered with a ice cap about 2km to 4 km hight.
      Oh, nice, everything2.com even covers that also, and they say the highest ice mountaine is 5km ... thats nearly the hight of the highest mountaine in the rockies.

      Anyway, if all that ice would melt the sea level would rise about 100 meters. Of course the global warming is not that fast. So a sea level raise over the next 50 years will only be about 10 meters, bye bye New York ... and until a new balance is found likely about 30 meters.

      Regards,
      angel'o'sphere

      P.S. if you go for skiing to Austria or Swizerland you can watch the snow line going up the mountaine each year. A winter 0.1 degree warmer than the year before is 2 weeks less winter holidays or 100 meters higher snow line.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    31. Re:Either/or by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1, Offtopic


      Also, yes the Kyoto agreement didn't make a lot of sense in the US, because it didn't take in to account how many
      forests the US plants (or other forms of conservation). In this respect, the Kyoto agreement was fundementally
      flawed.


      Planting forrests is a ZERO SUM game.

      The trees only consume the amount of CO2 they need to grow. When the trees die, rott or are made into paper wich is burned or rotts, they evapore the same amount of CO2 they ate before.

      So to get a positive gain while you still burn oil you would need to plant each year trees in an amount big enough to eat the amount of CO2 produced by the burned oil.

      Then next year the same ... and the same ... more forrests and more forrests untill all the US is covered with forrests.

      So: if you now continue to burn oil ... where do you plant the next forest?

      Remember: for each lbs oil you burn you need one lbs of wood(in fact more) to compensate that.

      Following the Kyoto suggestions, reducing energy usage, increasing efficiency of energy usage, is far the fastest way to reduce CO2 ... planting trees needs 10 years to even show up in the plots, and as I said above ... you have to continue with planting until you start reducing your CO2 exhaust.

      Interesting is that in some years the other countries in the world will have industries focusing on low energy technologies .... I asume the US think they simply can buy stuff in.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    32. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a gentleperson and a scholar, and would be welcome in my home.

    33. Re:Either/or by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      The "friends from the East" comment was sarcasm. And the United States has suggested on numerous occasions the withdrawal of significant forces from Europe, which is usually met with semi-panicked responses from the host countries.

      As for why we seem to get the focus, I'd ask you to open your eyes a bit. You ignore the neo-Nazi movement in Germany, the former KLA in Kosovo, the Basque ETA in Spain, the Chechens in Russia, the Aum Shinrikyo clan in Japan, the Muslim separatists in western China, and several rebel armies in Africa. We may get the most widely-reported focus, but we're certainly not alone.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    34. Re:Either/or by karmawarrior · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      As far as I know, sea levels are rising in some areas and falling in others.

      I would assume you mean as in "They're rising on Earth, but they're falling on Mars."

      Or could this be an elaborate troll by a pro-GW advocate to try and ridicule the anti-GW lobby...
      --
      KMSMA (WWBD?)
    35. Re:Either/or by osgeek · · Score: 2

      It really is such a sickening debate. On the one hand, you have the Rush Limbaughs of the world who completely deny the possibility that we've done any damage to the environment. Then on the other side, we have the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, and Hollywood that keeps telling us that we're all going to die any second from our horrifying environmental practices.

      Both sides are all too willing to pick their sources of "information" selectively. That's not Science, that's Religion.

      Lomborg has his issues with adherence to good Science, but I think his willingness to re-examine the issue from another direction is refreshing. Overall, we'd be better off if more of the combatants took this approach.

    36. Re:Either/or by errxn · · Score: 1

      Correction: You still don't usually need AC in Arizona or Nevada when the temperatures are that hot. The humidity is so low that you can just use a swamp cooler, which is much more efficient, instead.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
    37. Re:Either/or by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      No, the ice melting part is correct. As you stated, the density of ice is different from liquid water. In fact, it's less dense, and therefore FLOATS on the liquid water. Because of this, the ice is only partially submerged in the water, and thus only displaces a fraction of the full volume of the ice. The parent post is correct in describing that when the ice melts, the volume that it occupies will end up being exactly the same as the amount of water that was displaced by the ice cube (minus evaporation). This, as previously stated, only applies to ice that is floating. Go ahead and try the experiment. Make sure you fill the glass completely full. When the ice melts, the glass won't overflow at all. I believe this is all dealt with by Archimedes' Law of Displacement.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    38. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a self-righteous prick.

      Just because your government taxes away almost all your income to support a sluggish socialist bureaucracy doesn't make you superior.

      Paying $5 for a gallon of gas doesn't make you superior. Driving miniature cars because that's all you can afford after your outrageous taxes doesn't make you superior.

      You can thank the american taxpayer later for stabilizing the globe for the past 60 years after the Euro-trash destroyed themselves, and you can thank the American entrepreneur for giving you practically every modern convenience you take for granted.

      Real political debate? Where? All of Europe is so far to the left, the only debate is how much should we tax and how much bureaucracy can we support with that tax?

      Get over yourself.

    39. Re:Either/or by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2


      As far as I know, sea levels are rising in some areas and falling in others.


      Erm ... ROFL.

      How, should that be possible? Take a soup plate fill it wit water, then let it raise at one side and fall at the other, show me how you do that.


      Also, the global warmin zealots have been caught bending the facts to fit their theories.

      There is no such thing like "the global warmin zealots". If one of them or two of them or a group of them bended facts .... the others did not.

      Bending of facts seem only to happen in wide scale by anti global warming "zealots" as you call them. Just like the negation of ozone layer holes by the industries producing ozone killer gases.

      BTW: El Ninjo is not familar to you, is it?

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    40. Re:Either/or by spike+hay · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      We like having low poverty, high welfare for all

      America has a much higher per capita GDP than European countries. Just look at the almanac.

      There are not a lot of us who would like to see our governments crank up expenditure on defence to the 40% of GNP you Americans spend on it, just to catch up with you.

      I don't know where you got that figure! It is nowhere even close to that.

      --
      If you don't understand any of my sayings, come to me in private and I shall take you in my German mouth.
    41. Re:Either/or by spike+hay · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      America has saved the arses of the Europeans in WW1, WW2, the Cold War, and the Marshall Plan.

      If it wasn't for us, Hitler would have won the war. You would be living in a totalitarian fascist dictatorship. If you had won the war, which would be unlikely, your economy would have been screwed without the Marshall Plan. Also, the Soviets most likely would have had an invasion were you not backed by America during the Cold War.

      Don't bash America. We have done so much for Europe.

      --
      If you don't understand any of my sayings, come to me in private and I shall take you in my German mouth.
    42. Re:Either/or by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Actually, I did this math exercise yesterday on EXACTLY this problem. And what I came up with, with a certain margin of error, is a total sea level rise (not taking into account coastal flooding, just the waters rising straight up), of ~76 METERS. That's a LOT of sea level rise. Without much greater information about coastal areas, and average height over particular areas, I couldn't give a true number, but I'd GUESS anywhere from 20-30 meters.

      Please check my math:
      Based on some figures I've collected for total ocean surface area: 335,258,000 sq km, total Antartic land mass: 12,093,000 sq km, with an average icepack thickness of: 2100m I get the following formula (Ice Thinkness) / (Ocean / Antarctica), which works out to (2100) / (335,258,000 / 12,093,000 ) = (2100) / (27.723) = 75.749m in total ocean height. While I doubt this great high would be achieved, due to lowlying coastal areas, it is likely that the total rise in sea level would be around 20-30m...

      Sources:
      http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/oceans .h tm
      http://www.scar.org/Antarctic%20Info/Ant%20sta ts.h tml
      http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2000/MaySy.sht ml

      Corrections welcome.

    43. Re:Either/or by pomakis · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      If some bright fellow invented a general CO2 collector that could be planted on floating platforms in the middle of the oceans and suck up more than all the manmade CO2 that was being pumped out, the Kyoto treaty would *still* require a CO2 emission restriction regimin even though it would be totally useless.

      I can't believe how many people have this attitude about environmental pollution! I don't understand how any reasonably intelligent person can fail to see that preventative maintenance (i.e., reducing emissions at the source) is a fundamentally safer way to insure that we don't continue down the spiralling path of the gradual destruction of our planet's ecosystem. In order for humankind to survive (comfortably) in the long run, we're going to have to treat our planet with respect.

      Do you piss on your living room carpet every day and then get a carpet cleaner in each weekend to clean up the mess? No, you install a toilet and a plumbing system!

    44. Re:Either/or by crevette · · Score: 1

      You really got me thinking about this one and you are perfectly right. Given the right explanation, it's now quite clear.

    45. Re:Either/or by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1
      The trees only consume the amount of CO2 they need to grow. When the trees die, rott or are made into paper wich is burned or rotts, they evapore the same amount of CO2 they ate before.

      Could you please provide a link with proof of this statement? I've never seen anything that proves a rotting tree releases as much CO2 as the tree ever took in during its entire lifetime.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    46. Re:Either/or by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Note that these calculations don't take into account Northern Hemispherical *GROUND* ice. The arctic sea ice pack will actually take up less volume when melted... but you all knew that.
      :-)

    47. Re:Either/or by james_shoemaker · · Score: 1

      >>As far as I know, sea levels are rising in some
      >>areas and falling in others.

      > How, should that be possible? Take a soup plate
      > fill it wit water, then let it raise at one side
      > and fall at the other, show me how you do that.

      Never overestimate the invariability of large systems. Sea level is 8 inches higher on the Pacific side of Panama than the Atlantic side

    48. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Restricting ourself to only one way (planting trees vs. increasing efficiency vs. reducing usage) is unwise. We should proceed in all directions instead of ruling out some options for ideological reasons.

      2) "where do you plant the next forest?". right where the previos one was. No-one sais you have to burn the previous forest (i.e. convert the bound Carbon to CO2), you can just let it lie or store it somewhere or use it for construction. That's how the coal deposits were formed: just one forest on top of the next. Actually burning fossils is just another (indirect) way of using solar power, because plants get their energy from photosynthesis.
      I'm not sure why planting trees needs 10 years to show up in the plots (trees start to grow right away, don't they ?) - but anyway - where's the problem with that? We have time. Earth won't fall apart in the next 10 years.
      Btw. trees are not the only plant to bind carbon, actually more carbon can be/is bound in form of algae in the sea.

    49. Re:Either/or by rebrane · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is, you are grossly exaggerating one side's argument while reporting the other one correctly. Guess which is which.

    50. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Correction: You still don't usually need AC in Arizona or Nevada when the temperatures are that hot. The humidity is so low that you can just use a swamp cooler, which is much more efficient, instead."

      As an Arizona native I can with all certainty say that you sir, are full of runny shit. In late June and early July when our 'monsoon' season begins, evaporative air conditioning no longer functions adequately.

    51. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "America has a much higher per capita GDP than European countries. Just look at the almanac"

      Yes, but in Europe the difference between rich and poor is a lot smaller, which means that the middle class is much larger and there's less poor people. We don't generally trip over homeless people on the sidewalk. That's a good thing, no ?

      "I don't know where you got that figure! It is nowhere even close to that."

      Could be, but it's till a lot higher.

    52. Re:Either/or by onepoint · · Score: 1

      Funny that you have asked that question, you would think that because water freezes and take up more volume there would be a cancelation effect. but try this:

      take a pan ( about 4 inches deep ) add about 2 inches of water then about another inch of ice cubes, measure the side. then let it melt ( cover the try with something ), you'll get a small rise of about 1/8 of an inch.

      Given the above experiment is not proof but most people forget that Ice surface is only 1/10 to 1/6 of what's below.

      Mike

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    53. Re:Either/or by mpe · · Score: 2

      The polar ice caps melting means the sea level rises and we lose land, and not gain any.

      Actually it depends if the ice is covering land or sea. If the ice is on land then it's melting can raise sea level, if the ice is already floating then it dosn't make much difference.

    54. Re:Either/or by onepoint · · Score: 1

      Well they release methaine (SP?), but trees are the best for of carbon locking that the general population can deal with. Hey plant a tree, lock up 100 lbs of carbon. not alot but every little bit helps until we have zero polution.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    55. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I own land in denver that use to be sea-shore. cool, it is coming back :)
      and finally we can clean up washington d.c./new york/texas.

    56. Re:Either/or by Fjord · · Score: 2

      it didn't take in to account how many forests the US plants

      Planting forests? A bunch of trees is not a forest

      --
      -no broken link
    57. Re:Either/or by mpe · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I don't think that the southern ice cap melting would have much/any effect. Doesn't the vast majority of that ice already float on the water?

      More of the North ice cap is floating, the Southern ice cap has the continent of Antartica underneath, but plenty of floating ice around it's outside.

    58. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Must be from florida. Well, in our life time, floridians will not be making that mistake again as we will not have it popultated

    59. Re:Either/or by mpe · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Yep, but even in the northern hemisphere you have ice that will cause sea level rises when it melts. Think only of Greenland.

      Greenland isn't actually that big. You really need to check on a globe, not a Mercator projection map.

    60. Re:Either/or by Grape+Shasta · · Score: 1
      Now I agree that AC is not a waste, it's damn hot in some places and people would die (litteraly) if it wasn't there.

      Oh, come on... anyone who's been on /. long enough knows that pretty much everything from AC's is waste.

      --

      "I am a cipher, a cipher, wrapped in an enigma, smothered in secret sauce" -Jimmy James
    61. Re:Either/or by vipw · · Score: 1

      yeah, it so good of you to support worthless people who don't deserve it. ... i guess.

    62. Re:Either/or by MrPeach · · Score: 1

      That will only happen if the ice was touching the bottom of the pan. If you had the slightest grasp of the science involved here you'd understand that the ice displaces (below the water level) exactly as much space as the water that composes the ice will once the ice melts. When it melts, there is NO CHANGE in the water level. None, nada, naught! Back to school with you!

    63. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, back to school with YOU! Water changes volume as it heats up - hotter water takes up more, cooler water takes up less. All that is required to change sea levels is a change in water temperature. Land-locked ice melting (Antarctica) just makes it worse.

    64. Re:Either/or by errxn · · Score: 1

      As a former Tucson resident, I can say with all certainty, sir, that the monsoon season is the very reason that I said "usually" in my post. Also, I don't know if monsoon season applies to Nevada or not, as I'm not familiar with the weather patterns there.

      Those swamp coolers should be working great right about now, though. Last I checked, the humidity was about 8% or so around TUS.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
    65. Re:Either/or by JonK · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but you work 50% longer hours for it... Me, I like spending time with my girlfriend, not working my arse off.

      Consider that output-per-hour-worked in France, the Netherlands, Belgium and the former West Germany is higher than in the US. Ireland, Austria and Denmark are all close behind. The only country which isn't closing the gap is (predictably) the UK - because our politicians believe, against all evidence, that the "american model" for running an economy is successful.

      --
      Cheers

      Jon
    66. Re:Either/or by wwaaves · · Score: 1

      Um does anyone realize that 80% of icebergs and the icecaps are hidden beneath the water line? Who remembers why the titanic sank? ah yes the water line might rise as much as 600 feet at certain latitudes (that is a southern californian latitude estimate), but if Ice is expanded water then nobody really knows that if 80% is submerged and then the ice melts, maybe the ocean won't really rise at all! Of course if the ice caps melt, then we have to deal with outrageous weather conditions or dry arid land. Ah who gives a rats ass, I won't be around when it finally happens anyways. I'm just worried about surfing in the ocean and turds floating by me.

    67. Re:Either/or by onepoint · · Score: 1

      Heck I don't know where your from but this is real easy to test. plus we are not talking about a lab experiment, some /. could easy prove me correct. Anyway we know ice floats, I was talking about what's above the surface line of the ice. it's only a little bit but that little bit is about 1/6 to 1/10 of the total volume of the ice. so even after displacement ( replaced by melting water ) you still have the top of the ice that was never accounted for.

      also displacement of a solid mass is measured for the entire volume, an object floating on water will only measure up to the plain where it floats.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    68. Re:Either/or by dubl-u · · Score: 2
      As far as I know, sea levels are rising in some areas and falling in others.
      Erm ... ROFL.

      How, should that be possible? Take a soup plate fill it wit water, then let it raise at one side and fall at the other, show me how you do that.
      Blow on it.

      Seriously, the sea isn't all at sea level. Thanks to winds and currents, the level of the water differs. If wind and current patterns were to change, some places would show drops and others would show rises.

      That said, the studies I've seen about sea level changes account for this, so I think that the ocean is indeed rising. And since one of the things that global warming would cause is a shift in wind and current patterns, that seems even more evidence.
    69. Re:Either/or by MeNeXT · · Score: 2
      My point is that it does not matter how many forests you replant, these forests will take 30 years to develope to the state in which they are now. We need to reduce CO2 emissions.


      My point is if we allow countries to receive credit for their natural resources, what stops a country like Canada from polluting. They will have all the credits that they need to polute two to three times more per capita.

      --
      DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
    70. Re:Either/or by notsoanonymouscoward · · Score: 2

      tripping over poor people? Nah I ususally kick them out of the way. - not so anonymous

      --
      I ate my sig.
    71. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you think the US join the war to help Europe only? They did it because the damn war was coming in their own backyard. Nothing to do with 'helping' out other countries. That was simply a nice side-effect.

      Indeed. The war that the US didn't join until the Japanese bombed the fook out of Perl Harbour.

      I think the attitude until then from many was that warming^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Hitler wasn't such a big threat to US interests.

    72. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get back to us when Germany implements the Kyoto Treaty.

      Until then, STFU.

    73. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical boody Americans think that anything built pre 1950's is old

      Typical bloody Europeans, equating "old" with "good".

      I guess that's why you guys still have a genocide every 10 years.... it's hard to give up those ancient ways.

      Tell me, did it ever occur to you to consider the effects of NOT continuing to use large amounts of energy? In particular, the fact that this would doom billions of people in the third world to a subsistence (or below) lifestyle?

      Of course it hasn't. Those people are just peasants, and don't count as human beings by European standards.

    74. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "tripping over poor people? Nah I ususally kick them out of the way. - not so anonymous
      "

      mmm, suppose one would get chronically sick, and lose ones job and not be able to pay the morgage on the house, in America, how many months would it take to end up on the sidewalk ?
      In Europe, it would also lead to a personal disaster, you might lose your hose, but you don't run the risk of freezing to death under a bridge in the winter. There's a difference.

    75. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cheer up. It might never bloody happen.

    76. Re:Either/or by alan_d_post · · Score: 1

      I can't believe how many people have this attitude about environmental pollution! I don't understand how any reasonably intelligent person can fail to see that preventative maintenance (i.e., reducing emissions at the source) is a fundamentally safer way to insure that we don't continue down the spiralling path of the gradual destruction of our planet's ecosystem.

      EXACTLY! Thank you for being sane! dbrutus and friends put the burden of proof in the wrong place -- people who want to alter these systems that we depend on should be the ones proving those alterations safe.

    77. Re:Either/or by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2


      Could you please provide a link with proof of this statement? I've never seen anything that proves a rotting tree releases as much CO2 as the tree ever took in during its entire lifetime.

      This is basic biology.

      Probably a standard primary school biology course is enough?

      Every plant grows by taking CO2 from the atmosphere and producing cellulose from it.

      The O2 is more or less returned to the atmosphere(at night the plant burns O2 with sugar to CO2, btw.) the carbon is build into the plant.

      If the plant is rotting microbes are EATING the plant, burning the carbon in the plant with atmospheric O2 back to CO2.

      Exception: the plant is covered with some miles of earth and converted to coal.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    78. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, there's no call for that kind of language

      We pay approximately 1 dollar per liter of gas, don't exagerate. High taxes encourages people to buy cars that use less gass, thus polute less and use up oil reserves in a slightly less frightening way.

      "Stabilizing the globe for the past 60 years"

      Tell that to the South Americans with their dictatorial regimes and US backed military coups...
      Remember pigs pay? the above mentioned globe was nearly blown to bits by the ruskies and the western alies. Meta stable would be a better term for describing these 60 years.

      "Real political debate? Where? All of Europe is so far to the left, the only debate is how much should we tax and how much bureaucracy can we support with that tax?
      "

      European voters can choose over the whole spectrum, from left to extreme right.

      "Get over yourself"

      I'm trying

    79. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I suppose all the people in the US that lost their job because of 9-11 don't deserve tax-payers support ?

    80. Re:Either/or by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      yeah ... but the originbal poster was talking about level differences like they will happen if the ant arctic ice is melting.

      Of course you have tidal and wind and other forces leading to sea level changes.

      E.g. Africa raises each year 1 inch ...

      BUT: of course if a global change in the amount of liquid water happends, no place will be unaffected.

      And no place will be save from it, by saying: here it won't raise that high.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    81. Re:Either/or by Squalish · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      The point is that the ice in the largest ice caps is 2+ miles thick. Ice is usually thicker on land than on the north pole, because snow falls much more at higher elevations, and since something like 93%(forget where I read this) of the ice stays below water when floating, the ice gets big, but not as big as similar ones do inland. In addition, tides, currents, and the seasonal change in temperature affect things covered by water much more than things coverred by insulating snow. Anyway, back to my point: Lets do a little experiment. Say a 50km by 50km chunk of ice, 3km thick, suddenly melts. This size ice cover is not very much, and many times this exists in a place the size of antartica, or even greenland(well, maybe just a couple over greenland, but you get the point). 50km x 50km x 3km = 750 km^3 of ice The earth has about 362,000,000 km^2 of water cover. Divide this up(assuming equal volume of ice/water and a bunch of other simplified timesavers) and you get aproximately 2 meters more of water over the entire ocean. This is enough to drown a large percentage of the human population of earth. Check your map. Every major city in the world was founded at the intersection of two bodies of water. The ocean forms a nice junction, so most of the cities on earth will either be underwater or have nice new beachfront property.

      --
      People in Soviet Russia, however, appear to be afflicted with amusing juxtapositions of the aforementioned situation
    82. Re:Either/or by vipw · · Score: 1

      why would they deserve it? i don't understand the reasoning of why they would.

    83. Re:Either/or by Squalish · · Score: 1

      Experiment: Count the number of conversations on slashdot where each side exaggerates their rhetoric, each side selectively picks their statistics and quotes, and each side plays with facts as if they were play-dough. Keep counting. And counting. What? You havnt found an argument where this doesnt happen? Interesting.

      --
      People in Soviet Russia, however, appear to be afflicted with amusing juxtapositions of the aforementioned situation
    84. Re:Either/or by notsoanonymouscoward · · Score: 2

      I believe that what I posted is known as black humor. I've actually had many an interesting conversation with homeless people, some of whom, if you would believe it, actually enjoy the lifestyle. As to your hypothetical. If one became chronically ill in the US, they would get disability. Their home (if they were at least semi intelligent) would be homesteaded (and thus protected). In america, you wouldn't lose your house, nor would you be freezing under a bridge. Now what were we talking about?

      --
      I ate my sig.
    85. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans did help save our ass in WW2, and we're still very greatfull for that, make no mistake.

      WW1 was a different story. Nobody seems to know that. WW1 was, althoug it's called a world war, mostly a european war. Almost every European country had an alliance with one other country in the sense of "When you get attacked, we help defend you. The snowball started rolling in the balkan, and four years later a staggering number of soldiers were dead, on all sides. There wasn't any real winner, but Germany was definetely the looser. They got squeezed to hard with repair payements, pushed deeper into crisis and hey presto, the way was paved for the next world war. The Nazi's came to power via the democratic system, and then destroyed it. Even more people died.

      The motives for the Marshal plan were purely economical; America needed a strong Europe to trade with after the war. There are worse motives to my opinion, but don't be naive, every nations governement puts its own interests first. Seems logical to me. And as long as the interests of the free nations of the world are common, which I clearly think they are, there's no need for bashing. So I wasn't bashing America. I was bashing an eralier post though, and I'm way of topic :-)

    86. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When the trees die, rott or are made into paper wich is burned or rotts, they evapore the same amount of CO2 they ate before.

      Who says you have to let it rot?

      Wood can last for centuries.

      For that matter we could always fertilize the surface of the (essentially lifeless) deep oceans and tie up CO2 in plankton which would sink to the depths, never to be seen again (hint: carbonate skeletons of marine creatures do not "rot", as a rule).

      Sorry if that interferes with your wolf-crying.

      By the way, let us know when you stop using your computer and get your electricity turned off.

    87. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      about a lot of mutual misunderstandings, I'm beginning to think. Europeans and Americans know far too little of each other.
      I know it was black humour , but I wasn't in the mood

    88. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would they be worthless? They worked their arse of, and now they're fired. That's not the companys fault, it's economy, that's how it works, right, but that doesn't make them worthless.
      Why do they deserve it? Why do people deserve respect for their human rights ? It's the same kind of ethical question.

      One reason why people would be willing to pay for a social security net is that, even if they have a great job that pays well, they still might need it themselfs one day. That's a much more down to earth reason than the ethical blabla.

      Unless you're very rich and you don't need a job, then wy pay? I don't know, I'm not rich

    89. Re:Either/or by caca_phony · · Score: 1

      My point is that it does not matter how many forests you replant, these forests will take 30 years to develope to the state in which they are now. We need to reduce CO2 emissions.

      I agree with your intent with this statement, but many forests (the Pacific NorthWestern Rainforests for example) will take hundreds, even thousands of years to reach their previous state.

      --
      ...and this lie crawls out of its mouth: 'I, the state, am the people.'
    90. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But as you say, 93% of the ice is below the water level, so the volume of the ice below the water gets replaced with water, meaning only 7% of the volume of the ice actually goes towards raising the sea level. Also, ice is less dense than water (which is why it floats), so by mass, the water from melted ice has less volume than the original ice.

      Even so, obviously it's still a problem; just not as great a magnitude as you illustrate.

    91. Re:Either/or by vipw · · Score: 1

      there's nothing ethical about using the government to force people to pay them. a social security net would be just fine if you weren't forced to participate. if you want to pay people for something other than something you want from them, it's up to you, as well it should be, but i don't think it's reasonable to force me to as well.

      i only pay, uncompelled, for something i want in return, and i realize that makes me different than a lot of people. i'm forced to conform though, by penalty of imprisonment; i don't think that is ethical.

    92. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I see you really need to take a "primary school" biology course yourself.

      CO2 and H2O within plants is converted into glucose and has O2 as the byproduct. There is no "CO2" remainder in the plant. Period. If this was true, all life on earth would have died a long time ago from asphyxiation due to the atmosphere having too little oxygen.

    93. Re:Either/or by osgeek · · Score: 2

      Your post is a case in point.

      I've heard plenty of pundits on the environmentalists' side that have espoused imminent death, from a circa 1970 documentary I remember watching in school that predicted that by the 1990's acid rain might reach deadly proportions -- to the early 1990's, when Ted Danson predicted that within ten years, our environment would collapse. How about when Jimmy Carter told the nation that we had 50 years of petroleum left in the world? Uhoh... we'd better start hording now!

      And if by some chance you're claiming that the "other" side is the one that I've grossly exaggerated, just spend a few days listening to Rush Limbaugh, you'll hear him say directly that man has had little if no impact upon the environment.

      Get your head out of your ass and realize that your side is almost equally culpable in the attempted slaying of the truth.

      People like me who are in the middle have no respect for you extremists, and we won't support you until you start pushing facts, not dogma.

    94. Re:Either/or by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      > Yes, but in Europe the difference between rich and
      > poor is a lot smaller, which means that the middle
      > class is much larger and there's less poor people

      Either that or you tax the hell out of the rich (new earnings, anyway. Old money is still well intact) causing slow economies, grinding much R&D to a halt, such that other countries with less oppressive policies have to do the bulk of technological advancement.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    95. Re:Either/or by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      Got your ticket to Canada ready that fast, eh?

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    96. Re:Either/or by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      And by the way, its the French that look great with asses stuffed into tight jeans, the English that have magnificent, pendulous breasts, the Germans that are lying nude in nude parks and the Belgians are nude on the beaches. Well, the gigantic Dutch women are, anyway.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    97. Re:Either/or by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      While the (waterbound) ice would take up 4% less volume when melted (IIRC) the ice amounts to a floating ship, which is to say, it won't alter the height of the ocean when it melts. A trillion tons of ice or a trillion tons of water at the north pole won't change the sea level.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    98. Re:Either/or by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      Yes, it will take up less volume, but that extra volume is paid for by what's above the water level. Like a boat, it's effect on sea level is already considered. If it melts, no net change.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    99. Re:Either/or by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      > ah yes the water line might rise as much as 600
      > feet at certain latitudes (that is a southern
      > californian latitude estimate)

      I live in Michigan and am about at 630-680 feet above sea level IIRC. Look where Michigan is on the map.

      > but if Ice is expanded water then nobody really
      > knows that if 80% is submerged and then the ice
      > melts, maybe the ocean won't really rise at all!

      The ice on the water will have no net gain or loss as it's presence, like a boat, is already taken into account on sea level.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    100. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that doesn't work when the ice is floating. put some ice in a glass and then fill it up to the very top. when the ice melts, the glass won't overflow because the part of the ice floating above the water is almost exactly equal to the difference in volume between ice and water

    101. Re:Either/or by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      > We need to reduce CO2 emissions.

      Or we could stop passing laws that mandate no yard waste or newspapers in landfills, and mandating landfills with air holes that biodegrade.

      Shovel all that stuff in and seal it up. Seriously. One of the proposed ways to suck CO2 out of the atmosphere is to plant fast growth forests, chop them down, and bury them in sealed landfills.

      So, if you have a mulch pile in the backyard, thanks for heating up the planet, fool.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    102. Re:Either/or by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      Biodegredation is the same as burning, more or less. The carbon all goes back as CO2 into the atmosphere, not as a pile of glucose goo on the ground.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    103. Re:Either/or by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      > Btw. trees are not the only plant to bind carbon,
      > actually more carbon can be/is bound in form of
      > algae in the sea.

      90% IIRC. Land plant life is almost irrelevant.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    104. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AC makes the environment less challenging but isn't life or death.

      Do you read news sometimnes?

      http://asia.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/05/ 16 / ndia.deadlyheat.ap/index.html

      May 16, 2002 Posted: 9:24 PM HKT (1324 GMT)

      HYDERABAD, India (AP) -- A heat wave has killed 450 people over the past week in the sweltering coastal belt of the southern Indian state of Andhra Pradesh.

    105. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      European economy suffered far less from the recent crisis, even before 9-11, than the US. Were doing fine actually. The biggests misconception of European politics by Americans seems to be that they think its oppressive. It isn't.

    106. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see your point and it's not an immoral one. So you'll use your democratic right to vote for a governement that supports lower taxes. Good.

      But suppose the people that were very rich suddenly said : "hey now, we're not paying any taxes from now on" There's this geek for example who has enough assets to buy the entire airline industry, or twenty or so space shuttles... What if he said, "I pay the infrastructure I need myself, I don't care about the rest".
      Then who's going to pay for construction of roads, sewerage systems, national security etc...

    107. Re:Either/or by darkwhite · · Score: 2

      A few inches is wrong. See the replies above. But also...

      Among other things, disappearing ice in polar regions will mean changed reflective index of earth surface in polar regions, which means more heat absorption from sun, which means a rise in global temperatures. BTW, any lands "released for use" in arctic regions will be countered thousandfold by lands in the tropical region becoming deserts because of rising global temperature and changing precipitation patterns.

      --

      [an error occurred while processing this directive]
    108. Re:Either/or by gjhut · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the calculation was about ice on *land*. The water coming from this ice will be fully added to the oceans, instead of replacing the volume of ice it was. For as far as the ice mass itself was above sealevel, of course.

    109. Re:Either/or by freddled · · Score: 1

      Most of the ice in the Antarctic is 3000m (thats 12,000 feet) above sea level.

    110. Re:Either/or by freddled · · Score: 1

      How exactly will you use land created by glacier retreat ? Most of it is (dohh) in the mountains and inaccessible (dohh), it will be covered in rocks and have a meltwater river running (dohh) down the middle and (dohh) the smell of rotting mammoth will be (dohh) offensive (dohh, dohh) (dohh)

    111. Re:Either/or by Alex+Belits · · Score: 2

      Oh. So it's third-world peasants that consume increasing amount of energy, that for some reason mysteriously registers as being consumed in US. Damn energy smugglers!

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    112. Re:Either/or by vipw · · Score: 1

      so you sock it to that one guy on taxes because he can't defend himself against democracy.

      it sounds like he's the one getting screwed in the current system, but it can also be argued that he derives great benefits from things like roads and national security that build stable economic channels that his wares can be sold in. it's very difficult determining who deserves to be taxed, because it's not exactly an opt-in system.:)

    113. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe that Godwin's Law has been invoked.

    114. Re:Either/or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the geek I had in mind is one who's screwing everybody else, but that's a whole different story :-)

      it's true, it's not an opt-in system, but for the majority it works better thant the "every man for him self - survival of the fittest" system. Civilisation is a social structure by definition.

    115. Re:Either/or by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1
      If the plant is rotting microbes are EATING the plant, burning the carbon in the plant with atmospheric O2 back to CO2.

      I thought the result of this process was mostly methane, not CO2. Am I wrong?

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    116. Re:Either/or by dbrutus · · Score: 2

      One of the unresolved questions is whether the effect of increased evaporation due to global warming outweighs the rise due to the reduced glacier areas.

      http://www.co2andclimate.org/Articles/2000/sea.h tm

      The real answer is that noboy knows for sure how all of this is going to play out which is why the apocalyptics are so desperate to close debate and get some kind of phony consensus accepted via browbeating any real scientific dissent.

      Science shouldn't work that way and any true scientist should be worried about efforts to shut down discussion and twist data.

    117. Re:Either/or by dbrutus · · Score: 2

      Another possibility is to divide the plate (The Americas provide a real world example). As another person in this thread mentioned, the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of Panama differ by 8 inches.

      I would suggest you look up the Simpson effect which says that greenhouse effect increases in temperatures can cause increased snowfall in polar regions. So would the increased polar snow mitigate, entirely cancel, or exceed the snow melt caused by the increased temps? Nobody seems to have run the numbers properly yet.

      Here's a decent article.

      http://www.co2andclimate.org/Articles/2000/sea.h tm

    118. Re:Either/or by dbrutus · · Score: 2

      The problem is that the system is naturally shifting in a direction we don't know. We can't even measure the damn thing right (see the differential between satellite and ground station temp readings, one shows no warming the other does), and you propose that somebody building a factory is supposed to prove that they don't have a bad impact on the environment? This is a bad joke.

    119. Re:Either/or by alan_d_post · · Score: 1

      Given that we don't understand the system, we should be careful with it. We do understand what goes into and comes out of a factory, and we do know how to do things in such a way that the factory blends in nicely with existing natural processes. We can simply avoid doing things that might or might not be dangerous, such as massively increasing the CO2 levels, or spewing dioxins into the water system, or nuking everything in sight with pesticides, nitrates, nad phosphates.

      This sort of approach would involve much lower levels of production, but we can deal with that by distributing the results more equally, and by discouraging conspicuous consumption. Just think about all the stuff that gets produced that nobody really needs.

      This is not a bad joke -- if anything, surely massively overproducing (notice the current recession) while poisoning our streams (witness collapsing amphibian populations) and pumping our aquifers dry (over much the midwest) is more of a tragic comedy.

    120. Re:Either/or by dbrutus · · Score: 2

      But the global warming movement is predicated on the position that we *do* understand the system. If the inputs that humans make are not going to affect world climate, why would we ever lower production when we have people dying for the lack of production?

      From your comments on equal distribution it's clear that you haven't studied the real, practical, and very destructive effects of government monkeying around with distribution systems. Traditional food exporters tend to become food importers when markets are destroyed and replaced by 'equal distribution' via government. The effects are pretty much the same across all sectors. Private control of the means of production and distribution systems via contract, not ration coupon, lead to abundance. The problem is where governments steal so much that the people have no money and that is something that doesn't get solved by abolishing the free market.

      This isn't to say that no environmental regulations are warranted. Until we, as a society, figure out how to make a functioning market in pollution rights, regulation is the best route for now but CO2 as a pollutant? Come off it. If we were to deploy machines to remove 100% of the CO2 from the atmosphere, we would have huge plant kills downwind of the facilities.

      The easy pollution gains have largely been made. In the 1st world, we're spending more and more to get incrementally less gain. That's not a very good use of resources.

      As for the business cycle, the free market maybe gets production levels right 60% of the time. But government led alternative systems get it right maybe 20% of the time. So should we sacrifice the not so good for the truly pathetic? Why would we ever do that?

    121. Re:Either/or by alan_d_post · · Score: 1

      But the global warming movement is predicated on the position that we *do* understand the system.

      The idea that humans may be affecting the climate is based on the imperfect knowledge we have about the world. The question is how to act in the presence of uncertainty: to plunge blindly ahead with our experiment, or to back off? To plunge ahead with possibly horrid results seems very irresponsible to me.

      why would we ever lower production when we have people dying for the lack of production?

      The problem is not with production. The world produces enough food for everyone; the problem is that much of it goes to feed animals which are later eaten by overfed first-worlders. That step of the process loses about a factor of ten in food energy. The reason people are dying is that those who *have* food just don't care about those who *don't* -- mostly because there is no money to be made in feeding them. Likewise with medicine. It doesn't cost that much to manufacture most medicines after they have been developed. The US is pushing every country in the world to honor US drug patents so that Merck & co. will have ever-increasing margins, and never you mind all those dying people. Public sanitation (clean water systems, proper sewage management, etc.) is more expensive to set up, but hardly beyond the means of our technology. All that is lacking is will. The current economic/political system is building weapons, cars, action figures, etc. instead.

      From your comments on equal distribution it's clear that you haven't studied the real, practical, and very destructive effects of government monkeying around with distribution systems.

      Ah, you must be referring to Social Security, unemployment benefits, progressive taxation, and so on.

      Traditional food exporters tend to become food importers when markets are destroyed and replaced by 'equal distribution' via government.

      I am not arguing for a command (aka state capitalist) economy a la the USSR. I have no more desire to go to the gulag than you do. Besides, such systems didn't really lead to equality, because control of the system is still in the hands of an elite. Perhaps you are not familiar with what happened in Catalonia in the late 30's: the farmers collectivized themselves, and got along spendidly. They produced plenty of food -- unfortunately, much of it went to feed the militiamen who were fighting the Fascists.

      Private control of the means of production and distribution via contract, not ration coupon, lead to abundance.

      Abundance for some, definitely. I'm getting along quite well. Unfortunately, those less highly valued by those Private Controllers end up in bad shape.

      The problem is where governments steal so much that the people have no money and that is something that doesn't get solved by abolishing the free market.

      You really believe that people are evil enough to have no desire to help their fellow humans? Even if you think that is so, must it be so? Or could it be that there is something self-fulfilling about the "humans as selfish automatons" economists' model?

      What I'm suggesting is that greater equality of distribution is possible without the coercion of an all-powerful state.

      Until we, as a society, figure out how to make a functioning market in pollution rights...

      Why the obsession with markets? Do you really think it is always appropriate for the richest person to get his way? Could it be that people in poor areas are just as deserving of healthy surroundings as people in rich areas?

      If we were to deploy machines to remove 100% of the CO2 from the atmosphere, we would have huge plant kills downwind of the facilities.

      Which is exactly the sort of thing I'm arguing against. I would prefer that we avoid a crisis situation that would require technological "fixes." Plunging ahead with risky alterations of natural systems implies either: a) total disregard for future events, or b) faith that people in the future will be able to fix anything that goes wrong because of our current actions.

      The easy pollution gains have largely been made. In the 1st world, we're spending more and more to get incrementally less gain. That's not a very good use of resources.

      This is the first thing you've said that sounds at all sensible to me. I agree that there is an important tactical issue w.r.t. fixing problems in the first world or in the third world. Keep in mind, though, that *everyone* will need to eventually adopt the conservative approach if we are to avoid natural crises later. Who will figure out how to do this, if not the richest areas?

      As for the business cycle, the free market maybe gets production levels right 60% of the time.

      Right according to whose measurement? From what I see, it looks like rampant overproduction for my entire lifetime. Why else would we need to be constantly bombarded by adverts imploring us to consume ever more? The soda companies are trying to get everyone to stop drinking tap water so that they can make a few more bucks -- but all that soda is just wasted productive capacity!

      But government led alternative systems get it right maybe 20% of the time.

      I assume here you are referring to command economies. Where did you get your 20% number from? The USSR glorified production over all else, mangling their land even worse than US-aligned countries. Of course the *nature* of the production was largely military, and so didn't help provide people with the comforts that those in the US enjoyed.

      So should we sacrifice the not so good for the truly pathetic?

      Not at all. We should avoid totalitarian governments at all costs. If you haven't noticed, the US and China are sort of converging on a private capitalist/repressive police state arrangement that, as far as I can see, combines the worst of both systems.

      What I hope for is not either of the options you have presented, but instead for real democratic control of the economic/political system. I think there is much to learn from the Spanish Revolution. How to apply those ideas to the more complex and far-flung economic arrangements of today is a difficult question, but I think an important one.

    122. Re:Either/or by dbrutus · · Score: 2

      You are woefully uneducated about economics. Price signals are the only system yet discovered to ensure that we have a working economy that is sustainable. You are echoing a million failed reformers but at least they had the excuse that their ideas had not been tried. the bloody results of trying to seriously run economies without meaningful price signals (economics via caring or planning, or rationing) are well documented and at this point in human knowledge what you are proposing goes beyond niave, it is monstrously evil.

      Social Security and the rest of the welfare apparatus is an intergenerational tax on our future. You may find palming off the cost of our benefits on to our children to be acceptable but I don't. The costs rise and rise while benefits are stagnant or shrink. There is a breaking point and we are fast reaching it in SS, healthcare, and a host of other leftist bribes to the electorate of a few generations ago. We'll either give these opiates up or lose our freedom. To some extent we already have.

      In countries that were not blessed with a long period of economic freedom, socialist utopias fail quicker. There may be a lot of ruin in a nation, but eventually the nation does fall, no matter how rich it was in the past.

      Back to climate, chaotic systems (of which the climate is one) are not perfectly predictable because they are heavily initial condition dependent. They can, however, be relatively stable which climate obviously is. The problem of global warming isn't whether we effect climate, an individual exhalation does that, it is rather whether our effects are enough to knock us out of our current main pattern into a new one and whether or not that new pattern would be better than the current one. It is *those* questions that are not well resolved.

    123. Re:Either/or by alan_d_post · · Score: 1

      Do you actually care about other people at all? I'm just trying to figure out where you're coming from here.

      About my education -- I am quite well educated, thank you. Unlike many people, however, I don't accept mainstream economics uncritically.

      About redistribution schemes -- if you haven't noticed, societies with *no* redistribution schemes, and private capitalism, tend to extreme inequality, which breeds revolution. The 19th century has plenty of examples of this in Europe. And FDR's New Deal was a (somewhat successful) attempt to ameliorate the Depression so that the starving masses would not simply overthrow the government.

      I don't at all see how a welfare state is doomed. The people who predict the collapse of SS ignore the fact that allocating a bit more money to SS would close up the projected funding gap. Those people are also the same people who advocate dumping the SS funds into the stock market, so that their friends can make lots of money on the commissions.

      As far as what has worked in the past, I don't see how you addressed my point. I did not defend command economies (they have obviously failed), nor did I attack the existence of money or prices. The possibility I raise is that production could be controlled democratically, from the bottom up, rather than from the top down (the top being either the state or the private owners). You reject out of hand any possibility that we could build something better than the current situation. I ask again that you read a bit about the Spanish Revolution. For a brief time at least (~2 years), the workers really did control the whole apparatus of the economy, and from what I've read it worked quite well. Again, I'm not suggesting that I have all the answers -- just that something better than the current situation may be possible.

      Also, when considering what has worked in the past, you also need to keep in mind the context that various nasty people (the Fascists w.r.t Spain, the CIA w.r.t. Chile in 1973 and democracies all over the Third World over the last 50 years, the Bolsheviks in the Ukraine during the Russian Revolution) have been working to destroy anything that looked like bottom-up control of the system.

      About the climate -- yes, the question is how stable the system is. We don't know. We have good reason to believe it is not stable, given its erratic behavior in the past. For instance, the Little Ice Age in Europe -- the theory is that it was caused by a change in the Gulf Stream, so that northern Europe was temporarily not warmed by the ocean as much. Given that these things happen spontaneously, I think it's a dubious assertion that the system is stable.

      But, like you said, we can't know for sure how stable the system is. So what do we do? Hope for the best, full steam ahead? Or be careful?

    124. Re:Either/or by wheany · · Score: 1

      They will have all the credits that they need to polute two to three times more per capita.

      So does Finland, 76% forest compared to 54% of Canada. Sweden has 68%, Brazil 58%, Congo 77%, USA 30%(CIA world factbook)

    125. Re:Either/or by j-beda · · Score: 2
      Maybe I am not reading you correctly, but my understanding of what you are saying is incorrect. Go perform the experiment if you doubt my exposition.

      Things float when they displace an amount of water equal in weight to their total weight. Thus if you wanted to cause an object weighting 1 pound to float, it will need to displace exactly one pound of water. Thus it needs to have a volume equal to or greater than the volume of one pound of water in order to float. Any extra volume greater than the volume of one pound of water will stick up above the surface of the wanter that the object if floating in.

      Now take a pound of ice. Since ice is less dense than water a pound of ice will have a volume greater than a pound of liquid water. Thus it will float in liquid water. When a pound of ice is floating, it will displace exactly the volume of one pound of water, and the extra volume of ice will stick up above the water.

      What hapens when this floating ice melts? Well, obviously it turns into a pound of water, and less obviously, in the process it decreases its volume because as previously stated, the density of liquid water is greater than the density of ice. The pound of water-that-was-ice will exactly fill the hole displace by the ice floating in water, since that hole was exactly the volume of one pound of water.

      Thus, floating ice melting does not change the level of the water as it melts.

      There are subtle differences when we start mixing fresh-water-icebergs in a salt-water-ocean, but they do not have a great effect, I think.

    126. Re:Either/or by j-beda · · Score: 2
      There is a book called the Sceptial Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg which I think you might like: http://www.easyfiction.co.uk/Bjorn-Lomborg-Sceptic al-Environmentalis-0521804477.html

      Scientific America did a fairly lenghtly piece on this in their January 2002 issue which pointed out a large number of fundamental flaws in the book. They had a breif rebuttal the next issue and further disussion in the letters to the editor. Pretty interesting, but Bjorn doesn't seem very persuasive in that forum at least.

  4. Chip cooling? by gowen · · Score: 4, Funny

    The only chip cooling you ever need is vinegar and ketchup. (Oh wait, most of you are Americans and will call those "fries"... Forget I mentioned it)

    --
    Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    1. Re:Chip cooling? by DarkHelmet · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      Only in England does no mean yes, pissed means drunk, and a french fry is referred to as a "chip".

      Now stop driving on the wrong side of the road before I take away your tea time. :)

      --
      /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
    2. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you call both the thin crunchy ones and the long, thin fried ones "chips"? How do you distinguish?

    3. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vinegar on fries? Gross dude.

    4. Re:Chip cooling? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      and WTF do you think Ketchup is made from? Tomatos and...

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    5. Re:Chip cooling? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      no. the things that you call "chips" we call crisps. So it's "Potato Crisps" rather than "Potatoe Chips". I presume that you spell potato this way since your former VP did...

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    6. Re:Chip cooling? by Nakago4 · · Score: 1

      At least he didn't say mayonaisse on fries.

    7. Re:Chip cooling? by G-funk · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Quiet yankie, us aussies get chips (unless we're at maccas), and i got half-pissed watching starwars in gold class this arvo.

      Oh yeah yoda is... hmmm... tough :-)

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    8. Re:Chip cooling? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      whats's wrong with that? Mayo works pretty well on chips. Why are Americans so blinkered about this kind of stuff? I know McDonald's stuff is ultra bland, but I was always quite partial to a Whopper or three.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    9. Re:Chip cooling? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Only in America pommes frites are called french fries.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    10. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you explain the "no mean yes" bit - I don't understand that at all.

      You're actually 100% wrong on how they refer to french frys - it is in the US where a "chip" (when you can get them) is called a french fry. In the UK, a french fry is called a (french) fry, and a chip is called a chip. Makes sense to me.

    11. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But only Belgians now how to fry - whatever you call'm - properly. And they eat it with mayonaise. Yes, we f'ng drown 'm in that shit.

      Oh god, now, I' going to explain to all you Americans where the heck Belgium is!
      Well it's the country of which Brussels is the capital and NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

    12. Re:Chip cooling? by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Oh come on, everyone knows they were invented in Belgium. And what you call 'chips' were originally sold as Saratoga Crisps, so we're right there too.

    13. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Belgium

      Watch your mouth, young man!

    14. Re:Chip cooling? by Surlyboi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh god, now, I' going to explain to all you Americans where the heck Belgium is!

      Sure you wanna do that? We've got a bone to pick
      with you for sending over that Van Damme guy.

      And don't get me started on the sprouts...

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine...
    15. Re:Chip cooling? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      Only in America pommes frites are called french fries.
      Indeed. "Frites" are not from France, but from Belgium.
    16. Re:Chip cooling? by alecbrown · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Wrong, Chips are big and juicy, and you get them from a 'Chippie' - where you can also buy fish, (French) Fries are small, skinny, taste of nothing and come from McDonalds. French Fries here are also a type of Crisps that somewhat resemble McDonalds fries except they are crispier and taste of vinegar.

      I was told once that McDonalds used to use reconstituted chicken feathers for the starch in their Fries, mmm. And I don't know if any of you /.ers saw the program on McDonalds on the BBC a couple of weeks ago - it was a real eye-opener when they quoted the food poisoning outbreaks in the US and some food expert said that they were due to Faeces (that's poo to you) in the Big Macs, mmm tasty.

    17. Re:Chip cooling? by Devilgate · · Score: 1

      > Only in England does no mean yes, pissed means
      > drunk, and a french fry is referred to as a
      > "chip"

      And in Scotland, Wales and Ireland, for most of it. But what's this about no meaning yes?

      Martin.

    18. Re:Chip cooling? by Mr+Reaney · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Vinegar and what?

      Oh, you mean red sauce....

    19. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The only chip cooling you ever need is vinegar and ketchup.

      You brits put vinegar on your french fries?!

      ...

      I guess I should come with some insult at this point, but I can't. See, it's morning over here.

    20. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canadians also get 'pissed'.

    21. Re:Chip cooling? by chickenman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      And in england you guys fed dead cows to cows
      and had kill most of them because they had madcow. Also who knows how many people in you country got human form which takes a while set in. well food posioning seems be very common in the uk due to
      the same beef digestive bacteria which kill several 100 people in you counrty from ordinary butcher shops.

    22. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're referring to the f-word then pardon my French, but it's a line from Pulp Fiction.
      A rather funny one to.
      I think.

    23. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BSE rate in the US is far higher than all of europe put together, you're just unniformed.

    24. Re:Chip cooling? by Fjord · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      or gravy and cheese curd, for the French Canadians out there.

      --
      -no broken link
    25. Re:Chip cooling? by spike+hay · · Score: 2

      it is in the US where a "chip" (when you can get them) is called a french fry.

      Since when have us USians called french fries chips!? Here, we call them fries.

      --
      If you don't understand any of my sayings, come to me in private and I shall take you in my German mouth.
    26. Re:Chip cooling? by scjelli · · Score: 0

      anybody want an old 386 french fry?

    27. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what the hells with all the BS?

    28. Re:Chip cooling? by CaseyB · · Score: 2

      No kidding. Everyone knows that you should have cheese curds and gravy on fries, as God intended.

    29. Re:Chip cooling? by Paul+Jakma · · Score: 2

      hmmm.... patat frite.

      or even better sate sauce (spicy peanuty sauce from indonesia i /think/) and mayonaise with a sprinkling of onion on chips -> patat oorlog - hmmmm.....

      --paulj

      --
      I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
    30. Re:Chip cooling? by David+Greene · · Score: 1
      You, my friend, need to discover the wonderful world of french fries (sorry, chips) and malt vinegar. Yum!

      Those Brits know their chips. Give it a try.

      --

    31. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We know where Belgium is, Belgium is the military expressway to Paris!

    32. Re:Chip cooling? by DLWormwood · · Score: 1

      ...and most of us Americans probably scoff at vinegar on fries on top of that. Then again, I've known a few that like mayo...

      (Personally, I find vinegar's ideal for high grease "county fair" style chips/fries.)

      --
      Those who complain about affect & effect on /. should be disemvoweled
    33. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no.

      "The Most Gratuitous Use of the Word 'Belgium' in a Serious Screenplay."

      H2G2.

    34. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but that's got all those tomatos too. Comparing vinegar to ketchup is like comparing fat to steak. Yeah, it's in there, but I wouldn't want it alone.

      Ans now they've got those vinegar potato chips. GACK!!! Nasty stuff.

    35. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...can't think of anything more derogitory to call them than Belgians..."

    36. Re:Chip cooling? by 56ker · · Score: 2

      I'm not American I'm British - but then I hate chips, dislike ketchup and salt & vinegar. Just call me strange!

    37. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmm, watch it, the Germans already made that mistake in World War 1. They got stuck in Ipre, Belgium.

    38. Re:Chip cooling? by cwilkins · · Score: 1

      No kidding. Everyone knows that you should have cheese curds and gravy on fries, as God intended.

      Mmmm... You from Canada? I went up there many years ago for a ski trip, got some of those (I forget what they called them -- it was french -- something fromage...) and promptly fell in love with the dish.

      Back in the states, I would make attempts to procure them in places that seemed cooperative and had the right ingredients. Boy, talk about some funny looks...

      Of course with all the gravy and melted cheese, they are very hot at first, and there you have a chip cooling problem. I'm on topic now, HAH!! ;)

      --
      -- Charlie Wilkinson Freelance Deity - Fire & Brimstone in Stock - Smiting While-U-Wait!
    39. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...but though even words like jujuflop, swut and turlingdrome are now
      perfectly acceptable in common usage, there is one word that is still
      beyond the pale. The concept it embodies is so revolting that the
      publication or broadcast of the word is utterly forbidden in all parts
      of the galaxy except one, where they don't know what it means.
      That word is... BELGIUM."
      (Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Fit the Tenth)

    40. Re:Chip cooling? by blowhole · · Score: 2

      Since when have us USians called french fries chips!? Here, we call them fries.

      An obvious double agent... or a disgrace to our nation

      --
      "Ask me about Loom"
    41. Re:Chip cooling? by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      Having been to the Netherlands (it ain't just Belgium) I can concur as to the vast superiority of mayonnaise on French fries.

      I do believe "poutine" (?) in Canada wins, though, as it is cheese curds (?) and gravy on fries.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    42. Re:Chip cooling? by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      A lot more than Brits use vinegar on fries. Detroit Motor Speedway used to specialize in those. Ketchup? Someone needs to build a machine to keep up with all the face slaps needed.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    43. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're strange.

    44. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all media hype and politician panic, only about 30 people have had CJD ever (and it cannot be diagnosed until after death. Scrapies (the sheep form) has been around for thousands of years all over the world, whose to say that CJD isn't from Scrapies - there haven't been enough cases to really understand it fdrom what can tell.

      Food poisoning gets blown up out of all proportion in this country due to our free tabloid media and the fact that the health system is all publicly funded. If we had a proper health system where people actually paid for it, we probably wouldn't have so many widly reported problems, but health seems to be something that most people here are not prepared to pay for as thet think it should be a given. I don't understand it.

    45. Re:Chip cooling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Learn to spell, you stupid fuck.

  5. refusal ? by audionoom · · Score: 1

    from the Boeing press release Boeing has the right of first refusal on this new technology for aerospace applications.

    Euh - probably legaleese for saying "it's ours, we refuse to give it others from now on"

    --
    Knowledge first. Social contact later.
    1. Re:refusal ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      It means that Boeing has secured the right that, if any other company tenders an offer for (exclusive?) rights to the technology, Boeing is guaranteed the right to match or beat the offer before the deal is made.

    2. Re:refusal ? by arivanov · · Score: 2

      No, this means that someone already has claimed it and Boeing the next in the line if the first claimant drops out of the deal.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    3. Re:refusal ? by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2

      No, Egg Dye had it right. Boeing has the rights to buy the technology first for aerospace applications. If they pass, then Cool Chips can take it to whomever they wish. Nobody is in line ahead of Boeing.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    4. Re:refusal ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just means they have the right to pre-empt sale to a third party on the same arm's length terms. This
      is a common business practice between partners
      which share other common business interests. It
      certainly does not stop a 3rd party from bidding
      and amount higher than Boeing is willing to pay,
      and taking product rights anyway.

  6. Solid State Cooling! by zodar · · Score: 1

    Maybe that'll cut down on the 120db fan drone in our computer lab. The silence in here is deafening.

  7. Insufficently geeky by 00_NOP · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Shouldn't they be called Kewl Chips?

  8. Mirror by ChiPHeaD23 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here's the Google cache for those too lazy to find it themselves.

    1. Re:Mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you link google by numeric ip instead of name? Isn't this better?

    2. Re:Mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I think he was trying to see how many people would be afraid of a goatse.cx trap.

    3. Re:Mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and?
      how many were there?

      I am really interested to know, because I'm doing a study for netcraft.

      I think I'm gonna "Ask Slashdot" next, because I'm very b0red.

  9. Local over heating by brejc8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We have been workingb on asynchronous chips which slow down when the chip heats up. The problem with having super high heat producing chips and a great big super high enegry sucking heat sink is that the chip will have hot and cold regions. These hotspots will get hotter as the gradient gets larger. The problem is that clocked design will not be able to cope with a small area of the chip being slow. Anly a very localy generated clock can cope with it and slow down the circuit.

    1. Re:Local over heating by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2

      Having hot spots on a chip is indeed a problem for cooling, but not a problem to which superior cooling cannot be effectively applied. Clocked designs can quite easily cope with a small area of the chip being slow, and they always have. Those are called "speed paths", and the maximum frequency at which your slowest speed path can operate defines the maximum frequency of your chip. If you have a hotspot that is causing that portion of the chip to run slower, having better cooling will cool off all portions of the chip, including the hotspot, causing it run faster, and therefore increasing the max frequency. Hot spots make the need for more efficient cooling greater.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:Local over heating by brejc8 · · Score: 1

      Well all very nice dynamicly changing your system frequency by detecting that an area of the chip has been working too hard and had wormed up some what. unfortunately nearly impossible. You cant have probes all over the chip and slow down the whole system because one gets too many operations. Imagine if you started running a 3d game and then your performance drops horrificly because your multiplyer is working too hard and getting hot.

    3. Re:Local over heating by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2

      The research I did into exactly that not withstanding, there is no need to dynamically tune frequency or detect hot spots on the chip on the fly. Who said anything about doing that?

      There are a number of reasons. First, the chip designers are aware of the maximum power of the chip. This is the power dissipated in a theoretical worst case where everything (eg the multiplier) is working constantly. It may never happen in real life, but if it did, that is how much power would be dissipated. That is the power disipation that the thermal guidelines are designed for. Second, the frequency at which a part is shipped is determined by worst-case conditions minus some margin. In other words, there is no need to detect if the worst case is occuring and slow down, because the worst case has already been assumed and the clock frequency set for that case!

      And this estimate is generally quite pessimistic. As can be seen by 1) the success of overclocking most chips and 2) Intel's clock gating at a power output much lower than maximum, which hasn't impacted their performance in non-overclocked benchmarks, including 3d games.

      Honestly, if what you said was remotely true, modern clocked processors wouldn't work as soon as you put them under load, which is clearly not the case.

      Back to the subject of having an exceptional cooler -- if you cool down the entire chip, you cool down the entire chip. A hot spot will still be hotter than other areas, but it will be cooler than it was before. This is obvious. When that happens, your maximum clock frequency increases, as I said. Perhaps this is what made you think I was talking about doing this dynamically. While a useful concept, it isn't necessary. If you're just doing normal overclocking, rebooting the machine to change frequencies, you can still get a higher speed with a better cooler.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    4. Re:Local over heating by brejc8 · · Score: 1

      Unforntnately retarding your cpu to the worst possible conditions each time is silly. The P4s look at the temerature and dynamicly slow themselves down to half speed when they need to. This practise is not only ging to get more common but will be expanded and used at finer granularities. Who would buy a P4 if in its worst possible stage, data and enviroment vareables it run at 1G? When you start having clock gating it will only cool down the processor on average executions (pending loops etc.). And thus has no point as the chip would still work at exactly thesame speed as the worst possible scenario with none of the gating being turned on.
      The next set of high power precessors will have finer temperature detection and will retard only parts of the chip that are going mad.
      Eather that or async logic will kick in.

    5. Re:Local over heating by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Informative

      Unforntnately retarding your cpu to the worst possible conditions each time is silly.

      No, it's sound engineering.

      Who would buy a P4 if in its worst possible stage, data and enviroment vareables it run at 1G?

      What are you talking about? This is true right now, but the P4 is still selling well. This is because if you have proper cooling and are running the cpu in spec, you never see the clock halving occur. The observation is that while the maximum power is X, you rarely if ever see power usage above Y in real workloads. Without this feature, you would still have to design for power X, since it -might- happen. This way, you can design for power Y.

      When you start having clock gating it will only cool down the processor on average executions (pending loops etc.).And thus has no point as the chip would still work at exactly thesame speed as the worst possible scenario with none of the gating being turned on.

      Once again, what are you talking about? Clock-gating is a power saving technique. You turn off the parts of the chip you aren't using, thus saving switching power on those parts. It does -not- reduce maximum power, except to the degree to which it is impossible to use all parts of the chip at once. The purpose is to reduce -average- or -typical- power, not to increase the max frequency by reducing the worst case. So it does indeed have a point.

      The next set of high power precessors will have finer temperature detection and will retard only parts of the chip that are going mad.

      Now this, however, would have no point. If a part of your machine is "going mad", that means it is being used heavily, and thus it a safe bet that the code you are running depends on that unit, and thus retarding that part of the chip would decrease your performance, quite possibly exactly to the degree to which you reduce the frequency. At that point, you might as well slow down the entire chip, since you've already screwed yourself by slowing down the critical path.

      Eather that or async logic will kick in.

      The only thing async logic will do for this is reduce the need for the margin built in to the frequencies of clocked chips. Hey, I'm all for that, but the fact remains that the part of your chip that is hot and thus running slower is almost certainly the critical path for performance, and thus you'll still see performance degrade. Getting rid of that margin is a noble goal, but there are ways to do it without having to resort to the complexity of an asynchronous design.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  10. Slashdotted already? by joshki · · Score: 4, Informative

    COOL CHIPS DISCLOSES APPLICATION OF QUANTUM MECHANICS IN HIGH-EFFICIENCY NANOTECH COOLING DEVICES
    Refers to COLCF and BOREF

    Cool Chips plc
    Gibraltar
    14 May 2002

    Cool Chips plc (COLCF) said that its Cool Chips(tm), wafer-thin discs designed to produce cooling or refrigeration more efficiently than any competing technology, use quantum mechanical electron tunneling as the primary cooling mechanism. The Cool Chip is one of the first transformative technologies to emerge from the nanotechnology revolution.

    The Cool Chip technology could eventually replace nearly every existing form of cooling, air conditioning, and thermal management. Prototype devices are being shown publicly for the first time at the Nanotech Planet Conference in San Jose, California, that begins today. The company has not previously disclosed the full scientific basis for its technology.

    Because of the inherent advantages in cooling across a gap using electron tunneling, Cool Chips are projected to attain efficiencies much higher than those previously available in cooling systems, and they are much less than 10% of the size and weight of compressors. Cool Chips are modular, and can be packaged in arrays to cool virtually any size heat load.

    The company expects its Cool Chip(tm) technology, which has been in development since 1994, to replace all thermoelectrics and compressors for cooling, in applications ranging from electronics and infrared sensors, to computer components, refrigeration, and air conditioning. Cool Chips are on target to have an overwhelming cost advantage.

    Cool Chips will enable many new and improved consumer products. They will enable laptops to run cooler, for example, and make possible in-car soda and grocery coolers. A panel of Cool Chips one inch square will provide enough cooling for a refrigerator; a panel about two inches square will have the capacity to provide the air conditioning for a living room; and a panel about five inches square will supply enough cooling power to cool an entire house.

    Most existing cooling systems use compressors and environment-damaging fluids and are 40-50% efficient. Smaller thermoelectric cooling devices, despite more than $1 billion spent on research, are only 8% efficient. Cool Chips are projected to operate at 70-80% of the maximum theoretical efficiency (Carnot) for cooling.

    Cool Chips prototypes are small electronic devices similar in appearance to computer chips. When an electric current is applied, one side of the chip will become cold and the other side hot, as electrons "tunnel" across a 1-to-10 nanometre gap separating the two sides, carrying heat with them. Innate device advantages include high efficiency, solid-state design, silent operation, environmentally friendly materials and operation, and compact size for easy integration.

    "We have demonstrated the capability to make multiple prototypes that show a tunneling current in excess of 10 amps, using a wafer area approximately 9 square cm in area," said Isaiah Cox, Cool Chips' president. "This is, by far, the largest tunneling current that has ever been reported across a gap, and we expect Cool Chips to make the first use of this quantum tunneling effect in a primary commercial application."

    The tunneling current can be harnessed to provide cooling of very high density. The theoretical heat flux for flat electrodes suspended 50 Angstroms from each other is on the order of 5000 watts per square centimetre. Cool Chips(tm) will be more than adequate for cooling the next generation of microprocessors, which will produce upwards of 100 watts of heat per square centimetre.

    Cool Chips are currently in development, and it is expected to take over a year to complete prototypes which demonstrate high output and efficiency. Current prototypes are being used to increase the quantum tunneling, and cooling has not been directly measured to date. Once the tunneling output has been increased to a certain level, our scientists intend to begin increasing cooling output.

    An IV curve and other information is now available on the Cool Chips website at http://www.coolchips.gi.

    The Cool Chips technology is protected by an extensive patent portfolio. This coverage extends to include a broad array of techniques related to this unique thermal management system, which offers solutions for nearly any thermal management application.

    Cool Chips plc, based in Gibraltar, is a majority-owned subsidiary of Borealis Exploration Limited (BOREF) and has 7,281,785 shares outstanding. Borealis' business is reinventing the core technologies used by basic industries, including electric motors, steelmaking, electrical power generation, and cooling and thermal management.

    For further information contact:

    Chris Bourne
    Director of Public Relations
    Cool Chips plc
    +44 20 8571 5216
    pr@coolchips.gi

    Forward Looking Statement at http://www.coolchips.gi/fwdlook.shtml

    --
    I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
    1. Re:Slashdotted already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poor slashdotted site... wanna try their search engine? ;)

    2. Re:Slashdotted already? by amunter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Despite what it says they must make laptops run hotter. Adding electricity to something cannot bring a net cooling effect. If one side of this thing gets cooler by removing heat, then the other side gets hotter than the cool side gets cooler. (did that make sense)

      Anyway, it is the reason you can't just stick an air conditioner in the middle of the room or leave the fridge door open and expect your house to get cooler. You have to have a heat exchanger outside to dump the heat removed from the cold side and the 20% waste heat that they are quoting.

      Maybe they are talking about making the inside of the laptop cool while having a big funky heatsink on the outside which you could fry an egg on...

    3. Re:Slashdotted already? by SerpentMage · · Score: 2

      You want to know what the really interesting thing here is? And this is going to happen more often. The company is from Gibralter. Why? Simple lets say you invent something and you want to make money. Sell the technology through an island like Gibralter and pay NO TAXES!!! Cool eh?

      IP will move to the least amount of resistance...

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    4. Re:Slashdotted already? by AFaus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gibraltar is not an island.

      It's a British colony in the middle of Europe: the last residue of the British Empire. Spain and GB are in negotiations about making it a shared territory.

      See http://www.gibraltar.gi/history/ for the locals point of view.

    5. Re:Slashdotted already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's not slashdotted, you whore.

      I really mean it, moderators: Stop giving karma to these whores.

    6. Re:Slashdotted already? by DrSkwid · · Score: 2

      don't forget the Falkland Islands

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    7. Re:Slashdotted already? by guacamolefoo · · Score: 2, Funny

      "If one side of this thing gets cooler by removing heat, then the other side gets hotter than the cool side gets cooler. "

      The hot side stays hot, the cool side stays cool. Wasn't that the basis for a McDonald's sandwich back in the eighties?

    8. Re:Slashdotted already? by iainl · · Score: 1

      Fortunately, we are already cooling the chip down however. If they are claiming an 80% efficiency in doing so, as supposed to the 5-8% of a peltier quoted (mind you, have you ever seen a peltier-cooled laptop?) then if we are still doing the about same amount of cooling we have a small fraction of the heat being churned out that we would be doing otherwise. The tiny size makes laptop fitting more practical, but its the efficiency gains that are going to be important for how much heat we need to worry about.

      Or am I stating the obvious?

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    9. Re:Slashdotted already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your assuming that the fan motors themselves make no heat. That is an incorrect assumption. ANY fan motor makes a good deal of heat itself, probably close to 22% of the energy stuck into a fan is lost as heat. Also, with this your using less energy to cool the thing overall, which means less battery usage, which means the battery doesn't get as hot. it WILL be an overall drop in operating tempature.

    10. Re:Slashdotted already? by markmoss · · Score: 2

      Your assuming that the fan motors themselves make no heat.

      Actually, ALL of the electric power going into the fan winds up as heat - a small percentage of losses in the motor, probably a larger percentage of losses around the fan blades to air friction, etc., and finally all the kinetic energy that is imparted to the air will eventually be lost to friction, both inside and outside of the case.

    11. Re:Slashdotted already? by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

      You must not have been paying attention. They didn't say they were reducing the heat generated by cooling. They only said they were more efficient. It makes perfect sense, since they are using a vacuum as an insulator. Also since they are expending *less* energy in removing the heat they are also creating less heat than say a peltier junction. Yes, the hot side will be hotter and you still need a fan to move that heat away. They never said they didn't. If they get all the bugs worked out of this, and it looks like they have some, it will revolutionize many markets. I hope you're reading this Frigidaire, because this will obsolete big noisy electric guzzling heat pumps!

    12. Re:Slashdotted already? by cnaumann · · Score: 1

      You are assuming that the efficiency of a CPU stays the same over temperature. This is not the case. If you can get a CPU really cold, it's efficiency increases. It takes less power to do the same amount of work. So even with the added load of the the refridgeration unit, the overall system could in fact run cooler.

      But I have no idea if this is what they meant.

    13. Re:Slashdotted already? by mpe · · Score: 2

      Anyway, it is the reason you can't just stick an air conditioner in the middle of the room or leave the fridge door open and expect your house to get cooler.

      There are air air conditioning units which you can simply sit in the middle of a room to make it cooler. The downside is that they make the air more humid.

      You have to have a heat exchanger outside to dump the heat removed from the cold side and the 20% waste heat that they are quoting.

      Or something which can adsorb the heat. The air conditioning units on a 747 are actually designed to dump heat into the fuel.

    14. Re:Slashdotted already? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      acm on 747 not designed to put heat into fuel

  11. Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by rcs1000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because Boeing is backing CoolChips plc *doesn't* mean the technology or the company is sound.

    Big companies like to throw their money around just to make sure they don't miss the 'next big thing'. Often they make terrible mistakes...

    Take Lernout & Hauspie, the Belgian speech recognition software company, which Microsoft invested a ton ($40m?) of money in. The Chairman of MSFT Europe was on the board.

    Yet when L&H went belly-up in 2000, it turned out 100s of millions of revenues were fraudulent. MSFT was no better at picking a company with solid speech recognition technology that the rest of us.

    So, don't assume that - just 'cause Boeing *appears* to be supporting CoolChips - that the company is a good investment.

    --
    --- My dad's political betting
    1. Re:Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by echucker · · Score: 2, Funny

      If they were truly smart, they would have sold banner ads before one of their employees submitted their site to /.

    2. Re:Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by Gopher971 · · Score: 1

      There was nothing "wrong" with the technology of the Lernout & Hauspie speech engines, the company was the victim of fraudulent sales in the Asian market. I don't think you can compare the them with CoolChips.

      CoolChips technology seems too good to be true but this could be the next "Big Thing"tm.

      --
      Just you're average nitpicker.
    3. Re:Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by ctar · · Score: 1

      Big companies like to throw their money around just to make sure they don't miss the 'next big thing'. Often they make terrible mistakes...

      Yeah, remember this story?

    4. Re:Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by taliver · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, from the press release, Boeing isn't backing it-- yet. They just said thqt they were in testing, and notice the lack of results or data.

      Without data from even a not-so-independent reviewer like Boeing (not so independent since they seem to have some financial interests in the company), I'm far from thinking this is close to reality.

      --

      I demand a million helicopters and a DOLLAR!

    5. Re:Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by Kajakske · · Score: 1

      They were not 'victim' of fraudulent sales ...

      They caused them !

      Anyways, the result is the same. L&H went down and MS's investment is lost.

      Also with coolchips, the technology is (probably) available ... Something only needs to be done with it ...

    6. Re:Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by DrSkwid · · Score: 2
      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    7. Re:Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by DrSkwid · · Score: 2

      I found this one while searching too, it has 0 (zero) comments and I never remember seeing it.

      Make pretty interesting reading (particularly in hindsight)

      ESR Writes on "Surprised By Wealth"

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    8. Re:Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by AJWM · · Score: 2

      Boeing is just playing it smart in positioning themselves, at little risk, to take advantage of this if it pans out.

      They've done this before: Jerry Pournelle tells the story of the time he, as a Boeing employee, and another fellow were tasked with investigating the "Dean Drive" (a "reactionless" drive that somehow converted rotary into linear motion). They were authorized to present Dean with a check for some multiple thousand dollars (worth far more then than now) if they were satisfied with the demonstrations.

      They weren't, and they didn't. But Boeing at least invested enough to have them go check it out.

      --
      -- Alastair
    9. Re:Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by rcs1000 · · Score: 2

      Victim!

      Management fraudulently created more than $500m of revenue.

      They bought company, after company after company. They developed zippo of their own technology, bought other companies for their technology and then failed to do anything with them.

      They bought Kurzweil, Dragon, Dictaphone, etc. and then ran them into the ground.

      Blame management, not the market.

      --
      --- My dad's political betting
    10. Re:Big companies make mistakes occasionally! by joekool · · Score: 2, Funny

      If they were truly smart, their logo wouldn't involve a pick ax through a dolphin!

      --

      Slackware: old school feel, new school gear.
  12. Price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The most important question is the price. Will it be cheaper than refrigerator compressors for example?

    1. Re:Price by The+Cookie+Monster · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The most important question is the price. Will it be cheaper than refrigerator compressors for example?
      In a word... No

      If it costs them 50c to produce a chip as efficient as a $200 aircon heat pump, then until there is someone else who can produce a heat pump for less than $200 there is no reason to charge less than $180 for the chip.

      I suspect this is what has happened with the micromirror chips Texas Instruments invented to replace LCD projectors, for all the waffling on about how cheap these things would be, they've been available for a few years now and a projector will still set you back $5000, regardless of whether you get LCD or micromirror.

      Until there is a competeing technology, these chips will not be significantly cheaper.
    2. Re:Price by HerringFlavoredFowl · · Score: 2

      Though price is nice, it is not will initially sell this device ...

      If it has a smaller foot print and is more efficent than other direct cooling technologies, it will sell.

      Trust me, If I could use this to cool a CCD chip down to LN temperatures without the use of a water chiller or LN dewar I would be willing to pay for it.

      --
      TastesLikeHerringFlavoredChicken
    3. Re:Price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rest assured that this technology will not be priced one cent below below what they can squeeze out of it. Consider what might happen if they can can get competing technologies basically outlawed on enviromental principles. Many things could actually become much much more expensive, not cheaper.

  13. Solar energy too by bleeeeck · · Score: 5, Informative
    The company is also making solar collectors the same way.

    From http://www.borealis.com/technology/patents.shtml:

    Patent 5981866(StampPE)
    PROCESS FOR STAMPABLE PHOTOELECTRIC GENERATOR
    Abstract
    Manufacture of a photoelectric converter by a photolithographic or stamping process prior to coating with a photoelectrically emissive material is described. This gives an economic and simple means of mass-producing photoelectric converter cells, and in one aspect is analogous to that used for pressing optical discs.

    1. Re:Solar energy too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Coolchips is Owned by Borealis! In says this in the nasa paper linked above

  14. Great for the Arprotek e-Cube/gBox by oliverthered · · Score: 1

    Shoud be able to keep this little puppy cool

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    1. Re:Great for the Arprotek e-Cube/gBox by bleeeeck · · Score: 1

      The answer to all of Toshiba's problems?

  15. Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess they can compress virutal random number too?

  16. Slashdotted by joebp · · Score: 4, Funny
    I don't believe this company.

    If what they claim is true, why has their server melted?

    1. Re:Slashdotted by NateSac · · Score: 1

      I think I'd be alot less skeptical if they didnt use all the non-sense buzz words.
      --wouldnt it be great if we could trust the media?

      --
      ::i visited slashdot and all i got was this lousy sig::
  17. In case the site is slashdotted here it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    COOL CHIPS DISCLOSES APPLICATION OF QUANTUM MECHANICS IN HIGH-EFFICIENCY NANOTECH COOLING DEVICES
    Refers to COLCF and BOREF

    Cool Chips plc
    Gibraltar
    14 May 2002

    Cool Chips plc (COLCF) said that its Cool Chips(tm), wafer-thin discs designed to produce cooling or refrigeration more efficiently than any competing technology, use quantum mechanical electron tunneling as the primary cooling mechanism. The Cool Chip is one of the first transformative technologies to emerge from the nanotechnology revolution.

    The Cool Chip technology could eventually replace nearly every existing form of cooling, air conditioning, and thermal management. Prototype devices are being shown publicly for the first time at the Nanotech Planet Conference in San Jose, California, that begins today. The company has not previously disclosed the full scientific basis for its technology.

    Because of the inherent advantages in cooling across a gap using electron tunneling, Cool Chips are projected to attain efficiencies much higher than those previously available in cooling systems, and they are much less than 10% of the size and weight of compressors. Cool Chips are modular, and can be packaged in arrays to cool virtually any size heat load.

    The company expects its Cool Chip(tm) technology, which has been in development since 1994, to replace all thermoelectrics and compressors for cooling, in applications ranging from electronics and infrared sensors, to computer components, refrigeration, and air conditioning. Cool Chips are on target to have an overwhelming cost advantage.

    Cool Chips will enable many new and improved consumer products. They will enable laptops to run cooler, for example, and make possible in-car soda and grocery coolers. A panel of Cool Chips one inch square will provide enough cooling for a refrigerator; a panel about two inches square will have the capacity to provide the air conditioning for a living room; and a panel about five inches square will supply enough cooling power to cool an entire house.

    Most existing cooling systems use compressors and environment-damaging fluids and are 40-50% efficient. Smaller thermoelectric cooling devices, despite more than $1 billion spent on research, are only 8% efficient. Cool Chips are projected to operate at 70-80% of the maximum theoretical efficiency (Carnot) for cooling.

    Cool Chips prototypes are small electronic devices similar in appearance to computer chips. When an electric current is applied, one side of the chip will become cold and the other side hot, as electrons "tunnel" across a 1-to-10 nanometre gap separating the two sides, carrying heat with them. Innate device advantages include high efficiency, solid-state design, silent operation, environmentally friendly materials and operation, and compact size for easy integration.

    "We have demonstrated the capability to make multiple prototypes that show a tunneling current in excess of 10 amps, using a wafer area approximately 9 square cm in area," said Isaiah Cox, Cool Chips' president. "This is, by far, the largest tunneling current that has ever been reported across a gap, and we expect Cool Chips to make the first use of this quantum tunneling effect in a primary commercial application."

    The tunneling current can be harnessed to provide cooling of very high density. The theoretical heat flux for flat electrodes suspended 50 Angstroms from each other is on the order of 5000 watts per square centimetre. Cool Chips(tm) will be more than adequate for cooling the next generation of microprocessors, which will produce upwards of 100 watts of heat per square centimetre.

    Cool Chips are currently in development, and it is expected to take over a year to complete prototypes which demonstrate high output and efficiency. Current prototypes are being used to increase the quantum tunneling, and cooling has not been directly measured to date. Once the tunneling output has been increased to a certain level, our scientists intend to begin increasing cooling output.

    An IV curve and other information is now available on the Cool Chips website at http://www.coolchips.gi.

    The Cool Chips technology is protected by an extensive patent portfolio. This coverage extends to include a broad array of techniques related to this unique thermal management system, which offers solutions for nearly any thermal management application.

    Cool Chips plc, based in Gibraltar, is a majority-owned subsidiary of Borealis Exploration Limited (BOREF) and has 7,281,785 shares outstanding. Borealis' business is reinventing the core technologies used by basic industries, including electric motors, steelmaking, electrical power generation, and cooling and thermal management.

    For further information contact:

    Chris Bourne
    Director of Public Relations
    Cool Chips plc
    +44 20 8571 5216
    pr@coolchips.gi

    Forward Looking Statement at http://www.coolchips.gi/fwdlook.shtml

  18. Could YOU use a cooler?? by hplasm · · Score: 0

    or a TiVo type ad killer? ;-)

    --
    ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
  19. Obligatory GOOGLE CACHE by Andorion · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Some useful google caches:

    Main Page
    Technology (hype?)

    -Berj

  20. from their web site by tonywong · · Score: 2, Informative

    which is getting /.ed.

    http://www.coolchips.com/technology/overview.sht ml

    What is Cooling with Electrons?

    "Hot" and "cold" are words we use to describe the presence (or absence) of heat. Heat is best described as energy contained within something else. So a cup of hot coffee has more energy than that same cup an hour later, after much of the heat has dissipated.

    The energy which makes up "heat" is the kinetic energy of the atoms which carry the heat. So if the atoms in the cup of coffee are very active, the coffee is "hot". If the atoms become less active, the coffee is "cold". And if the atoms get cold enough so that the atoms are no longer in a fluid form, the coffee freezes into a solid.

    While atoms in a solid themselves tend to be pretty immobile, the sub-atomic particles within them are always moving. At any temperature above absolute zero, electrons are constantly in motion, spinning around the atom, but also (especially in metals) swapping places with the electrons of surrounding atoms.

    Of course, some electrons have high energy, while some electrons have low energy. The low energy electrons are cold, while the high energy electrons are hot.

    Cooling with electrons involves encouraging the high energy electrons to escape, bringing in low energy electrons to replace them. It is analogous to removing the loudest people from a party: the party gets quieter.

    What makes Cool Chips special?

    There are other technologies which use electron migration to reduce heat. These fall under the rubric of "thermoelectrics". These technologies all use special materials and geometries to move the hottest electrons to one side, keeping the coldest electrons at the other.

    The biggest problem with thermoelectrics is that while electrons are used to carry heat in one direction, the material itself returns most of that heat through conduction!

    Cool Chips are special because the electrons move across a gap -- and that gap, since it is not a solid, is an excellent insulator. Once heat is trapped on one side, it cannot easily return.


    How do we get the electrons to move across the gap?

    The difficulty in getting lots of electrons to flow across a gap is that electrons do not naturally leave their atoms to go into space. Electrons do jump around a lot (it is called tunneling), but those jumps are pretty short, from one to ten nanometers, or just a few billionths of a meter long.

    Researchers at Cool Chips plc have figured out how to get two materials very close to each other so that electrons can tunnel from one material to the next, carrying their heat with them. With the addition of a voltage bias, which encourages the electrons to move in a given direction, the heat is then transferred from one side to the other. And because there is a gap between the two materials, the heat cannot simply flow back!

    Why hasn't this been done before?

    Thermotunneling has not been done before because nobody imagined that it was possible to get large surfaces areas close to each other without making occasional contact. Cool Chips' scientists not only imagined a way to do it, but we have accomplished this goal and are currently refining our patented process.

    Once these devices become commercially available, they will not only revolutionize the industries of refrigeration and cooling, but all of those industries that depend on them.

    1. Re:from their web site by Hieronymus+Howard · · Score: 2, Funny

      I want the chip that removes the loudest people from the party.

      HH

    2. Re:from their web site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Researchers at Cool Chips plc have figured out how to get two materials very close to each other so that electrons can tunnel from one material to the next, carrying their heat with them. With the addition of a voltage bias, which encourages the electrons to move in a given direction, the heat is then transferred from one side to the other. And because there is a gap between the two materials, the heat cannot simply flow back!

      So, essentially, they've made a one-way electron tunnel? Otherwise, the heat can simply flow back, no?

    3. Re:from their web site by clone304 · · Score: 1


      Just hand them a can of poisoned pringles.

  21. .5 inch gives... by hummer357 · · Score: 0, Offtopic


    and half a square inch of the coolchip gives me a nice beercan cooler!!

    1. Re:.5 inch gives... by wimmi · · Score: 4, Interesting
      and half a square inch of the coolchip gives me a nice beercan cooler!!
      I believe that a (beer-)can manufacturer (I believe it was Chorus Steel) is experimenting with cooling cans by releasing a harmless gas on opening which has been previously dissolved during the canning procedure.

      To vaporise that gas it drained the heat-energy from the drink and therefore instantly cooled it.
      It's probably cheaper than Coolchip too.

    2. Re:.5 inch gives... by ThaReetLad · · Score: 2, Informative

      I too heard this some time ago, but I believe it was dropped because the harmless gas in question was a either a strong greenhouse gas or a destroyer of ozone.

      btw. it's Corus steel (I know, it's a very silly name)

      --
      You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    3. Re:.5 inch gives... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      I thought the person drinking it was the one who ended up releasing the gas?

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  22. Ouch! by Bazman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Who is going to be the first idiot to get their tongue stuck to one of these!?

    Baz

    1. Re:Ouch! by hplasm · · Score: 0

      Jar-Jar.

      --
      ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
    2. Re:Ouch! by eracerblue · · Score: 1

      likely a Canadian. It's like a right of passage up there or something.

  23. What the hell are these made of? Neutron Stars? by hplasm · · Score: 0

    "Cool Chips ..... are much less than 10% of the size and weight of compressors. " I should think so too, for something 1 or 2 in square, unless they also make teenytiny compressors...

    --
    ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
  24. Hmm..Look at this by justinstreufert · · Score: 5, Informative
    I was just about to buy a million billion shares when I noticed this:

    ...cooling has not been directly measured to date. Once the tunneling output has been increased to a certain level, our scientists intend to begin increasing cooling output.

    Cooling not yet measured? So, the device works in theory, but there might be an unanticipated roadblock ahead which significantly delays or hinders their ability to produce devices that actually cool something. :/

    Justin

    --
    "Why would God give us a waist if we wasn't supposed to rest our pants on it?" - Rev. Roy McDaniels
    1. Re:Hmm..Look at this by eracerblue · · Score: 1

      ah yeeeaaas.....

      and monopoles, in theory, should be able to solve the entire world's energy problems.

      ... shame they don't exist.

  25. Cold spot/hot spot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So these guys have come with a very efficient heat transfer dispositive... so what?
    Think about *any* dispositive of this kind. It moves heat from here (you room, the refrigerator box, the surface of the CPU...) to there (usually the air, or a free water mass). Now, two extreme examples:
    Your air conditioner: it colds mainly due to convection and conduction (the air circulates and goes near a cold tube system). Now, no matter how effectively those chips steal heat from air, how much air you can pass over an square inch on a time unit, given the fact it has to be in countach with the refrigerator unit time enough to transfer that heat to it -the chip can be marvellous, still air is not a good heat conductor?
    Your CPU: Your CPU is nowadays a heat place. Now you put one of those chips which steals heat from your CPU's one square inch surface very effectively... just to put that heat on the external chip one square inch surface! You still have *exactly* the same problem than rigth now: how do I remove that heat from the colding system? It is still one square inch, it is still within my PC box, it is still very hot (and remember: once all the chip is at the same temperature than the "hot" side, it won't refrigerate no more).

    The problem with *all* refrigerating systems is the same: move the heat from where I don't want it *to a place where it can be "pumped off" as fast as it is producing*.

    1. Re:Cold spot/hot spot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right.

      Now, if they could (as they claim) convert the heat into electricity it could be "pumped off" really easy.

    2. Re:Cold spot/hot spot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but as far as I recall from my thermodynamics class, to convert heat into energy, you need both a cold and a hot reservoir. During the conversion the reservoirs graduatally reach the same temperature and the process stops.

      Here it would mean that when the air in your computer is as hot as the CPU no more electricity can be generated.

      To keep it going you'd need fans. I.e. almost back to square one...

    3. Re:Cold spot/hot spot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah... so easy it would be against thermodynamics laws:
      You have a hot CPU; you transfer heat by close contact to thethe inner face of one of those chips and then you move it to the external face. Now, to reconvert it again into electricity (don't forget it was electricity in first place, prior to go "into" the CPU) you will need a *new* cold sink (it won't work if two faces are at the same temperature) but... how do you get it?

      Of course, you can make this work, but you will have all the expenses you have rigth now (you can, for instance, use a water cooling (sub)system to take the heat apart to a conventional radiator out the PC box... well, you can do it rigth now... the heat transfer will be better than rigth now due to the properties of the new chip, but it will far away from a "revolution").

    4. Re:Cold spot/hot spot by The+Cookie+Monster · · Score: 5, Informative
      You still have *exactly* the same problem than rigth now: how do I remove that heat from the colding system? It is still one square inch
      No, the heat dissipated is proportional to the difference in the temperature between the hot thing and the cold thing, and with one of these chips you can make the hot surface hotter, thus dissipating more heat.

      If the heatsink on the hot side of the coolchip isn't radiating as much heat as the CPU is producing then (assuming the coolchips heat pumping properties work) the hot side of the coolchip will keep getting hotter until the radiation of the heatsink matches the heat output by the CPU. You argument would work if the coolchip was just an excellent conductor of heat, but it's a heat pump - it can shift heat from a side that is cool to a side that is hotter than the side the heat came from.

      how much air you can pass over an square inch on a time unit, given the fact it has to be in countach with the refrigerator unit time enough to transfer that heat to it
      This is what heatsinks are for, a 1 inch cube heatsink can have a huge surface area (which air is then blown through), and there's no reason to stick to one cubic inch, the heatsync can be much larger than the coolchip provided it can conduct the heat sufficently to all it's tiny fins. If two coolchips can actually do the heat pumping work of an air conditioner, then transferring that into the actual air should be no trickier than with conventional aircon units.
    5. Re:Cold spot/hot spot by LemonYellow · · Score: 1
      If the heatsink on the hot side of the coolchip isn't radiating as much heat as the CPU is producing then (assuming the coolchips heat pumping properties work) the hot side of the coolchip will keep getting hotter until the radiation of the heatsink matches the heat output by the CPU.

      ... or until the electric field from the cool side to the hot side is big enough that the tunnelling current drops off.

    6. Re:Cold spot/hot spot by LuxFX · · Score: 1

      Their technology seems inherently different from your run-of-the mill living room air conditioner. An AC doesn't even try to convert heat to electricity, yet their device (according to their claims) is able to do this. In the example of an AC, the device is basically a heat transfer device, moving heat from one area to another. This coolchip device would seem to convert heat energy into electrical energy. Transfer vs. conversion. Not the same thing.

      --
      Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
    7. Re:Cold spot/hot spot by javilon · · Score: 2

      One advantage of this device (if it ever works) is that it can remove heat from the chip's hot spots and make the chips surface temperature even.

      But this is not the main one. This is a heat _pump_, not only a dissipation unit, so it will make one side of itself cooler while making the other side hotter. The end result would be that the hot side of the device would be hotter than the chip would be without the device. And we all know that this would radiate/exchange heat with the enviroment quicker than the chip would. If you add a dissipation unit on top of the device, you can move more heat quicker.

      --


      When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
  26. Quantum Tunnel in reverse? by oliverthered · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can someone please explain how you Quantum Tunnel in reverse, do the electrons magically get sucked in a shell or something.
    And for that matter how you do Quantum Tunneling that results in a -ve gradent less than the energy used to tunnel the electrons in the first place. i.e. More heat is produced tunneling than tunneling looses.

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    1. Re:Quantum Tunnel in reverse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems a bit like Maxwell's demon. A bit suspicious I think.

    2. Re:Quantum Tunnel in reverse? by Salsaman · · Score: 1
      It could work in theory I think, due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The electrons could 'borrow' some energy on the cold side, which allows them to tunnel through the gap. They then return the borrowed energy on the hot side. Provided the amount of 'borrowed' energy * the time they borrow it for is A potential gradient across the gap reduces the chance that electrons can tunnel back in the other direction. You have to provide power to create this potential gradient, which is where the 80% efficient figure comes from.

      The company's breakthrough is apparently making this gap with enough area that electrons can move en masse through it, thus providing a large cooling effect.

  27. Automotive by Terminus0 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Now, if we can figure out how to use this to keep my car from overheating... I guess until then I will have to stick to my toggle switch for the radiator cooling fan.

  28. right of first refusal by EggDye · · Score: 4, Informative

    No, it isn't that sinister a concept.

    Right of first refusal means that you get a chance to buy something before anyone else does. It is the business equivalent to the concept of having "dibs" on something.

    It also does not represent too great a risk on Boeing's part. They aren't obligated to buy this technology. They just have the chance to buy it before anyone else does. While they are certainly paying for this privilege in some manner (maybe the press release is the payment), they aren't jumping in with both feet.

  29. Nice idea but it has a problem by boltar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is that the other side of the chip heats up. So what you say? Well in most applications
    its no good cooling something only to dump the waste heat a few millimeters away just so it can
    leak back into the device/fridge/whatever. You need something to transport that heat away
    whether than be a fan or a liquid transport system.
    So I reckon these devices (if they work) will be great for largish appliances and PCs but not much
    use in your average laptop where there is no room for a fan and just glueing the hot part of the
    chip to the casing is asking for trouble (and burnt users).

    1. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by larien · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course, aeroplanes could just "dump" the heat out at altitude where it's cold, hence Boeing's interest.

    2. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coolchips themselves had a little graphic explaining because there was a larger temprature difference between ambient and the heat sink, you need a smaller fan.

      And it's hardly a "problem" of the idea if the one thing you can think of it not working for is a laptop.

    3. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by boltar · · Score: 1

      Well , not just a laptop but anything small which rather defeats one point of it which is its small
      size.

    4. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by LadyLucky · · Score: 4, Funny

      need something to transport that heat away whether than be a fan or a liquid transport system.

      You attach another cool chip to the back, obviously.

      :-)

      --
      dominionrd.blogspot.com - Restaurants on
    5. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by nhavar · · Score: 2

      Well if what they say about the chips is true and you can use them to convert heat to electricity then you just stick another "chip" on the waste heat side of the first "chip" and suppliment your power with the waste heat.

      --
      "Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
    6. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The problem is that the other side of the chip heats up.

      Not to mention they also claim it can be used to harness electricity from heat, making overheating a memory and too much electrical energy a problem.
      Perpetum mobile, anyone? More like stock manipulation.

    7. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Who the hell modded this as 'insightful'?!?!? Are the moderators totaly fucking stupid? If you think about it for a few seconds you'll realize that the parent post is dumb and impossible!

      But it is pretty funny.

    8. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by SonCorn · · Score: 1

      The problem with this is that the reason it is "cold" at altitude is that there is a very low density of air. There is not much air at altitude to hold "heat." So although it feels cold to us at altitude (due to there being very few air molecules hitting our skin and transferring their energy to us in the collision), it will be VERY difficult to shed heat at high altitudes. On top of that air is one of the best insulators around, and a vacuum is the best. So not only is there very little air, which is a good insulator, there is also a significant space between the air molecules, a vacuum, across which no energy except radiation can be transferred. I would say that the best way to use this on an airplane would be to use the Aluminum (Aluminium for those that would bitch about that) skin and components of the airplane as a heat dump. Aluminum is highly conductive and has a large mass on the plane and thus could take a large amount of energy. Plus with it's large surface area and the air moving past it rapidly there should still be quite a bit of energy transferred to the atmosphere even at high altitudes.

      --
      What good is a used up world, and how could it be worth having? --Sting
    9. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by evilstranger · · Score: 1

      So I guess you just have to put a 2nd one on, and have it convert the heat to electricty, and use it to power the first one that is cooling the chip, thus you get the cooling for only 20% of the power consumption of one?

    10. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by austad · · Score: 2

      You attach another cool chip to the back, obviously.

      Actually, you can do this. It's a common technique used with peltier units. However, it only works up to a point, because the unit can only move a certain amount of heat, called Qmax. If you're moving 50 watts of heat away from a processor, an it takes 10 watts of electricity to run the cooler, the one you stack on top of it must have a Qmax greater than 60 watts or it will become an insulator. Now, you can get around this by attaching a copper or aluminum plate to the hot side, and sticking two more units (with a Qmax of at least 30 watts each) side by side on it. But, you still have to get rid of the heat somehow in the end. Usually if you're stacking peltiers, you need a *REALLY* big heatsink or water cooling. But peltiers are very inefficient, and if these claim 80% efficiency, you might be able to get away with stacking a bunch of them and still use a heatsink on it.

      --
      Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
    11. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever hear of heat sinks?

    12. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and trade your 80% efficient system for one that is 64% efficient at best.

    13. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds perfect for laptops! You get cooler chips, and longer battery life.

    14. Re:Nice idea but it has a problem by nhavar · · Score: 2

      okay that didn't make any sense. Explain the efficiency loss.

      --
      "Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
  30. This reeks of stock manipulation... by Travelr9 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The company is run out of a tax haven. A mere three weeks after they get NASD trading approval, up pops an article on Slashdot - complete with vague but reassuring press release from a big [but likely dumb] name, Boeing. Then you go to their site - KewlChips have lots of vague but reassuring information about their governance and pedigree, and look, kids, you can invest now!

    I quote from their Investor Relations page:

    "Cool Chips plc common shares were cleared for trading in the United States by the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) on 24 April 2002. Quotes are available from www.pinksheets.com under the symbol COLCF. The Cool Chips Technology work is managed out of Europe and we are a virtual company based in the European Union. Your Company is a member of the Borealis Family of Companies, and is incorporated in Gibraltar. Gibraltar law is essentially English law and we are governed by that. We have elected to use Gibraltar GAAP as our reporting standards, as these are the standards of our domicile.

    In addition to the Investor Information available for our parent company, Borealis Exploration Limited, links to corporate information specific to Cool Chips plc are located at http://www.coolchips.gi/investor/corpinfo.shtml

    Stock quotes can be found at:
    Pink Sheets: BOREF COLCF Bloomberg: BOREF COLCF "

    Does that sound like pandering to you? It sure does to me, and my wallet is firmly tucked away.

    Just remember... their own statement is that they are a virtual company run out of a tax haven. Caveat emptor. Don't throw your SlashDollars away.

    1. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by brunes69 · · Score: 2

      a big [but likely dumb] name, Boeing.

      Boeing is dumb???Boeing??? You mean the same Boeing that is one of the worlds leading aerospace companies and handles billions of dollars in top-secret cutting edge Military applications? You mean the same Boeing that helped NASA build the space shuttle?

      A company such as Boeing is litterally stacked to the top with PHD's and engineers which most liely make your knowledge look like Mickey Mouse. Even if they did make a mistake on this company, it doesn't mean they are "big and dumb".

    2. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by hagardtroll · · Score: 4, Funny

      I agree. It looks like they've created a device to get dollar bills to jump from the gap between gullible bank accounts and theirs.

    3. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by Pedrito · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They're still trading over the counter, not on NASDAQ, which makes it more suspicious. I wouldn't suggest putting any money in it unless they actually do get onto Nasdaq. Actually, the press release sounds pretty boilerplate for a small, publicly traded company, though.

      I mean, being offshore doesn't necessarily mean anything. A lot of very "respectable" U.S. companies are heading off shore to get the tax break.

    4. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by klieber · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think he means the Boeing that still has no idea exactly how much it costs to build an airplane. No, I'm not kidding -- a friend of mine works in their procurement department. They've been struggling for years to figure out what the total cost of a 747 is. Still don't know.

      There may be a bunch of smart people working at Boeing, but that doesn't necessarily make Boeing, as a corporate entity, smart.

      --
      Gentoo Linux http://gentoo.org/
    5. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by GregWebb · · Score: 2

      Borealis? This is legit, I've had long discussions with one of their staff about this. Well done for them pulling this one off.

      No, he's not one of the techies building it so I can't milk him for details but I'd trust him that this isn't snake oil.

      --

      Greg

      (Inside a nuclear plant)
      Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!

    6. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A company such as Boeing is litterally stacked to the top with PHD's and engineers which most liely make your knowledge look like Mickey Mouse.

      More likely it's stacked AT the top with PHB's.

      As an aside, I'm about willing to try just about anything to cool my AMD...

    7. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, they'll never know the exact cost of a 747. It's extremely variable from one to another due to being labor and process intensive. It's kind of like naval ships: no two are exactly alike even though they were built from the exact same plans.

    8. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by HRH+King+Lerxst · · Score: 1

      Nevermind the fact that a lot of things are not _directly_ charged to a particular airplane.

      --
      No one got beat up more often than the mimes of the old west!
    9. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by klieber · · Score: 2

      I don't think you understand my point -- even if the cost of two naval ships are variable, it is generally possible to say "naval ship A cost us $100 and naval ship B cost us $500"

      Boeing cannot quantify those figures for a 747. When a 747 rolls off the production line, they do not know how much that plane has cost them to build.

      I don't care how you slice it, when a company cannot define the cost of their product, that's a problem.

      --
      Gentoo Linux http://gentoo.org/
    10. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they switched to MS Office and are trying to use the Spread Sheet to calculate it. But every single time they open it, it shows different numbers.

    11. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by markov_chain · · Score: 1

      Hey, remember that /. story about how the FTC was setting up fake investor-baiting scam websites to teach people a lesson about dangers of investing? Maybe this CoolChips plc. is one of those fake companies!

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    12. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by markmoss · · Score: 2

      I'm not qualified to comment on the stock manipulation aspect, but I've got several questions on the science and engineering end:

      They say it is solid-state, based on a "Vacuum Diode." What the f* does that mean?

      Actual cooling has't been measured. Apparently they measure the current through it, and calculate a theoretical cooling rate from that -- assuming it works as expected, which hasn't been tested, if I understood correctly...

      5,000W/cm^2 cooling: A TO-220 power transistor has approximately 1cm^2 of metal pad on the back to contact the heatsink. I can put a heatsink the size of a car on that, with the very best thermal grease made, and if I run the transistor at 20W of heat it will fry because the heat can't get out to the heatsink fast enough. That's 1/250 of what they claim their device can do. Maybe if they soldered fins right onto both sides of the device, and circulated water at high velocity on both sides... But that has nothing to do with useful applications.

      A more realistic use would be to settle for a significantly lower W/cm^2, and mount tiny chips far apart so there is perhaps 1cm^2 of metal for .01cm^2 of chip.

      Cost: Not mentioned at all. Aerospace companies like Boeing can use the best technology regardless of cost, the rest of us have to look at whether it's worth it...

    13. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by grytpype · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh, this is easy. Just follow the following steps.

      1) Look at your bank account.
      2) Make an airplane.
      3) Look at your bank account again. The difference is what it cost to make the airplane.

      --

      - Have a picture

    14. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by Kanasta · · Score: 2

      Doesn't this just mean we should still buy shares, but sell them sooner rather than later?

    15. Re:This reeks of stock manipulation... by mpe · · Score: 2

      Boeing cannot quantify those figures for a 747. When a 747 rolls off the production line, they do not know how much that plane has cost them to build.

      You'd think they'd have some idea by now. It's not as if a 747 is a new aircraft design.

      I don't care how you slice it, when a company cannot define the cost of their product, that's a problem.

      So long as they avoid selling it at below cost it probably isn't a serious problem though :)

  31. Sounds reasonable by HalfFlat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Reading their technology explanation, the idea certainly seems reasonable enough! The trick being of course in the manufacturing of the two very close but seperated layers.

    If I understood their physics-for-dummies explanation correctly, the principle relies on two metals separated by a very thin gap; a potential difference across the plates encourages tunneling of electrons across the gap, carrying heat with them.

    IANAP, but I'm sure someone here is: doesn't vibration at the atomic scale in some crystalline medium also act like a particle? Can these guys also tunnel across gaps, or is their weird quantum nature restricted to the single medium they're expressed in? If they could tunnel, I would have thought that as the heat differential across the plates increased, their tunneling would also increase, acting as a break on the process and bringing about an equilibrium situation (temperature differential vs. potential differential.) Or is the mechanism for equilibrium simply black-body radiation across the gap, or similar?

    What sort of temperature differentials are possible through a device like this? Is it only limited by mechanical constraints?

    Hope these thoughts aren't entirely moronic.

    1. Re:Sounds reasonable by Kynde · · Score: 4, Insightful

      IANAP, but I'm sure someone here is: doesn't vibration at the atomic scale in some crystalline medium also act like a particle? Can these guys also tunnel across gaps, or is their weird quantum nature restricted to the single medium they're expressed in? If they could tunnel, I would have thought that as the heat differential across the plates increased, their tunneling would also increase, acting as a break on the process and bringing about an equilibrium situation (temperature differential vs. potential differential.) Or is the mechanism for equilibrium simply black-body radiation across the gap, or similar?


      (I was a physicist)
      Vibrations if atoms in a solid indeed behave like particles. They're called phononss. Them aswell as the electrons are basically responsible of the heat conduction in solids. Only electrons and other electric particles can tunnel. Phonons are very much like particles but they do need the medium (i.e. the solid) to travel in, where as electrons are not bound by medium.

      What I see happening with this system of theirs is a lot of excess heat that has to be taken away once it's on the other side.

      People cooling their pcs should remember that their problems are actually quite practical. They have few hundred watts coming out their chasis and that has to dealt with, no matter the actual cooling device next to the cpu. The problem _is_ the CPU producing shit loads.

      There are uses for highpower cooling although most physicists these days disregard the problem and use liquid nitrogen or even liquid helium. It simply kills the heat and releases just some gas that isn't harmfull. One can then produce it somewhere else where exess heat is no longer a problem.

      --
      1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
    2. Re:Sounds reasonable by Kynde · · Score: 1

      I would have thought that as the heat differential across the plates increased, their tunneling would also increase, acting as a break on the process and bringing about an equilibrium situation (temperature differential vs. potential differential.) Or is the mechanism for equilibrium simply black-body radiation across the gap, or similar?

      Forgot to point out that it's quite easy to overcome the thermal potential because it's quite small (think of peltiers or thermo couples). But I'm guessing that the limiting effect comes from the fact that you cannot raise the electrical potential too much over the thermal potential because it would cause arcing. What I am curious is how are they gonna keep the plates so close by (we are talking about tunneling here, so they're gonna have to be pretty damn close) so nicely given the temperatue differences and thermal expansions, i.e. I see practical problems ahead.

      Black-body radiation has no role in their device, radiation goes both ways, and that's something that has a "cooling effect" when ever the environment is cooler (i.e. radiates back less that it receives). Besides radiation does what it can without extra appliances anyway.

      --
      1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
    3. Re:Sounds reasonable by ThaReetLad · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Quantum tunneling has little to do with a charge difference between two plates and everything to do with an individual electron having enough kinetic energy that it's Schrodinger wave function has a significant value on the far side of a barrier.

      What they are doing is rather like bouncing a tennis ball against a wall and all of a sudden the ball just appears on the other side of the wall. This isn't the same as throwing it hard enough that it goes through making a hole in the wall, it just has a finite possibility that it could exist on the far side, and then it is.

      The technological problem is that the barrier has to be small enough that the wave function can have a high enough value on the far side that tunneling can occur in large numbers, then the kinetic energy of the electron has to be reduced rapidly so it can't tunnel back, or the electron must be drawn away from the boundary by a potential difference.

      --
      You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    4. Re:Sounds reasonable by Fjord · · Score: 2

      IAANAP, but something seem wrong here. If you are tunnelling electrons from one side to the other to transfer heat out, one of two things will occur: either the inside will become +vely ionized and eventually you will run out of electrons and the cooling will no cease functioning, or electrons will get in some how (and they will really want in to the +ve ionization) and carry heat from the outside. I feel that if they get this thing working, at best they will find
      a) one surface will be cold the other hot until ionization occurs, in which case both sides will become the same and heat will leak into the fridge.
      b) one surface will be cold, one surface will be hot, but in reality, the temperature inside the fridge won't change much (it will however, be a little hotter one the one side of the chip and a little cooler all around the surface of the fridge where the electrons are going back into the fridge). Basically a redistribution of heat, but not the one desired.

      The out comes above depend on whether the inside becomes ionized ot not.

      --
      -no broken link
    5. Re:Sounds reasonable by Quikah · · Score: 2

      Plug the cold side into the wall outlet or a battery or whatever to pump in more electrons. You then just have to get rid of the excess electrons from the hot side so plug that side into ground.

      --
      Q.
    6. Re:Sounds reasonable by Fjord · · Score: 1

      I think I'm just missing something about how electrons are carrying heat, then. why don't the ones from the plug in the wall carry heat?

      --
      -no broken link
    7. Re:Sounds reasonable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do, but the barrier is acting as a filter, since only the ones carrying enough heat tunnel across the gap.

      Assuming it works, of course. It sounds plausible but I can think of various problems or limitations...

  32. L&H : Sometimes the technology is there ! by Katchina'404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Quit off topic, but regarding L&H it should be noted that the technology was indeed there.

    These guys made great products... But that just wasn't enough for them... So they got into these fraudulent revenues schemes with daughter-companies in distant countries...

    Just my 2 cents.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
    1. Re:L&H : Sometimes the technology is there ! by wiredog · · Score: 2
      they got into these fraudulent revenues schemes with daughter-companies

      Hmmm. That sounds familiar. Almost Enronesque.

    2. Re:L&H : Sometimes the technology is there ! by Fjord · · Score: 2

      Not all of the products L&H were pushing were there. Notably, the speech rec for embedded devices was no where near what they claimed. I know because I was tasked with finding a speech rec engine for PDA's for an application we were building at the time. I talked with L&H and it took me 2 months to get them to admit that they didn't have what we were talking about but that we could work with them to port their stuff to WinCE (note WinCE was on their supported platform sheet) and this is after they danced around having them send or demo a device of their choosing so that we could see how well it worked and if it would work well with our application. We couldn't even get a demo. Once they said we'd have to port it but that they'd help us (without showing us how well it worked even in their labs), it was basically "no thanks".

      --
      -no broken link
    3. Re:L&H : Sometimes the technology is there ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
        • they got into these fraudulent revenues schemes with daughter-companies
        Hmmm. That sounds familiar. Almost Enronesque.

      I don't remember the details, but it is similar to Enron, but probably even worse.

      What L&H, IIRC, did was to setup daughter companies that purchased product from the parent. L&H showed the sales as revenue, when actually they were just moving it around.

      Similar to Enron, the daughter companies were funded by stock in the parent. SEC accounting rules didn't require that the company reports what it does with stock that it holds in itself.

      Enron also used this device to fund their daughter companies, where they placed all of their bad investments. Both Enron and L&H were playing around with hugely inflated stock values. Things got dicey when the market collapsed out from under them.

      I've heard it said that accounting rule changes brought in with the Contract With America (US Congress of 1994) are to blame for some of this. The Accounting firms were shielded, to some extent, from liability in court cases under the guise of "Tort Reform". I just heard this in passing one day on NPR, so it could be not entirely reliable.

  33. "Baffling" Logo by twentycavities · · Score: 4, Funny

    Could someone please come up with a reasonable theory on what the hell the dolphin-with-pick-ax logo is supposed to be before my head explodes?

    --
    Monstromart: Where shopping is a baffling ordeal
    1. Re:"Baffling" Logo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it has to do with cooling, and it uses quantum tunneling ?

      "My Guess"

    2. Re:"Baffling" Logo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not a pickaxe. Its a sun umbrella (protecting the dolphin from the suns heat.

      Now does that seem more appropriate?

    3. Re:"Baffling" Logo by coryboehne · · Score: 1

      It's not a dolphin, it's a whale... DUH =)

    4. Re:"Baffling" Logo by Kynde · · Score: 1

      Dolphins did/do have a funny way of communicating with the human kind, eh. Double sommersault with a flip or something was "so long and thanks for all the fish", eh.

      Who knows if a weird face with a pick axe has something to do with colling based on quatum tunneling... :)

      --
      1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
    5. Re:"Baffling" Logo by suss · · Score: 5, Funny

      Could someone please come up with a reasonable theory on what the hell the dolphin-with-pick-ax logo is supposed to be before my head explodes?

      You'll find out next time you'll go for a swim at the beach... no more mr nice dolphin!

    6. Re:"Baffling" Logo by Seedy2 · · Score: 2

      I think it's a Beluga Whale.
      That's a whale that lives in the arctic.

      note the lack of dorsal fin.

      --
      Nothing to say here... move along
    7. Re:"Baffling" Logo by DoctorFrog · · Score: 1

      The dolphins escaped the destruction of the Earth in Douglas Adams' "So Long and Thanks For All The Fish" by escaping to another quantum continuum. The pickaxe is obviously for quantum tunnelling across barriers...

    8. Re:"Baffling" Logo by ksp · · Score: 1

      "Could someone please come up with a reasonable theory on what the hell the dolphin-with-pick-ax logo [coolchips.com] is supposed to be before my head explodes?"

      If you can think of another logo that will make people any more likely to think of quantum tunneling cooling with 80% efficiency, go right ahead and draw me one!

      --
      What is the sound of one hand clapping?
      cat /dev/null > /dev/audio
    9. Re:"Baffling" Logo by squaretorus · · Score: 2

      Its clearly a cheap logo, but the idea I assume is to relate the work the company does to an environmental advantage.

      The pick axe is a symbol of work, and a basic tool, every one needs one! It also has commie undertones which is good in these dull times.

      The dolphin being a bit of a symbol of the environmental movement and also considered to be an intelligent creature - so this is showing us green AND intelligent credentials!

      its all been drawn by a 2 year old using the gimp though, so it loses all cred. Had it been designed by anyone who has seen a GOOD logo in the past 20 years it could have been okay!

    10. Re:"Baffling" Logo by buckeyeguy · · Score: 2
      Well, how about a cold-climate bird, like say... a penguin? Yeah, a penguin!

      What, it's taken? Oh. Nuts.

      --
      I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
    11. Re:"Baffling" Logo by arnie_apesacrappin · · Score: 2
      Follow me here, as I had a good thought.

      Ask yourself, what if it is a whale (as other posters pointed out) and a pick axe. Pick axes were used in the "olden days" for mining. What, if in some sick inside joke, their logo is indicating they are mining for whales, i.e. investors that have a lot of money that will be easily parted with.

      my .02 sacagaweas

      --

      Still, with a plan, you only get the best you can imagine. I'd always hoped for something better than that. -CP

    12. Re:"Baffling" Logo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually the logo for Borealis (the parent company). Borealis started as a minerals exploration company (hence the pickaxe). Presumably the dolphin implies an "environmentally friendly" focus to their research (and hopefully to their mining!).

    13. Re:"Baffling" Logo by BlameFate · · Score: 1
      It's a Balooga Whale; they live in cool climates; the arctic and so forth; hence Cool

      And the pickaxe? well; you can use one to break rocks into stone chips right? hence Chips

      Hey Presto = Cool Chips

      --

      --is not to be confused with user #672982 - Bame Flait

    14. Re:"Baffling" Logo by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Obviously they also manufacture pick-axes and dolphins. They are truly a diverse company.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    15. Re:"Baffling" Logo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The logo looks like a beluga whale found in the arctic, along with a pick-axe.

      If you look at their parent company Borealis Expeditions and the fact that they are holding mineral rights to a very large body of iron ore in Northern Canada, then the whale logo makes sense.

      If the company is not legit, there was an awful lot of work coming up with a fraud (apparently they have a USPTO patent.)

      It seems like the technology tack is an approach to go after the high grade ore. They have a lot of other interesting ideas they seem to be working on.

      Worth keeping an eye on, but I'm holding onto my cash until I see some proof.

    16. Re:"Baffling" Logo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dolphin in the water represents cool things, and you can use a pick to chip at things......duh!

    17. Re:"Baffling" Logo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (and hopefully to their mining!)

      Except of course that in the mid-1990's the gov't of the (then) NW Territories, Canada filed suit against them (and won, I believe) for failing to clean up at least one of their mining sites according to their land contract. Try a google for Borealis Exploration, it's in there somewhere.

      Doesn't sound terribly environmentally friendly, now, does it? But maybe it does make for a good reason to 'skip town' so to speak. Hello, Gibraltar! :)

  34. Wow by SlugLord · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If the efficiency on these things is at all realistic --80% of Carnot efficiency!!!-- the implications would be staggering. For comparison purposes, the most efficient gasoline engine is currently about 50%, and that is only true for diesel engines on the order of 100,000 horsepower. all I have to say is Wow. Think: efficient solar power, electric cars, air conditioning, superconductivity, asynchronous computers, overclocking Athlons. If there were ever anything to top cold fusion, it would be an 80% efficient Carnot engine.

    1. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Efficiency of 80% sounds nice, but you have to remove the heat from the hotside HELLA FAST to make use of that efficiency ... I imagine with the efficiency being dependent on the close proximity of the cold/hot side that the isolation between the two will be pretty pitifull.

    2. Re:Wow by negativethirsty · · Score: 1

      ya as an mech eng, I had to read it twice when i woke up. I thought i was sleepwalking/dreaming.

      --

      thirsty*i^2

      "Ya I finished that last week, it just doesn't work"
    3. Re:Wow by rtaylor · · Score: 2

      The only problem with that statement is that this is a single part. It'll take way more parts to make it useful (heatsink, fan, or liquid cooling).

      So... Add up the efficiencies of everything else and you might get 50% of of it in the end which is still excellent but not quite as staggering.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    4. Re:Wow by BattleTroll · · Score: 0

      Who cares about 80% efficiency if it costs a fortune? If my next refrigerator costs $10k, it's certainly not more efficient for me. Until they tell me how much it'll cost, I'll stick with the tried and true methods.

    5. Re:Wow by SlugLord · · Score: 1

      Well I think you're looking at a really specific and frankly trivial application of a monstrous invention. The mindblowing part is not the application to computers, but rather the fact that it's a thermoelectric heat engine that runs at 80% of theoretical efficiency. nothing runs that efficiently. well, except for transformers. but an 80% efficient heat engine is more like a flux capacitor than an uber-cool CPU fan.

    6. Re:Wow by SlugLord · · Score: 1

      I think you're missing the point. There won't be any heat sinks with these things attached any time soon, but the fact is that if this technology can be built to last long enough, power companies running 80% carnot-efficient solar panels would put every coal miner out of business and cars running on 80% carnot efficient electrical motors would make fossil fuels all but useless. This invention could totally change the way we live.

      You fail to see the real effects by simply assuming that this is a consumer product, which it clearly is not. Your refridgerator would not benefit much from this. A 60% increase in fridge efficiency is trivial. Think of this invention more like quantum computing and less like an uber-fridge

    7. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      efficient solar power, electric cars, air conditioning, superconductivity, asynchronous computers, overclocking Athlons

      God bless you SlugLord

    8. Re:Wow by rtaylor · · Score: 2

      Actually, tons of things are that efficient if you take an individual component out of the system and test only that.

      A single transister is extreamly efficient. But multiple the efficiency of 100k of them in a row and you can see how it causes the system to suck (CPUs).

      Aside from that, you still need to move the heat coming out the other side somewhere doesn't mater what application it's used in. I'd be very surprised if this was put into a computer anytime soon. We could be very good at getting the heat an inch away from the CPU (those skills aren't often practiced -- solid copper housings for example). We suck at moving it any further than that.

      The temperature differential on the CPU doesn't matter if the case or ambiant temperature simply raises by the opposite vector. Temperature of 20 degrees, peltier which keeps 10 degree difference, makes for a cpu at 10 degrees.

      --
      Rod Taylor
  35. good intuition by dollargonzo · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, it is NOT restricted to the medium they are using. electrons can tunnel through anything, because they are borrowing some needed energy (to get through the barrier) from time, because delta t*E = h_bar...so since the uncertainty in time * energy cannot be less, electrons can borrow some energy and give it back later. The bigger the potential, clearly the less likely it is they will tunnel. also, when u speak of vibration at atomic scale, it is more the OTHER way around: particles at the atomic scale act like waves...that is really the ONLY reason there is quantum tunneling at all!

    QED

    --
    BSD is for people who love UNIX. Linux is for those who hate Microsoft.
  36. Quote from the pressrelease: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "cooling has not been directly measured to date"

    I'll put buying that stock on hold for awhile.

  37. You can't get much from very little... by stienman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If the technology works (as pointed out by the press release no cooling has actually been achieved) then it likely will remain far too expensive for the return on energy savings for quite some time. It will have a place in aerospace and defense (typical areas where high cost and short life can be justified with gains in weight and energy savings) but you won't be seeing it in your refridgerator for some time - at least not until they make a cheaper (less efficient) version which can be mass produced and lasts for years.

    They, like many companies, have a lot of theory, a lot of calculations, and a lot of patents. Chances are they are hoping to sell it all to someone who has the resources to really try it out. Along with their other 'innovations' it appears that they are an IP company.

    -Adam

  38. Real Efficiency? by Performer+Guy · · Score: 2

    So what's the definition of efficiency for cooling devices?

    What constitutes "work done" in this case.

    Real physicists only please.

    1. Re:Real Efficiency? by SlugLord · · Score: 1

      Essentially, the carnot cycle defines work in terms of entropy. If you have a hot region and a cold region separated by a barrier, you have little entropy. if you allow the regions to approach the same temperature, you have increased the entropy. As it turns out, you can exploit this differential to produce more "useful" forms of stored energy. The temperature differential stores energy, and a Carnot engine (which cannot exist) would convert all of that energy into some other kind of energy (mechanical potential, electrical potential, whatever). The laws of thermodynamics require that entropy not decrease in a closed system, so the efficiency of heat engines is measured in terms of the carnot efficiency, which is, by the way, ( (temperature of the hot side) - (temperature of the cold side) ) / (temperature of the hot side) the temperatures must be measured in an absolute scale (e.g., Kelvins).

    2. Re:Real Efficiency? by dackroyd · · Score: 1

      Same efficiency as always, energy out from the work / energy put in to do the work.

      In this case the energy out is the potential energy of the heat that's been moved around,or how much energy you could back from that heat.

      eg if you use the a cooling device to heat one block of metal whilst cooling another block of metal, you could use a thermocouple device to generate electricity. The theoretical maximum amount of energy you can generate would be the energy out from the cooling device. The amount of energy used by the cooling device would be the work in.

      --
      "Free software as in beer, copy protection as in racket" - Telsa Gwynne
  39. Is this right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the text of the above post:
    Electrons can tunnel across a 1-10 nanometer gap with a 10 Amp current.
    Will the heating effect outweight the cooling?

    1. Re:Is this right? by wheany · · Score: 1

      It always will. The point is that you also move the extra heat away from whatever it is you are cooling.

      Your processor might run at 70 degrees celsius without cooling, you put the coolchip against it, and the processor will be at, say, 40 degrees, while the hot side of the coolchip will be at, for example, 120 degrees.

  40. *HINT* *HINT* Laws of Thermodynamics by Rolo+Tomasi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can't generate "cold" out of thin air. If one side of this thing gets cold, the other one will get hot. From their website: "Cool Chips plc has devised "Cool Chips" which use electrons to carry heat from one side of a vacuum diode to the other." So you still have to get rid of the heat on the "cool chip", and the hot side will have to dissipate more heat than the cold side absorbs, because efficiency can never be 100%. This means it works like a peltier, just (probably) more efficient.

    --
    Did you know you can fertilize your lawn with used motor oil?
    1. Re:*HINT* *HINT* Laws of Thermodynamics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When they say "cooling not measured" I assume they mean that the cold side has not been measured to have cooled down ... if the isolation between the two layers isnt large enough, or if the efficiency of transfer isnt high enough there will be no cooling.

    2. Re:*HINT* *HINT* Laws of Thermodynamics by bluGill · · Score: 2

      I think they were trying to imply that (in market speak) when they said efficencies of up to 80%, compared to a fridge of 50%, or peltier of 10%. The latter two numbers are about right for real world. If they can achive 80% efficiancies and the chip doesn't cost too much (the guts of a fridge are a hundred or so) this could easially replace all the fridges and air conditioners out there at a net savings of a large amount of electrisity.

      Sure you have to get rid of the heat, but it doesn't appear that they were claiming you didn't have to do that, rather they seem to be cliaming that you have to get rid of less heat then other technologies.

    3. Re:*HINT* *HINT* Laws of Thermodynamics by qweqwe · · Score: 1

      But consider this. It's possible to convert energy from one form to another. Wouldn't it be possible to convert the excess heat into, say, electrical energy?

    4. Re:*HINT* *HINT* Laws of Thermodynamics by cthulhubob · · Score: 1

      That's what they're talking about doing...

      It's at 80% efficiency, which is pretty good. That means it only loses 20% of the energy as waste heat (which isn't recovered). The rest of it is recoverable. You never gain energy, the best you can do is only lose a little bit, and that's what they're talking about. This device loses less energy than a refrigerator or a Peltier unit.

      --

      In post-9/11 America, the CIA interrogates YOU!
    5. Re:*HINT* *HINT* Laws of Thermodynamics by blair1q · · Score: 2

      Extra huge damn hint with a no-way Jose' on top:

      vacuum diode

      Now, if it's a vacuum, it's got no air in it. And if it's got no air in it, you're not cooling air with it, so you're not cooling your room with it.

      You'll have to set up a circulation system that brings a fluid in contact with the cooler and pumps it to a big heat-exchanger which (ta-daaaaaa!) is going to drop your net efficiency by a ton.

      Saying "one square inch will cool a refrigerator at 80% efficiency" for this thing is like saying "a one-square-millimeter aperture in a compressor will cool a refrigerator at 80% efficiency"...

      --Blair
      "You can't win, you can't break even, and you can't quit the game."

    6. Re:*HINT* *HINT* Laws of Thermodynamics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What have you been smoking son?

    7. Re:*HINT* *HINT* Laws of Thermodynamics by brooks_talley · · Score: 2

      I tend to agree that this looks like just so much more bunk.

      However, what they seem to be claiming is that the technology converts heat into electricity, which would allow you to then transport that energy somewhere else where it could do some good rather than just directly heating up the air.

      So there's no violation of thermodynamics; ultimately, that waste heat would be put back out by a motor, or a light bulb, or a television set. It's just the idea of being able to direct it to something other than radiant heat that's novel.

      All that said, I still don't believe it for a minute, but we might as well shoot it down legitimately.

      -b

    8. Re:*HINT* *HINT* Laws of Thermodynamics by Royster · · Score: 2

      There are thermodynamic limits to how much usable energy you can get out of heat. I believe that the maximum theoretical efficiency to generate any form of coherent energy from heat is 50%. Another fundamental limit is the difference in temperature between your source and your sink. You need to force heat to flow from a hot area (the back of this thing) to a cooler one through some kind of device to extract the energy.

      I just can't imagine the temperature that the hot side of something 2" square cooling a room must get. But thousands of BTU per hour is a lot of heat to dump from a small area. The thing must glow.

      --
      I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
  41. Questions.... by bogado · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even if their claim is 100% true I do have two questions about this tecnology before puting any money in it.

    How cheap (or expensive) this chips are?

    How long they endure?

    If they costs 1000s of dolars and work for a year I would stick to the cooler fan and my good old refrigerator.

    --
    []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

    ^[:wq

    1. Re:Questions.... by endoboy · · Score: 1
      Nobody can even hazard a guess at accurate answers to any of your questions.

      Boeing performed an EVALUATION not a TEST. The evaluation is a paper (and maybe computational simulation, if they want to spend the $$) project. The goal of such an eval is to answer the "is it possible" question, not to answer the "is it feasible" question.

      These are concepts (aka vaporware), not chips. Even if everything they claim is true, it's going to be a number of years before they're commercially available.

      The impossible is easy. Its the unfeasible that poses the problem....

  42. California by coryboehne · · Score: 1

    Well, from what I see California's problems could all possibly be solved! If this chip can do what they say it can (I'm not buying stock yet, but I'll be watching) California's electricity problems may be completely solved, consider the reduction of electricity consumption and the electricity production capibilities and you see where I'm going with this..... Now if it only works.........

    1. Re:California by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      California's electricity problems were not technological, they were economical. Enron, baby.

  43. Cooling and power by Hellkitten · · Score: 1

    If this actually works (big if) strap one onto the CPU of a laptop, while it cools down the processor it converts the heat into electricity. Then use this electricity to power the laptop

    Of course there will be some loss of energy so it won't run forever, but it might extend the battery life. Also you could put the fastest prosessors available in a laptop since you don't need to worry (as much) about excess heat and enegy consumption

    Cana nyone tell me how much of a laprops battery is used to power the prosessor, and how much of this is released as heat? How efficient would these cool chips have to be before it makes a noticable difference on battery lilfe?

    Maybe I shouldn't haave posted this (prior art) and patented the idea instead?

    --
    - We are the slashdot. Resistance is futile. Prepare to be moderated -
    1. Re:Cooling and power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It won't work because you need to supply power to the unit to provide the potential difference that moves the heat, and a _really_ good heatsink on the other side to keep the heat transferring across the junction (otherwise it has almost no effect). It actually wastes more energy moving the heat... it gets nothing back. If you have a naturally occuring heat potential difference, you can generate energy (but that slows the rate of heat transfer, not useful for cooling a CPU).

  44. Stocks.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if they cool as fast as their stock dropped the last week....

    http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/chart.jsp?symbol =C OLCF&duration=2-6-8-0-0-77

  45. Post got a bit mangled, read this instead by Salsaman · · Score: 2
    Ooops, Slashdot doesn't seem to like less-than signs in posts.

    So here goes again.

    It could work in theory I think, due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The electrons could 'borrow' some energy on the cold side, which allows them to tunnel through the gap. They then return the borrowed energy on the hot side. Provided the amount of 'borrowed' energy * the time they borrow it for is less than h (Planck's constant) then this is allowed by physics.

    A potential gradient across the gap reduces the chance that electrons can tunnel back in the other direction. You have to provide power to create this potential gradient, which is where the 80% efficient figure comes from.

    The company's breakthrough is apparently making this gap with enough area that electrons can move en masse through it, thus providing a large cooling effect.

  46. Isn't this unphysical? by davecl · · Score: 0

    I have doubts about some of the claims here on the
    basis of fundamental physics. The laws of thermodynamics set clear limits on the efficiency you can get out of a heat engine, and I worry that the claimed figures are too high to be allowed by physical law - especially for the power generation claims.

    1. Re:Isn't this unphysical? by SlugLord · · Score: 1

      No, they say it's 80% of the *Carnot efficiency*. The Carnot efficiency is that physical limit to which you refer, and efficiency in heat engines is generally reported as a percentage of the Carnot efficiency. 80% is still huge though.

  47. The company's breakthrough is by oliverthered · · Score: 1

    To make it efficient? and controlable.
    The main problem i see is in the transit of the electrons/energy across several atoms etc...

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    1. Re:The company's breakthrough is by Salsaman · · Score: 2

      "The main problem i see is in the transit of the electrons/energy across several atoms etc..."

      Already been done - that's how a transistor works. With a transistor though, the gap is on a much smaller scale (cross section), so any cooling effects will be far outweighed by other inefficiencies in the system.

    2. Re:The company's breakthrough is by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      Or super conductiors,
      Maybe they demonstrated it on a small scale, (a few attoms) which shouldn't be that hard, but on a large scale the qauntum plot gets a bit lost

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  48. 70% to 80% of CARNOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The cool chip can only provide 70% to 80% efficiency of the CARNOT CYCLE, which is 52.6% efficient. So the cool chip are really between 36.82% to 42.08% efficient

    1. Re:70% to 80% of CARNOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The efficiency of a Carnot cycle is directly related to the temperatures between which it operates.

      What temperatures were you using to get your 52.6% efficiency?

  49. Could I ask a dumb question? by streetlawyer · · Score: 2

    Given that my living room is rather larger than two square inches, and given that these chips apparently produce a hot side and a cool side, what is the point in saying that a two inch square panel could cool my living room? Surely the other side of this panel would be simultaneously heating my living room. Isn't the problem with all these sorts of coolers the means of getting the heat away from the hot side?

    1. Re:Could I ask a dumb question? by rjforster · · Score: 1

      You don't put the whole thing in your living room, that would be like trying to cool your kitchen by leaving the fridge door open. Try it!

      It would work just like a regular air-con unit, ie it is placed in an outside wall. The part of the box that is inside your living room has air blown across the cold side of the chip (well, across a heatsink stuck to the cold side but you get the idea) while the hot side is outside your house and has air from outside blown across it. The clever bit is that the cooling part is only a couple of square inches in area, before fans and air-hoses are added to actually get the air across the heatsink and back out into your room.

      And to those you say this is rubbish because it puts the 'hot' and 'cold' only millimeters apart obviously have not seen peltier coolers, which are only millimeters thick anyway and are stupidly inefficient, but are still used becuae they are all we have have when you need to put _that_ component at exactly _this_ temperature (like a telecomms DWDM laser).

    2. Re:Could I ask a dumb question? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >You don't put the whole thing in your living room, that would be like trying to cool your kitchen by leaving the fridge door open. Try it!

      Please do not suggest that idea to somebody who considers themselves a lawyer. They will try it

    3. Re:Could I ask a dumb question? by sweet+reason · · Score: 2

      Surely the other side of this panel would be simultaneously heating my living room.

      oh, so that's why the air conditioner i put in the middle of my living room isn't coolling it!

      --
      Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. -- A.E.
  50. Dolphin logo.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That logo reminds me of one of my alltime favourite Onion articles about Dolphins growing opposable thumbs. 'Oh shit' says humanity!

  51. power saving by sirius_bbr · · Score: 0

    If these chips also work in reverse, so they can make electricity out of heat, wouldn't it then be possible to use the heat from the CPU to generate electricity to power the CPU. OK, still additional power will be needed, but it looks like a win-win situation to me - cool your CPU and save some power!

    --
    this sig has intentionally been left blank
  52. This is amazing... by BlueUnderwear · · Score: 2

    An article about Chip Cooling, and not a single mention over overclocking yet! Could it be that really nobody got yet the idea of glueing such a "cool chip" back-to-back to a normal CPU, and let it rip?

    --
    Say no to software patents.
    1. Re:This is amazing... by teaserX · · Score: 1

      I dunno. It's my understanding that peltiers have been responsible for shorting due to condensation occasionally. I would expect the problem to be greater with a more efficient device. Maybe putting a small one inside case to cool the ciculating air? Nice idea, though.

      --
      We really need your help
      http://www.gofundme.com/help-sherry
  53. Moving heat with electrons? by pongo000 · · Score: 2

    What kind of current requirements would be necessary to move heat from one surface to another, one electron at a time? Sounds like one would have to move a good number of them per unit time. For instance, a typical Peltier module (a Melcor CP1.4-71-06L is what I have here) has an internal resistance of about 1.7 ohms. Which means that at 8 volts, you're pumping a little less than 5 amps through for a temperature drop of about 50 deg. C. That's what, P=IE, or somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 watts in! Energy to move the electrons has to come from somewhere. I'd sure like to see the specs on these babies.

  54. Even more off topic by vrt3 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Even more off topic:

    $ wget http://www.madcow404.com
    --13:41:45-- http://www.madcow404.com/
    => `index.html'
    Resolving www.madcow404.com... done.
    Connecting to www.madcow404.com[130.104.18.126]:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 504 Gateway Time-out
    13:43:00 ERROR 504: Gateway Time-out.

    --
    This sig under construction. Please check back later.
  55. Re:cooling laptops by maddogsparky · · Score: 2, Funny
    Well, at least you won't have to heat your grits before putting them down your shorts... ;-)

    --
    science is a religion
  56. Isn't this Maxwell's Daemon? by tshoppa · · Score: 2
    Of course, some electrons have high energy, while some electrons have low energy. The low energy electrons are cold, while the high energy electrons are hot. Cooling with electrons involves encouraging the high energy electrons to escape, bringing in low energy electrons to replace them.

    Isn't this exactly the same as Maxwell's Demon, which violates the second law of thermodynamics?

    1. Re:Isn't this Maxwell's Daemon? by vrmlguy · · Score: 2
      "Alas, Maxwell's Demon is an impossible beast. [...] The essence of the refutation is that the Demon cannot see the molecules unless he uses a flashlight, and thus spends energy."

      The cooling chip uses externally supplied electricity to run. This powers the "flashlight", meaning that no violation of the Second Law need occur. The refridgerator in my kitchen does the same thing: It moved high-energy atoms from the coiled pipe inside to the grid of pipes in the back, by using electricity to move the atoms.

      --
      Nothing for 6-digit uids?
    2. Re:Isn't this Maxwell's Daemon? by DLWormwood · · Score: 1

      The essence of the refutation is that the Demon ... spends energy.

      I came to this conclusion within the first paragraph of the linked discussion. Even if the demon is said to not need energy to open/close the shutter (which is a bogus assumption) and even granting supernatural knowledge of the molecules, the fact that the shutter is moving/changing state adds heat to the system via friction, so energy is being added to the system as a whole.

      Maxwell's Demon can't exist not just because of the 2nd law, but that the prerequisite for anything "to not spend energy" doing work can't exist.

      --
      Those who complain about affect & effect on /. should be disemvoweled
    3. Re:Isn't this Maxwell's Daemon? by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 2
      Isn't this exactly the same as Maxwell's Demon, which violates the second law of thermodynamics?


      If you want something that would seem to be a Maxwell's Demon, search at Google for Hilsch Vortex Tube. A Hilsch tube takes a stream of compresses air, and hot air comes out one end, cold air comes out the other. (Yes, they are real).

  57. Limerick by TonyMillion · · Score: 3, Funny

    Cold chips were the companies claim,
    Some said of them "they're insane",
    The chips got no colder,
    the investors got a tolder,
    your stocks worthless, oh what a shame.

    1. Re:Limerick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's a "tolder"?? Dictionary.com has no helpful suggestions...

  58. Just a metal plate and no more? by sdqume · · Score: 1

    Hang on, what is the difference between this and a 2mm thick piece of sheet metal, except for the fact that the sheet metal is 100% efficient in moving heat from one side to the other as it uses 0 current, and produces the same result?

    1. Re:Just a metal plate and no more? by Kajakske · · Score: 1

      The difference is, your metal plate would be hot on 2 sides, the cool chip would be cold on one (the CPU side) and hot on the other ...

    2. Re:Just a metal plate and no more? by sdqume · · Score: 1

      So where does the heat go then? if you can get rid of it from the cooler, then you can just get rid of it from the chip. My point is a piece of metal would cool until it warms up its self, then no more unless it was cooled. I can see the difference if it was working like they describe, but the thermal insulation between the two sides would be impossible (IANAPhysicist, but i doubt insulation like that, even a perfect vacuum, would work).

    3. Re:Just a metal plate and no more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The biggest difference is that a 2mm peice of sheet metal is not a heat pump, it would tranfer heat into the cold room instead of out out of it. A heat pump transfers heat in the opposite direction that heat would normally flow. Heat Pumps require a "Heat Sink" in which to transfer their energy into our out of. This Heat sink is generally the outside of your house, or the outside of your refridgerator. The refridgerator in your kitchen actually heats your house because it is transfering the "heat" from the inside of the fridge to the outside. There is also aditional loss since energy must be applied. So as someone pointed out if you try to cool your room by leaving your fridge open, all you do is actually heat your room. The trick then of course is to be able to transfer the heat from the hot side of this wafer to another system that will maintain the same temperature no matter how much energy the heat pump transfers.

    4. Re:Just a metal plate and no more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm surprised by how many of you, who can probably tear a computer apart in 15 minutes, dont know how refridgerators work. Let's think about this:

      If your fridge only equalized the temperature between the inside and outside through conduction, it would be, oh, about room temperature inside, wrouldnt it? Now everyone please open the fridge and observe that it is NOT ROOM TEMPERATURE.

      Heat exchangers move heat, "exchanging" it, if you will, to a spot that is hotter than where the heat came from. They work even where conduction would not. Hasn't anyone had high-school phyics?

  59. Sweet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's so sweet when Jenga Fett's head gets sliced off by Mace Windu!!! And Yoda opens up a serious can on the Count.

    1. Re:Sweet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      JANGO Fett! J-A-N-G-O, Jango! Not Jenga, you illiterate fuck!

      Jenga = Game.
      Jango = Bounty hunter.

      Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!

  60. "Your Company" Mad Libs by kriegsman · · Score: 2
    Your Company is a member of the Borealis Family of Companies, and is incorporated in Gibraltar.

    Is it just me, or does this look like a template document where someone missed one of the 'search and replace' terms? E.g. Perhaps Borealis provides this boilerplate text to all of the companies they try this with.

    Clerical errors are by no means an indication of anything more sinister. But clerical errors in the stock trading information that a company provides don't really make me feel especially warm and fuzzy.

    -Mark

  61. Big, funky heatsink needed? by geoswan · · Score: 2
    Maybe they are talking about ... having a big funky heatsink on the outside which you could fry an egg on...

    I wondered about this too. So, how about that quantum-cooled fridge? I didn't imagine that radiator being hot enough to fry an egg. I imagined it hot enough to start a fire, degrade the drywall it was backed up against, melt lead, melt steel.

    But maybe if each individual level is microscopic, instead of a single wafer with all the elements on it, your quantum fridge or quantum air conditioner is has a pair of panels with dozens of smaller quantum cooling wafers scattered, at intervals, so the heat load wasn't too high at any particlar point.

  62. Gibraltar (OT) by mashx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're probably right as Gibraltar is a tax haven. However Gibraltar is just a big Rock peninsular at the southern tip of Spain. It is not an island. And if the British and European governments get their way, it won't be a haven much longer, as it will be assimilated into Spain.

    --

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
  63. Perpetual Motion Machine by syn3rg · · Score: 0
    --
    The contents of this message have been doubly encrypted by ROT13
    1. Re:Perpetual Motion Machine by sirius_bbr · · Score: 0

      I was talking about powersaving, not perpetual motion. I'm aware of the fact that you cannot unplug the machine, and it will keep working. However, you might be able to use the heat to reduce the amount of needed 'extern' power.

      --
      this sig has intentionally been left blank
  64. Lasers meet Quantum Tunnel by oliverthered · · Score: 1

    So,
    take two flat single isomer cristals of a few attoms thick.
    on to each add a uniform raised matrix to each (like an egg box).
    position so that the gap between the raised points is correct for tunneling (given the correct potential).
    provide a even potential between the two crisyals to cause all points tunnel at the sametime (this is the laser bit).
    this should cool one side and heat up the other.

    repeat until cold enough

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  65. Yeah, that'd be a 2 for 1 by CrazyJim0 · · Score: 1

    You'd obviously get it stuck as you're refering...

    But then on top of that its generating electricity.

    Imagine getting your tongue stuck to a 9volt battery. :)

  66. Good to caution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its good of you to throw up the caution, but Borealis has been playing with heat->electricity and how to do it for some time. (and, notice how you can go down to Home Despot and get a thermopile)

    The 'cool chips' end of it was talked about 2-3 years ago, at least. And Boeing was looking at the heat->electricty end of things YEARS ago.

    1. Re:Good to caution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Um, yeah.. I used to work there and um, yeah, and we did some really awesome things.

      Um, yeah, this company is for real guys!! Invest now... Um, and I remember setting up this cooling network, it was so efficient, those 80% numbers are actually on the conservative side. And um, let me see. Yeah, we did all sorts of experiments, this techonology works so friggin well I can't even believe it myself. It's real guys. Um, send money if you want to make millions!

  67. Guardedly Optimistic.... by wowbagger · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I've been seening reports in various trade journals (EE Times, EDN, etc.) about improved thermoelectric coolers, using micromachining to improve on the standard Peltier junction, so these guys may not be full of it.

    The biggest problem with the standard Bismuth Telluride junction (like in your electric cooler chest, or your CPU cooler) is that the material doing the work has to have two contradictory properties:
    1. It must conduct electricity
    2. It must NOT conduct heat well

    The problem is that electrical conduction involve the movement of electrons, which can carry heat with them, so most electrical conductors also conduct heat well. But if you conduct heat, you get leakage from the hot side to the cold side of the device.

    And if you make the device less electrically conductive, you increase the heat generated in the device by the electric current, degrading efficiency. The biggest problem with Peltier junction coolers is that for every watt of heat you move, you MAKE ten watts of waste heat.

    Now, perhaps with proper microstructuring, you could make a system in which electrons under a potential difference tunnel across a gap, carrying heat without providing a thermally conductive path back to the cold side, and perhaps you could get high cooling efficiencies out of such a device. Granted, you still have to pull the heat off the hot side of the device, but if you could (for example) have the cold side at 20C next to your CPU, and the hot side at 120C exposed to an air stream, you will move more heat into the air stream than you would from the 50C surface of a CPU that was not actively cooled.

    So, what they are saying is at least plausable (unlike the "I can move video over three miles of dental floss" crap some folks have fallen for), however the best cons in the world have started from a plausible start.

    I won't whip out MY checkbook until I see a real device, in a real setting, moving real amounts of heat, and can poke, prod, and probe it to my heart (and more importantly, my BRAINS) content.
  68. Sweet deal by Hard_Code · · Score: 2

    Ok, guys, I heard that there was this backwoods genius who invented some, uh, "magic" box, that like, makes normal phone lines faster than a T1! Isn't that crazy! We better get in on this now before some major corporation sweeps this deal up!

    --

    It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
  69. Why this is bullsh*t... by s390 · · Score: 4, Informative

    They claim to have invented a highly efficient (~80%) Peltier device ("CoolChip") using "quantum electronic tunneling" across a near-perfect temperature insulating "gap" of nanoscale width. They claim heat-transfer capabilities on the order of 500w/cm**2 (theoretically, but there aren't any _measurements_ yet, that they have, er... published).

    It's difficult to attack these claims, simply because they haven't _explained_ the physics or materials or construction beyond trendy buzzwords and, by the way, they seem not to have actually _built_ any devices. This is typical of bunco artists hyping seemingly wonderful new technology. See all the "zero point energy" hucksters, for example.

    However, a little common-sense physics is enough to demolish this scam. I'd like to hear their answers to the following questions and objections. But, I bet they won't do it.

    There is no such thing as a near-perfect (or even really good) temperature insulating solid material - the only pretty good temperature insulation is... a vacuum. Any decent vacuum over a nano-scale gap is going to close the gap, real quick (especially if there is the strong electroforce attraction between negative and positive semiconductors helping); that's Strike One.

    Such a Peltier-like device has to work by pumping electrons into the cold side and removing them from the hot side. But injecting electrons into the cold side _excites_ the existing n-doped semiconductor's electron-states, and it's only the rapid migration of those excited electrons away from that layer that removes heat (and the device has to pull away unbound electrons marginally faster than they are injected to provide cooling). It's impossible to extract more electrons than are added without entirely stripping the substrate eventually, and long before that happened you'd see _reverse_ tunneling of electrons into the very depleted cold substrate; here's Strike Two.

    Then there's the claimed energy transfer. At the rate of 500w/cm**2, the hot substrate is going to start generating _photons_ (which have no charge, so they're not going to be bashful about moving _back_ across the "insulating" gap) and they will carry... heat; ergo, Strike Three.

    Sure, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" [A.C. Clarke], and great technological leaps are desireable. But the only "magic" these people have in mind is moving significant amounts of money from scientifically naive, greedy, and gullible investors into their own pockets. But, it were ever thus: caveat emptor.

    1. Re:Why this is bullsh*t... by HalfFlat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Caveat: I really am Not a Physicist, and am talking with little clue. But I don't think it is as bleak a picture as you describe.

      For starters, I thought these weren't necessarily semiconductor based. If I understand the principle correctly, you'd want both sides of the device to behave like metals. 'Hot' electrons would be being replaced by relatively slow-moving electrons from the current source.

      Also, if (big 'if') you can do some fancy molecular footwork so that the two layers are held apart by relatively heat-non-conucting struts, then there could still be a fair amount of room to produce a temperature differential before heat conduction back to the cold side caused equilibrium.

      Lastly, there's always going to be some radiation-based transfer of heat from the hot side to the cold side, but again that just constrains where the equilibrium point is going to be reached. It's possible that in normal operating range, this effect is quite small.

    2. Re:Why this is bullsh*t... by bidule · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I'd say parent is overrated. It is not worth a 5.
      However, a little common-sense physics is enough to demolish this scam. I'd like to hear their answers to the following questions and objections. But, I bet they won't do it.
      It may be because no B. Sc. Physics is more than 10 years away, all this seems very shallow thinking. Lets' go through the "balls".
      There is no such thing as a near-perfect (or even really good) temperature insulating solid material - the only pretty good temperature insulation is... a vacuum. Any decent vacuum over a nano-scale gap is going to close the gap, real quick (especially if there is the strong electroforce attraction between negative and positive semiconductors helping); that's Strike One.
      "The only pretty good contraception is... abstinence."
      There a very high correlation between heat and electrical insulation. If it is good enough for electrical insulation, it is good enough for heat insulation. Ball One.
      Such a Peltier-like device has to work by pumping electrons into the cold side and removing them from the hot side. But injecting electrons into the cold side _excites_ the existing n-doped semiconductor's electron-states, and it's only the rapid migration of those excited electrons away from that layer that removes heat (and the device has to pull away unbound electrons marginally faster than they are injected to provide cooling). It's impossible to extract more electrons than are added without entirely stripping the substrate eventually, and long before that happened you'd see _reverse_ tunneling of electrons into the very depleted cold substrate; here's Strike Two.
      If you read it correctly, you'll see that you need electricity. If you think a little, you'll realize it is to pump away those free electrons. No free electrons, no reverse tunneling. Ball Two.
      Then there's the claimed energy transfer. At the rate of 500w/cm**2, the hot substrate is going to start generating _photons_ (which have no charge, so they're not going to be bashful about moving _back_ across the "insulating" gap) and they will carry... heat; ergo, Strike Three.
      Well, if you are not using vacuum those photons won't go far. But most important, half of the photons will go away from the substrate. This would give a resulting 250W/cm^2 dissipation. Ball Three.

      Still, a single layer is not all that useful but think of a thick waffle of these. Then you could transfer heat far enough and fast enough that you wouldn't have a heat differential problem.

      For those aren't up to speed, here's a quick description on how the cooling works:
      Let's say the substrate has a 3 volts gap and you are using a 2 volts battery to push against the gap. Obviously, this is not enough to allow the electron to cross the gap. Now heat is energy also and there's a statistical distribution of this energy between the electrons. All the electrons with 1 eV of heat energy have (1 eV + 2 eV = 3 eV) enough energy to cross the gap, resulting in a 1 eV energy transfer from the cooling side to the heating one.
      If the cooling substrate becomes hotter, you can use a lower voltage on the battery since there are enough electrons in the 1.5-2 eV range. If it becomes too hot, this happens with a zero-volt battery meaning the subtrate probably doesn't work anymore.

      --
      ID: the nose did not occur naturally, how would we wear glasses otherwise? (apologies to Voltaire)
    3. Re:Why this is bullsh*t... by ivan256 · · Score: 2

      There a very high correlation between heat and electrical insulation. If it is good enough for electrical insulation, it is good enough for heat insulation.

      I am not a physicist, but off the top of my head I can think of two materials that are both excelent heat conductors, and excelent electrical insulators: glass, and diamond. There is hardly a correlation between electral and heat insulation.

    4. Re:Why this is bullsh*t... by lazn · · Score: 1

      re: "If it becomes too hot, this happens with a zero-volt battery meaning the subtrate probably doesn't work anymore."

      They said it can produce electricity from heat, so if it becomes too hot, the battery gets charged.

      If it works at all that is.

    5. Re:Why this is bullsh*t... by RogerRamjet98 · · Score: 1

      Duh:

      Thermal Conductivity of Glass: 0.8 W/m K
      Thermal Conductivity of Copper: 385 W/m K

      I'd like to know on what grounds you consider glass to be an "excellent" conductor of heat.

      Also, while I'm flaming, he said there is a VERY HIGH correlation not a PERFECT correlation. He is correct. Heat Conductors tend to be Electrical Conductors because the conduction mechanics are similar.

  70. Bitboys are back? by Uggy · · Score: 2

    Is it just me or does this distinctly bring back Bitboys Memories (TM)?

    A new chip that does something so mindblowingly amazing... etc.

    --
    Toddlers are the stormtroopers of the Lord of Entropy.
  71. Isn't this a capacitor by luzrek · · Score: 1

    2 plates separated by a very small gap is a capacitor. Capacitors store energy. If you charge one up you deliver energy to it and generate heat. When a capacitor is dis-charged it loses energy and if allowed to equilibrate with the ambient temperature it will end up colder than room temperature. For those looking for a fairly compact way to cool something to liquid nitrogen (LN) temperatures, Ortec EG&G produced a device to cool large Ge Diodes to LN temps for use in gamma ray spectroscophy. I beleive it used Peltire devices and fans. For the record LN is cheaper and easier to use, but more bulky.

    --

    Galium Arsenide is the material of the future, and always will be.

  72. Not 70-80% efficiency! by MarvinMouse · · Score: 4, Informative

    70-80% of the maximum theoretical efficiency (Carnot) for cooling.

    Just so everyone is aware, in thermodynamics the Carnot engine is not a 100% efficient engine. Actually, depending on a few variables, the carnot engine can be incredibly inefficient.

    Stating that the efficiency is 70-80% of the maximum theoretical efficient (Carnot engine) for cooling doesn't mean that much, since it doesn't fit the equation we all think about.

    70-80% = Energy Out/Energy In

    Instead we get

    70-80% = Energy Out/(Energy In * Carnot Efficiency)

    Since |Carnot Efficiency| 1, we end up with a artificial increase in the actual efficiency of the engine.

    I would personally like to see the results of the actual efficiency, not this skewed statistic.

    .....Marvin Mouse.....
    (Math, CS, Physics, Psychology Undergrad)

    --
    ~ kjrose
  73. SEC? by grrjeff · · Score: 1

    Wasn't there something a few months ago about the S.E.C. creating fake companies with glaringly obvious problems (read above, someone pointed out about the offshore tax shelter etc) pandering for investments, with the warning of "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is" ?

    This sounds alot like those, only a little bit more complicated because it involves boeing. Think it's possible they would get a company like boeing involved to pull a big enough hoax to give everyone a shock out of being retarded?

    -Jeff

    1. Re:SEC? by cetan · · Score: 2

      Yes, they did to that, but they did not ask any other company to be a part of the hoax and their website was only one layer deep. If you clicked on any one of the links on the fake site it took you to a real SEC info page about how you could have just been scammed.

      It looks like, from posts prior to this one, that the company really /is/ a scam.

      --
      In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
  74. Not 70-80% by Ruie · · Score: 1

    They only claim 70-80% of Carnot efficiency, not absolute 70-80% efficiency. I.e. this will not be better then the ideal heat cycle device and approximately on par with traditional macroscopic cooling systems like refregirators. Of course, being small, electric powered and having no moving parts is a plus.

  75. quite right, and FYI peltiers explained by Joe+'Nova' · · Score: 3, Informative

    The person is right, you need to sink the heat away, but so do you with ANY cooling device, the heat dissipates indoors for a fridge, outdoors for AC.
    The idea is you wind up with the same amount of heat, just rearranged. Peltiers have a bimetallic junction, which acts as a diode of sorts. A diode will cool on one side, and re-emit the heat at the other. Small effect, but get enough surface area and you have something. The battery op coolers have these things. How they actually work is any dissimilar junction electron needs to overcome a barrier, and the energy it uses normally comes from the voltage applied. Instead, peltiers use the raw thermal energy at the junction gap(the - side) to go to the + side, picking up energy. When they recombine at + side, energy is released as heat.
    Big drawback is most junctions don't take kindly to being heated on either side, so you need to sink them quick.
    This seems to be way more efficient, either not allowing an electron to 'get lucky' and jump over an impurity, or has to continually pick up more thermal energy on the way over, or has a ridiculously efficient manufacture process at nanoscale, and can afford to get just the right material thickness(1-10nM)
    my 2c adjusted for inflation...

    --
    This mind intentionally left blank.
    The KKK a bunch of sheetheads? You decide!
  76. Dolphin? by coryboehne · · Score: 1

    I'm not 100% positive, but let's call it at 99.5% I don't think that logo is of a dolphin at all, rather I beleve that to be a whale, the snout is not at all long enough to be a dolphin, and the proportion of tail to body is more whale like than dolphin like. Or maybe I'm just crazy because I guess it does'nt really matter what the damn thing is, the logo is still funky as all hell.

    1. Re:Dolphin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      think it's a whale on a swing. The swing is on the top of it's backward arc. At least that's what I see.

    2. Re:Dolphin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right it's a beluga whale. Dead belugas are considered toxic waste because they absorb pretty much all the chemicals that we pump into our waterways. Yippee!

    3. Re:Dolphin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a shark. It represents CoolChips' business strategy.

  77. The moderation is becoming ridiculous!!!!!! by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 0, Offtopic


    The moderation is becoming ridiculous!!!!!! How can you call the parent post to this one off topic!!! There are at least 10 posts above about french fries that are not marked off topic!!

    This is on topic! It sensibly points out that local cooling of semiconductors has difficulties, so don't expect an efficient cooler, like the one in the story, to make a huge difference!!!!!!!

  78. CoolChips can't handle SlashHot by mikosullivan · · Score: 2

    They may have cool chips, but when Slashdot makes their site SlashHot they apparently can't handle it.

    --
    Miko O'Sullivan
  79. Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Call my cynical, but I'm thinking that this is more smoke and mirrors again, al-la the recent Magic Box scam that took in Blockbuster etc. The press blurb from Boeing is thin - did they actually take the devices and blind-taste-test them or what? Did they let the developers do all the testing (bad), or do their own testing w/out the developers hovering around (good)?

  80. Structural integrity? by Bowie+J.+Poag · · Score: 1


    I've heard stories of people's teeth shattering in the winter time by drinking coffee too fast.. I'd imagine a similar loss of structural integrity would occur the instant you powered up such a device. It would cool down so rapidly that the material would shatter.

    Just as theory, tho. Hope its legit.. Imagine the implications in how cars are made. :)

    --
    Bowie J. Poag

    1. Re:Structural integrity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Teeth are made out of crystalline calcium compunds. The chip cooler is made out of metal. These are very different materials with vastly different metallurgical properties. It is not likely metal will shatter at the temperatures we are talking about here.

    2. Re:Structural integrity? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Even if the possibility of fracturing, due to rapid temperature change, existed then they could easily get around it by setting the chips to change temperature more slowly, sort of like not turning up the volume on the radio too fast.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  81. Communist conspiracy by IntelliTubbie · · Score: 2

    Could someone please come up with a reasonable theory on what the hell the dolphin-with-pick-ax logo [coolchips.com] is supposed to be before my head explodes?

    Maybe it's a hammerhead and a sickle.

    Cheers,
    IT

    --

    Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.

  82. More suspicions by dark-nl · · Score: 1

    I took a look at thequarterly and yearly statements on their Investor Information pages. Their entire expense over the previous year consisted of $32400 in administration fees (which I think is rather a lot), and nothing else. No R&D at all. All the development is apparently being done by their parent company (Borealis Technical), and the entire share capital of Cool Chips is lent to Borealis Technical, with no interest rate and no terms for paying it back.

    It looks like investing in Cool Chips will get you a piece of this loan, not a piece of the technology. I suspect that this is exactly why the company was set up. I also note that if Cool Chips folds, then Borealis Technical will be free of the exclusive licensing agreement, and it will still have all the money and the technology.

    Of course, none of this is conclusive. I just wouldn't invest in this company.

    1. Re:More suspicions by buckeyeguy · · Score: 2
      I just wouldn't invest in this company.

      Nobody should, based only on a PR news release. Issues of location and corporate structure aside, these news releases crop up on the PR newswire and Yahoo stock message boards constantly throughout the day, from all sorts of small/startup businesses, and appear to be generated at a frequency inversely proportional to the company's net worth. Releases mentioning "alliances" between the small company and a much larger one are common. Because of this, I kinda question whether this article should have even been Slashdotted... it's really just an ad, rather than news.

      As for the product itself, it sounds a lot like a classic boondoggle, but I have no way of saying if it is or not. Seems like it would be a challenge to effectively transfer that much cooling capacity to a large volume of air/fluid from such a small surface area.

      --
      I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
    2. Re:More suspicions by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      My suspicions were aroused by the fact that virtually the entire upper management structure are all from the same family (Cox). "Meet the CFO, Mr Corleone, and the CEO, Mr Corleone, and the CIO..."

      On the other hand a lot of people probably dumped on early investors in CISCO, as long as they knew when to sell of course!

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  83. Extraordinary claims by sam_handelman · · Score: 4, Informative

    require extraordinary wads of cash money.

    As experience has shown - suckering a major company with X does not mean X is true.

    That said, actually, I believe this could work. The "efficiency" claim, however, is somewhat bogus. Quoth their webpage:
    to a projected 70-80% of the maximum (Carnot) theoretical efficiency for heat pumps. Conventional refrigerators operate at up to 50% efficiency and current thermoelectric systems (Peltier Effect) operate at 5-8% efficiency.

    The Carnot efficiency is not 100%; it is (Th-Tc)/Th x 100%. Th is the temp of "hot" half of the engine cycle and Tc is the cold. Both are in kelvin. So, if your car engine runs at 400K (boiling water) on the compression stroke and 300K (freezing water) on the expansion stroke the maximum efficiency you can theoretically get is 25%.

    Now, they seem to be comparing the percentage-of-theoretical efficiency that their device gets with the actual efficiency of other devices. The upshot is that I believe refrigerators also run at about 80-90% of the Carnot efficiency, which is 50% actual efficiency, but I might be making a mistake.

    I suppose this maps somehow to a total kinetic energy operator for the individual electrons they are moving (1 minute chemistry - heat is "thermal motion", the degree to which particles are bouncing around. Every "observable" feature of a particle - position, kinetic energy, momentum, and so on - is actually "random", and is related to the "wave function" of the particle, which is a function that tells you the probability of finding the particle at any given position, by an operator, the position operator is the number 1, which is itself a function that maps from a set of algebraic functions to a set of algebraic functions. The math for these operators is hoary as all hell, not analytically soluble, and they can generally only be dealt with pproximately/computationally.)

    Clearly - and I'm talking about the second law of thermodynamics, here - they can't actually convert environmental heat into an electrical potential. A heat differential, on the other hand, could very well be done, so they might be usable (in the long run) as a way to generate electricity while venting waste heat from nuclear reactors and the like.

    --
    The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
    1. Re: Extraordinary claims by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 2

      Boiling water is 373.15 K and freezing water (or ice) is 273.15 K

      300K = 26.85C = 80.33F
      400K = 126.85C = 260.33F

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
  84. A big, old technology heat sink would be necessary by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Insightful


    Yes, a big, old technology heat sink would be necessary to draw away the heat just a short distance from the cooling area. The heat is moved only a short distance, even if you believe the article. At that short distance, you would have the same problem of the heat you started with, plus that introduced by the inefficiency of the device, and you've paid someone some money.

    It surprises me to read the comments above. Most readers don't seem to have much understanding of the basic issues of science.

    This is a hoax. Maybe the press release is the result of someone hacking the Boeing web site. Maybe someone paid a Boeing employee to post it. Maybe some evauluator at Boeing was genuinely fooled.

    Note the date of the press release: SEAL BEACH, Nov. 30, 2001. If this were real, we'd be seeing it on TV news stories.

    File this story with super-efficient data compression, a story that appeared last year on Slashdot.

  85. "Global Warming" and other arcticles of faith... by antirename · · Score: 1

    I rarely comment on global warming or other environmental issues, as this is a religion to some people. You cannot use facts to argue with a religious zealot. Still... in college one of my professors was a former NASA scientist, who pointed out the following: something is killing the ozone layer, no doubt about it. The environmentalists said it was freon, and now the UK (the same UK that is part of the "more socially responsible than the US" EU) is making it damn near impossible to get rid of old fridges as a result. But, the ozone layer is in the stratosphere... AND FREON IS MUCH, MUCH HEAVIER THAN AIR! How did it get up there, greenpeace activists? Any ideas? Now, other chemicals can kill ozone... chemicals that are very common in volcanic eruptions. You know, the kind that eject those chemicals straight into the stratosphere... What did Mt. Pinatubo do to the ozone layer? Google it yourself... zealots, and their blind, annoying, holier-than-thou stupidity, are truly maddening. We only need to combine monotheism with the far left environmental movement, maybe throw in some of the "animal rights" activists/terrorists/general loonies, and we'll have a REALLY dangerous movement! I might start it myself! Give me some money, you've got smoggy thetans!

  86. Site Down by shawnmelliott · · Score: 1

    "Should I sell my baseball cards and buy their stock now.." well, the sites down and thus they can't handle a simple little Slashdot flood.

    Any company that can't handle the slashdot effect isn't worth buying stock in

    BTW. here's Google's cache of their site's main page

  87. Re:"Global Warming" and other arcticles of faith.. by doppleganger871 · · Score: 1

    BRAVO!!!!! I'm glad to hear a geek (I usually find geeks farther to the left, and arguing for the environmentalists, etc...) speak some reason about the whole environmental situation. The earth has been around a whole lot longer than any animals, and I'm sure that we can't destroy the planet in a couple centuries.

  88. Big Question by 4of12 · · Score: 2

    Um, so what exactly is the operating temperature range of these Cool Chips?

    [I'm hoping it's not, oh, 2e-6 K<T<3e-6 K, or 20 C <T<20.1 C.]

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
  89. DC by swinginSwingler · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Well at least no American I know has ever put a "fag" in his mouth.

    1. Re:DC by cosmo7 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      >Well at least no American I know has ever put a "fag" in his mouth.

      i guess you're not in new york or san francisco.

  90. Re:Sounds reasonable but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The tunneling part of the system would probably work fine for phonons but peltier coolers, and I think these too, work because high energy electrons tunnel through a barrier better than low energy electrons, however normally this would be symetric if both sides were at the same temperature, however if you apply a voltage you can cause more tunneling in one diretion than the other so you will cool the -ve side of the barrier.



    Unless I am missing something phonons do not repell one another so there is no analogy to voltage, that you can use to make them preferentially tunnel from one side of the barrier to the other.


    Thus you can't build a peltier type heat pump using just phonons.


  91. Oh, no... by Rui+del-Negro · · Score: 5, Funny

    You struck first with Chuck Norris. It was self-defence. ;-)

    RMN
    ~~~

    1. Re:Oh, no... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now we will unleash Freddie Prinze Jr. on your pitiful band of rebels, and you will learn the TRUE power of the Empire.

  92. And... a new, lightweight Brooklyn Bridge. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2


    Sounds interesting? That ain't nothing! The same company has a revolutionary new motor.

    Can a lightweight Brooklyn Bridge be far behind? Investors wanted!

  93. Re: People die in the US every year from heat by @madeus · · Score: 2

    You say that it's not life or death, but it is!

    HUNDREDS of people die in hot weather in the US each year due to heat stroke!

    From http://www.stayinginshape.com/3osfcorp/libv/e09.sh tml

    he Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) say each year more people in the United States die from extreme heat exposure than from hurricanes, lightening, tornadoes, floods, and earthquakes combined. Over the past two decades, at least 7421 deaths that occurred in this country were attributed to excessive heat exposure. On average, approximately 300 people die each year from exposure to heat.


    People used to a hundred years ago too, but we didn't have TV, and the distribution of news papers was not what is now, so no one really noticed unless it happend in there local area.

    If you turned off the A/C in Florida for 12 months I'd wager that you'd get at least a few hundred extra dead wrinklies!

    To address your point's specifically:

    The goldminers of Western Australia didn't have AC for 15

    True - but were all a bunch of convicts and nobody cared ;) (HHOJ)

    As for India, well it's much more lucious (as apposed to being a dustball). As for places that *are* dustballs (like parts of Africa) well you got me there.

    It's possible that you just get used to the heat if you grow up in that sort of climate, or that people just die all the time and it's not reported (after all there is an extreamly high mortallity rate all over Africa).

  94. space shuttle applications.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if this stuff can also convert heat to energy, put a bunch of it under the space shuttle's heat tiles so when it re-enters the atmosphere it makes lotsa power too hehe

    1. Re:space shuttle applications.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, use it to pump a really hefty flywheel, tho that would increase launch weight..

  95. had to be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this sounds like alot of hot air

  96. Re:A big, old technology heat sink would be necess by Zurk · · Score: 1

    uh huh. well in theory if you converted heat to electricity you could dispose of the electricity pretty easily. your analysis considers a device that only moves energy around, not converts it.
    that said, this looks like a hoax..but theres always the small possibility it could be real.

  97. Exactly - plus, free water heater. by RabidChipmunk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, acutally, that would work if you add some heat conductors and a heat sink. Think of it as a really small heatpump.

    Heatsource => Chip =>
    Conductor to someplace else => another chip =>
    Heatradiator(sink, groundpole, space-dongle)

    Or even better, you use the hot end as a water heater.

    Heat isn't bad; It's just inconviently located.

    -Stuart

    --
    This is not a political statement. This is not legal advice. It's a frick'n Slasdot post. However: I'm Running For
  98. no problem with the right architecture by fantomas · · Score: 3, Informative

    Oh I really hope your post is a deeply ironic humourous one, sessamoid. I notice all your examples are from the USA.


    Having travelled to India, Spain, several other hot countries, I've seen a lot of architecture designed to work with the temperatures: narrow alleyways which are always in shade, houses with thick insulating walls and small windows, air ways through the houses to channel slight breezes into cooling air flows. These things work. These things have been working for hundreds if not thousands of years.


    I believe you are refering to architecture and town planning dependant on artificial cooling techniques: big, open pavements exposed to the sun, large glass and steel buildings with huge windows, big doors facing into the sun.... Also check out people's life styles. Remember Rudyard Kipling's famous line 'only mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the noon day sun'. If you're in India or the southern Mediterranean, people get off the streets by 11 in the morning. It's just the crazy tourists wandering around out there. Everybody else is working or relaxing out of the sun in the nice cool shaded buildings. If you want to see real genius, check out the Alhambra in Granada, Spain (and I am sure there are many other fine examples).


    Please tell me your email was one of those 'wind up the dumb rednecks' style postings...

    1. Re:no problem with the right architecture by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1

      mad dogs and Englishmen indeed, makes perfect sense when you consider that America was built by those same Englishmen. In England we savour every last drop of sunshine we get, as our climate does not allow us to know what tomorrow (or the afternoon, if you're a Scot) will bring.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    2. Re:no problem with the right architecture by Fjord · · Score: 2

      Just in case you missed this in another subthread: Heat 'kills 450' in southern India

      --
      -no broken link
    3. Re:no problem with the right architecture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, we cannot easily redesign all of the architecture down there. For example, I'd like to see you build a basement in AZ... it generally requires a lot of TNT...

      The people who are affected by the lack of heat, moreover, certainly cannot afford to redo their homes; they can't even afford AC, after all... and even with those measures, I'm sure that the old & infirm would *still* die...

    4. Re:no problem with the right architecture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if you're the dumb redneck, which I suspect to be the case.

      I've lived in 122 degree heat, and believe me, there is nothing on earth that will make that be something people can laugh off.

      And yes, I've dealt with up to 110 degree heat for days at a time without AC, and I live in the US! OMG!

      Frankly, you're an idiot, a troll, and a worthless piece of flesh.

  99. Re: People die in the US every year from heat by DrSkwid · · Score: 2

    yeah I was a bit superficial at the end there.

    True - but were all a bunch of convicts and nobody cared ;) (HHOJ)

    hmm, you should maybe read up on the transportation thing sometime. Many were simply debtors or minor petty criminals (few loaf of bread or a few pair of socks). Transportation was a tool of the overpopulated and overworked inner cities of the new Industrial England to clear out the chronically poor. Hundreds/Thousands died on their way. Ships full of women were used as not much more than mobile forced brothels taking twice to three times as long to make the journey as the male boats as they stopped for longer in each of the ports to provide relief for the British Servicemen stationed around the world.

    We have a museum [The Galleries of Justice (bah flash only)] here in Nottingham, England about it and other aspects of our inherited justice system. The sinister debtors prison is open for visiting and makes for a sobering afternoon.

    /me is sweating, it's so hot here (maybe 20degrees :)

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  100. Re: Belgium by booch · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hey, no need to use such foul language! Belgium is the most unspeakably rude word in the Galaxy.

    --
    Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
  101. For those concerned with what happens to the heat by NotesSauceBoss · · Score: 1

    Check out the same companies claims on the PowerChip -- a heat-to-electricity conversion device on the same principle. I am not even close to competant enough in physics to evaluate the truth of their claims, but if the CoolChip is real, and the PowerChip is real, then stacking the two would offer a way to pull heat, then convert it to electrical energy to feed back into the device. (Yes, I know it's less than 100% efficiency. In this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics.) It'd be a bit like the alternator in a car, converting part of the kinetic energy back into electrical to initiate the whole process again. Reminds me a bit about a story of a motor that produced electricity from atmospheric static. ;)

  102. Hot side by return+42 · · Score: 1

    I only had two semesters of physics, so I can't solve this myself, but wouldn't the hot side get damned hot? All the heat in a living room coming through two square inches?

  103. if this isn't a hoax... by Bogatyr · · Score: 2

    If this isn't this year's cold fusion, I see lots of options for use:
    1) computers, especially where silence is useful. Ever been inside a software-based recording studio?
    2) The refrigerator has already been brought up.
    3) Tankless water heaters are a really obvious use here.
    4) 80% is amazingly better than my heat pump. I have an older, large house. Mount a set of these as a single windowpane in each room, use bluetooth (too far, actually)/802.11b/X10 (although from their popup ads I really don't want to use X10 gear) wireless to control individual rooms and zones, with the old HVAC unit primarily relegated to air circulation in the house, smoothing out the pointsource effect.
    5) heating & air conditioning on cars is noisy and a load on the engine, and therefore costly in gas mileage and engine life. Ever see those solar-powered fans that mount in your rear car windows, to ventilate your car when it's sitting in the summer sun? Mount some of the ultracoolerchips like that as a retrofit to every car out there. For newer or custom cars, you can remove the heater/AC unit from the dashboard entirely..

  104. (OT)In defense of Quayle by yerricde · · Score: 1

    I presume that you spell potato this way since your former VP did...

    Myth. Fact is that former US VP Dan Quayle was substituting for a school teacher who had made out a spelling lesson plan with a mistake. Quayle merely followed the plan.

    To summarize: British "chips" == American "french fries." American "chips" == British "crisps." Geek "chips" == semiconductors. BUT notice that Pringles® potato crisps are called "crisps" worldwide.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:(OT)In defense of Quayle by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      BUT notice that Pringles potato crisps are called "crisps" worldwide.

      ironic then, that they are both American and not actually made from deep fried slices of potato. The fact that Quayle merely followed the plan does not excuse him. Jesus, you'll be telling me how smart Dubya is next...

      BUSH QUOTES FROM HIS TONGUE TO YOUR BRAIN

      "And so, in my State of the -- my State of the Union -- or state -- my speech
      to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation
      -- I asked Americans to give 4,000 years -- 4,000 hours over the next -- the
      rest of your life -- of service to America." --Bush at Connecticut
      Fundraiser, April 9

      "Look, my job isn't to try to nuance, my job is to tell people what I
      think!" --April 2002 Texas Meeting With Tony Blair.

      Dear Jerry, I was watching MSNBC last week, when I had the surreal
      experience of hearing President Bush, interviewed in Crawford, Texas by a
      British
      journalist, say something to the effect that Clinton's failed peace effort
      led to the "INFITADA." [Not the "intifada."] I felt a wave of embarrassment
      for our
      country wash over me. For a moment, I wondered if I had heard correctly,
      but then I was subjected to another un-edifying moment when anchor Lester
      Holt asked a guest, "did Clinton's peace effort, in fact, cause the
      Infitada?" At least they didn't say "Infritata" or use the word "bodacious"
      in front of it...

      Gary Markowitz

      "It would be a mistake for the United States Senate to allow any kind of
      human cloning to come out of that
      chamber."--Washington, D.C., April 10, 2002

      "I understand that the unrest in the Middle East creates unrest throughout
      the region."---George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002

      "Here's a vignette we're dying to see on the ABC broadcast of Sunday's
      Ford's Theatre Presidential Gala: When Stevie Wonder sat
      down at the keyboard center stage, President Bush in the front row got
      very excited. He smiled and started waving at Wonder,
      who understandably did not respond. After a moment Bush realized his
      mistake and slowly dropped the errant hand back to his
      lap. "I know I shouldn't have," a witness told us yesterday, 'but I
      started laughing.'" --Lloyd Grove, Washington Post, 03.06.02.

      "But all in all, it's been a fabulous year for Laura and me." --G. W.
      Bush, White House Press Release, 12.21.01

      Bush said..."In all those tasks, it is worth recalling the words from a
      beautiful Christmas hymn -- in the third verse of "Oh Holy
      Night" we sing, "His law is love, and His gospel is peace. Change ye shall
      break, for the slave is our brother. And in His name all
      oppression shall cease." --White House Press Release, 12/6/01

      "Truly He taught us to love one another
      His law is love and His gospel is peace.
      CHAINS SHALL HE BREAK for the slave is our brother
      And in His name all oppression shall cease.
      Sweet hymns of joy in grateful chorus raise we,
      Let all within us praise His holy name."

      --"Oh Holy Night," Words by Chappeau de Roquemaure. Translated by John S.
      Dwight

      "Bush promised during the presidential campaign to avoid tapping Social
      Security except in cases of war, recession or a national emergency. 'Lucky
      me. I
      hit the trifecta,' Bush told Daniels shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks,
      according to the budget director." --Miami Herald, 11.29.01

      ' I regularly check the Bushisms section of your site to see what new
      verbal blunder the Resident has made. The latest one is:
      "Still nettled by the criticism [about his failure to immediately return
      to the White House from Florida on Sept. 11, Bush recently]
      insisted: 'I wanted to go back to Washington. There is strong advice that
      I did not, primarily from the VicePresident.'" --TIMES,
      11/26/01

      Yesterday I bought a copy of the December 3, 2001 International issue of
      Newsweek; it has Tony Blair on the cover. I'm reading
      on article about Bush and his actions and reactions in the first hours
      after the attacks. On page 22 there is this quote: "I want to
      go back to Washington. There is strong advice that I not, primarily from
      the vice president."

      A small difference perhaps, "wanted" has been changed to "want" and "did"
      is omitted. Nevertheless, the difference is significant
      enough to change a nonsensical statement, with discrepancies in tense, to
      a relatively coherent statement.

      I hate the way the press protects his stupidity. --Bushwatcher, 12/03/01

      "Still nettled by the criticism [about his failure to immediately return
      to the White House from Florida on Sept. 11, Bush recently]
      insisted: 'I wanted to go back to Washington. There is strong advice that
      I did not, primarily from the VicePresident.'" --TIMES,
      11/26/01

      "Mr. Bush said yesterday that the war on terrorism had 'transformationed'
      the U.S.-Russia relationship." --New York Times, 11/14/01

      15 year-old Welsh singing sensation Charlotte "Church recently met George
      W. Bush but says she prefers Clinton. "[Bush] said,
      'So what state is Wales in?' I said, 'Erm, it's a separate country next to
      England, and he went, 'Oh, OK.' I didn't know what to
      say." --Jeannette Wells, 10/30/01.

      REPORTER: "You talk about the general threat toward Americans....And
      people ask us, what is it they're supposed to be on the lookout for?...What
      are
      Americans supposed to look for and report to the police or to the FBI?"

      BUSH: "You know, if you find a person that you've never seen before
      getting in a crop-duster that doesn't belong to you, report it...."Press
      Conference,
      10/11/01

      from the Washington Post, Oct 3: "I am here to make an announcement that
      this Thursday, ticket counters and airplanes will fly
      out of Ronald Reagan Airport." --Washington Post, Oct. 3, 2001

      "They misunderestimated the fact that we love a neighbor in need. They
      misunderestimated the compassion of our country. I think they
      misunderestimated the will and determination of the Commander-in-Chief,
      too" --Bush, 9/26/01, according to two readers' reports.

      "But even in the tension of war preparation, Bush gave a clear sign that
      things were returning to normal, as he employed his favorite malapropism,
      "misunderestimate," three times in as many sentences."The folks who
      conducted to act on our country on September 11th made a big mistake," he
      said.
      "They underestimated America. They underestimated our resolve, our
      determination, our love for freedom. They misunderestimated the fact that we
      love a
      neighbor in need. They misunderestimated the compassion of our country. I
      think they misunderestimated the will and determination of the commander
      in chief, too."" --Washington Post, 0/27/01 [but see Censored.]

      "To the book of "Bushisms," add a footnote on Fleischerisms. Announcing
      President Bush's schedule on Thursday, White House
      press secretary Ari Fleischer said the president was meeting with
      religious leaders "to talk about the importance of tolerism, er,
      tolerance." Later in his morning briefing, Fleischer repeated the nonword,
      "tolerism." Reporters more accustomed to hearing such
      malaprops from the president himself could barely stifle their laughter.
      Fleischer jokingly begged: 'Don't think what you all are
      thinking! That was MY word. Stop it!'" --Washington Post, 9/20/01

      "Sometimes we agree. Sometimes we don't. But I tell you we'll always
      answer his phone." --Speaking to a Labor Day crowd in
      Kaukauna, Wis., about Carpenters' Union President Doug McCarron, 9/3/01.
      AP

      "Bush, who has tweaked the press about his choice of Crawford -- a
      sunbaked crossroads where summer temperatures hover around the century mark
      --
      suspecting them of a preference for 'sucking in the salt air' on the East
      Coast, displayed similar disdain for those who would vacation on the West
      Coast. 'Brie and cheese,' he sniffed after learning one reporter had just
      returned from California." --Reuters, 8/23/01

      "An expert in Texas trees, described by Bush as 'an arbolist,' is coming
      soon to identify all the varieties at the ranch. 'Look up the
      word,' he said. 'I don't know, maybe I made it up. Anyway, it's an
      arbo-tree-ist, somebody who knows about trees.'" --Judy Keen,
      8/21/01

      "Bush at night hatches quizzical new phrases. In Denver and Albuquerque,
      he talked about the "so- called surplus," making it sound as if he
      doubted the existence of the very money he deemed so bountiful that a tax
      cut was necessary. And Bush at night latches onto adjectives and doesn't let
      go. Eight times in about one minute, he called Senator Pete V. Domenici,
      Republican of New Mexico, for whom he was raising money at the Albuquerque
      event, "passionate," and Mr. Domenici's passions knew no bounds. "Pete is
      passionate about the budget," the president said. He then erased more than
      two months of Congressional history, traveling back to a time before
      Democrats took control of the Senate, and put Mr. Domenici in charge of the
      Senate
      budget committee once again. "I can assure you, Mr. Chairman," Mr. Bush
      said to him, hurriedly adding: "Or I wish would be Mr. Chairman -- should be
      Mr. Chairman, and will be Mr. Chairman after next 2002." Not to be
      confused with last 2002." --Frank Bruni, 8/19/01

      "Well, sometimes we see the will on the other side, and sometimes that
      cycle overcomes the will. There's a lot of people in the
      Middle East who are desirous to get into the Mitchell process, but first
      things first. These terrorist acts and the responses have
      got to end in order for us to get the framework -- the groundwork, not
      framework -- the groundwork to discuss a framework, to lay
      the -- all right." --Bush Rmks To Travel Pool, 8/13/01

      "We will never get to Mitchell until the leadership works to reduce and
      stop violence. These terrorists acts, which are despicable, will prevent us
      from ever
      getting into the Mitchell process. My administration has been calling upon
      all the leaders in the -- in the Middle East to do everything
      they can to stop the violence, to tell the different parties involved that
      peace will never happen. And so long as terrorist activities
      continue, it will be impossible to get into Mitchell or any other
      discussion about peace under the threat of terrorism." --to reporters,
      8/13/01

      "I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and
      what I believe -- I believe what I believe is right," he said, to
      the confusion of some of the listening journalists during an informal
      meeting near the steps of Rome in Italy where orators used
      to speak. --Reuters, 7/23/01

      "After the [Ellis Island citizenship] ceremony, Bush led the group in the
      Pledge of Allegiance, mistakenly urging them to hold up their right hands
      rather
      than place them on their hearts, as is customary. 'Right hand up, please,'
      Bush said, prompting most of the group to follow suit, before catching his
      mistake. 'Actually right hand on your heart.'" --Reuters, 7/11/01

      "Well, it's an unimaginable honor to be the president during the Fourth of
      July of this country. It means what these words say, for
      starters. The great inalienable rights of our country. We're blessed with
      such values in America. And I--it's--I'm a proud man to
      be the nation based upon such wonderful values."--Visiting the Jefferson
      Memorial, Washington, D.C., July 2, 2001

      "I'm sure you can imagine it's an unimaginable honor to live here." --June
      18, 2001 in a White House address to agriculture leaders. (thanks, Sari)

      "When George W. Bush announced from Sweden on June 14 that he planned to
      pull the US Navy out of the Puerto Rican island of
      Vieques by 2003, it struck some as odd when he referred to the people of
      Vieques, all US citizens, as "our friends and neighbors" who "don't want us
      there." It was as though he was saying Puerto Rico is a foreign country."
      --Falcon

      "We spent a lot of time talking about Africa, as we should. Africa is a
      nation that suffers from incredible disease."--After meeting with the
      leaders of the
      European Union, Gothenburg, Sweden, June 14, 2001

      "President Bush reports that European leaders are warming up to his
      missile defense plan now that he has gone over and
      explained to them "the logic behind the rationale." Now, whatever you do,
      don't try to examine the phrase "the logic behind the
      rationale" logically. I tried, and the results weren't pretty:
      "A rationale, of course, is the logic behind some position or course of
      action. So the "logic behind the rationale" is the logic
      behind the logic behind some position or course of action--a concept I'm
      having trouble wrapping my mind around. Of course, if
      we adopt the more cynical sense of the word "rationale"--the purported but
      not actual logic behind a position--then Bush's
      phrase could have some actual meaning. For example: Maybe he explained to
      European leaders that behind the official rationale
      for missile defense--smacking down missiles launched by wacko leaders of
      rogue states--lie the actual goals of feeding the
      military industrial complex and keeping Donald Rumsfeld off the streets.
      But somehow I doubt it, even though one of those goals
      would indeed be laudable." --Robin Wright, 6/19/01

      "Anyway, I'm so thankful, and so gracious--I'm gracious that my brother
      Jeb is concerned about the hemisphere as well."--Miami,
      Fla., June 4, 2001

      "Russia is no longer our enemy, and therefore we shouldn't be locked into
      a Cold War mentality that says we keep the peace by
      blowing each other up. In my attitude, that's old, that's tired, that's
      stale."--Des Moines, Iowa, June 8, 2001

      "Bush, in a taped interview with Spanish TV 'mispronounced the prime
      minister's name.' Bush 'said he looked forward to meeting
      Aznar -- but the name came out as Anzar.' Bush also 'mangled Spanish
      grammar with gender disagreement and emphasis on the
      wrong syllables.' 'If I don't practice I am going to destroy this
      language' -- President Bush, on his Spanish." --AP, 6/12/01, as
      reported by Hotline.

      "Our nation must come together to unite." --Tampa, Fla., June 4, 2001

      "If a person doesn't have the capacity that we all want that person to
      have, I suspect hope is in the far distant future, if at
      all."--Remarks to the Hispanic Scholarship Fund Institute, Washington,
      D.C., May 22, 2001

      "Thirdly, the explorationists are willing to only move equipment during
      the winter, which means they'll be on ice roads, and
      remove the equipment as the ice begins to melt, so that the fragile tundra
      is protected." --Conestoga, Pa., May 18, 2001

      IS BUSH CLOSE ENOUGH FOR GOVERNMENT WORK? Ever since mainstream reporters
      filed their Bush First Hundred Days
      reports, they've gone easy on him about his verbal gaffes. He's still
      providing his Bushisms, but they're not being reported and the
      transcripts of his spur-of-the-moment informal press conferences are being
      cleaned up. During Friday's sneak attack by Bush on
      the English language, a Bush Watcher caught him saying de-ter-iate for
      "deteriorate," hay-ee-nous for "heinous," and vent-ed for
      "vetted." Please keep us informed of future Bush verbal transgressions
      while the media continues to be derelict in its duties.
      --Politex, 5/14/01

      "But I also made it clear to [Vladimir Putin] that it's important to think
      beyond the old days of when we had the concept that if
      we blew each other up, the world would be safe."--Washington, D.C., May 1,
      2001

      Here's what Bush said about how far he would have the U.S. go to defend
      Taiwan: "Whatever it took to help Taiwan defend
      theirself." --Good Morning America, April 25, 2001

      It's very important for folks to understand that when there's more trade,
      there's more commerce."--Quebec City, Canada, April 21,
      2001

      "This administration is doing everything we can to end the stalemate in an
      efficient way. We're making the right decisions to
      bring the solution to an end."--Washington, D.C., April 10, 2001

      "The Senate needs to leave enough money in the proposed budget to not only
      reduce all marginal rates, but to eliminate the
      death tax, so that people who build up assets are able to transfer them
      from one generation to the next, regardless of a person's
      race."--Washington, D.C., April 5, 2001

      "And we need a full affront on an energy crisis that is real in California
      and looms for other parts of our country if we don't move
      quickly."--Press conference, Washington, D.C., March 29, 2001

      "I've coined new words, like, misunderstanding and
      Hispanically."--Radio-Television Correspondents Association dinner,
      Washington, D.C., March 29, 2001

      "But the true threats to stability and peace are these nations that are
      not very transparent, that hide behind the--that don't let
      people in to take a look and see what they're up to. They're very kind of
      authoritarian regimes. The true threat is whether or not
      one of these people decide, peak of anger, try to hold us hostage,
      ourselves; the Israelis, for example, to whom we'll defend, offer
      our defenses; the South Koreans."--Media roundtable, Washington, D.C.,
      3/13/01

      I think there is some methodology in my travels."--Washington, D.C., March
      5, 2001, NYT, 3/9/01

      State Department Spokesman Says "Bushisms" Caused More
      Diplomatic Blunders

      The State Department is playing down comments by Secretary of State Colin
      Powell, who officials say misspoke twice last week on
      key mainstays of U.S. international policy -- one relating to Jerusalem, the
      other to Taiwan. The controversial statements came
      during Powell's testimony to Congress about President Bush's international
      affairs budget and hot spots for U.S. policy. One
      comment involved U.S. policy on Jerusalem, which both the Israelis and the
      Palestinians claim as their capital. The United States
      has long maintained that the fate of Jerusalem is a "final status" issue to
      be negotiated between the parties. But last
      Wednesday, when asked by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about
      President Bush's plans to move the U.S. embassy out
      of Tel Aviv, Powell said the president was committed to moving "the embassy
      to the capital of Israel, which is Jerusalem." State
      Department spokesman Richard Boucher called the comment an inadvertent
      mistake and said U.S. policy on Jerusalem remained
      unchanged....

      Officials say Powell's other mistake came during testimony last Thursday
      before the House International Relations Committee
      when Powell, while talking about arms sales to Taiwan, twice referred to
      Taiwan as the Republic of China.... According to
      Boucher, the Chinese called the State Department to raise questions about
      Powell's comments. "We replied very clearly that U.S.
      policy has not changed regarding unofficial relations with Taiwan," he said.
      "We don't normally use the term and I don't think
      we'll be using it in the future." On the whole, Boucher chalked up the
      statements to Powell's speaking style. Boucher noted Powell
      often appears before Congress and the news media without the piles of
      briefing notes characteristic of his predecessor,
      Madeleine Albright. "If we want to praise the secretary for being open and
      speaking English and talking without following a
      specific script, one would also have to accept that," Boucher said. "The
      language might be a little looser at times." "So don't get
      too excited over one word here, one word there," he added." --CNN, 3/14/01

      White House Spokesman Says "Bushism" Caused Diplomatic Blunder

      "President Bush told President Kim Dae Jung of South Korea today that he
      would not resume missile talks with North Korea
      anytime soon, putting aside the Clinton administration's two-year campaign
      for a deal and the eventual normalization of
      relations with the reclusive Communist state. Mr. Bush's comments, while
      couched in reassuring statements about the American
      alliance with South Korea, came as a clear rebuff to President Kim. Awarded
      last year's Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to open
      dialogue across one of the most heavily armed borders on earth, the South
      Korean leader has told American officials that he
      believes there is only a narrow window of opportunity to seize on North
      Korea's recent willingness to emerge from its diplomatic
      seclusion.

      ....In a brief exchange with reporters after meeting Mr. Kim in the Oval
      Office, Mr. Bush said: "We're not certain as to whether or
      not they're keeping all terms of all agreements." But the United States has
      only one agreement with North Korea - the 1994
      accord that froze North Korea's plutonium processing at a suspected nuclear
      weapons plant. And at a briefing this afternoon two
      senior administration officials, asked about the president's statement, said
      there was no evidence that North Korea is violating
      its terms. Later, a White House spokesman said that Mr. Bush was referring
      to his concern about whether the North would comply
      with future accords, even though he did not use the future tense. "That's
      how the president speaks," the official said." --NYT,
      3/8/01

      "Of all states that understands local control of schools, Iowa is such a
      state." --Council Bluffs, Iowa, 2/28/01

      Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman "and I will carry out this equivocal
      message to the world: Markets must be open." --WP,
      3/3/O1

      BUSH TOP LANGUAGE GAFFES...THIS WEEK

      "Those of us who spent time in the agricultural sector and in the
      heartland, we understand how unfair the death penalty is -- the
      death tax is. I don't want to get rid of the death penalty, just the death
      tax." --AP, 2/28

      "Education is not my top priority." (REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMEN APPLAUD)
      "Education is my top priority." --Budget Speech, 2/27

      "My pan plays down an unprecedented amount of our national debt." --Budget
      Speech, 2/27

      "[We can learn] from our conscience and from our fellow citizens, the
      highest PROSSIBLE praise: well done, good and faithful
      servants." --Budget Speech, 2/27

      Feb. 24, 2001..."Laura and I are looking forward to having a private
      dinner with he and Mrs. Blair Friday night." --Bush to
      reporters, Reuters

      Feb. 9, 2001...""One reason I like to highlight reading is, reading is the
      beginnings of the ability to be a good student. And if you
      can't read, it's going to be hard to realize dreams; it's going to be hard
      to go to college. So when your teachers say, read--you
      ought to listen to her."--Nalle Elementary School, Washington, D.C.

      Feb. 8, 2001..."It's good to see so many friends here in the Rose Garden.
      This is our first event in this beautiful spot, and it's
      appropriate we talk about policy that will affect people's lives in a
      positive way in such a beautiful, beautiful part of our
      national--really, our national park system, my guess is you would want to
      call it."--Washington, D.C.

      Feb. 7, 2001..."We're concerned about AIDS inside our White House--make no
      mistake about it."--Washington, D.C.

      Jan. 29, 2001...A president's right to grant...pardons is "inviolate, as
      far as I'm concerned," he said. "It's an important part of the
      office. I am mindful not only of preserving executive powers for myself, but
      my predecessors as well." --NYT, 1/29/01

      Jan. 14, 2001..."Redefining the role of the United States from enablers to
      keep the peace to enablers to keep the peace from
      peacekeepers is going to be an assignment." --NYT, 1/14/01

      Jan. 11, 2001...He said he wanted his administration to be remembered for
      making America "a more literate country and a
      hopefuller country." --Reuters, Bush Chooses Trade Rep

      BUSH COMES THROUGH WITH BUSHISMS

      What's a Bush debate without Bushisms, right? Here's what Time's James
      Posniewozik wrote. Bush "did manage a couple of
      Bushisms, including "There has to be a wholesale effort against racial
      profiling, which is illiterate children." Perhaps the most
      interesting line of the debate, in fact, came when Bush decried how the
      killers at Columbine could "have their hearts turned dark
      as a result of being on the Internet." One could say that ascribing a mass
      medium with the power literally to make people evil is a
      rather silly and disturbing argument to be put forth by a candidate for the
      leadership of a democracy. But I digress. Now, go
      forth, my readers, and kill! Kill! Kill! Rise up, my vast army, and do the
      sacred bidding of your dark master!" 10/12/00

      10/1... AUSTIN, Sept. 30 -- Texas Gov. George W. Bush declared this week
      that Vice President Gore would create "over 200,000
      new or expanded federal programs." He meant 200. Bush said that with
      education funds, "the federal government ought to have
      maximum flexibility." He meant that the flexibility should be with the
      states that receive the money. Bush said he has "ruled out
      no new Social Security taxes." Of course, he meant he has ruled out new
      Social Security taxes. In Beaverton, Ore., he said, "More
      and more of our imports come from overseas." In Redwood City, Calif., he
      promised "a foreign-handed policy," when he meant "an
      even-handed foreign policy." --Mike Allen, WASHINGTON POST

      9/27... At a town hall-style event in Redwood City, Calif., Tuesday
      morning, Republican presidential nominee George W. Bush was
      asked by an audience member if he would have an "even-handed" policy when
      dealing with the Middle East. Bush reassured the
      potential voter, "I will have a foreign-handed policy." --John Berman,
      ABCNEWS

      9/8...Republican officials anxious about his slippage in the polls are
      fair-weather friends, [Bush] said. "That's Washington," he
      said. "That's people getting ready to jump out of the foxhole before the
      first shell is fired." Detroit Free Press (thanks to Lois
      White)

      MAJOR LEAGUE BUSHISM
      "There's Adam Clymer, major league asshole from the New York Times.'' An
      Aside to Dick Cheney as
      they stood together this morning on a Labor Day rally platform in
      Naperville, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago. Cheney responded,
      "Oh yeah, he is, big time." A Bush spinner said the Texas Governor is angry
      with reporter Clymer because he wrote about Bush's
      Texas record. More than once. During the rally, Bush told the crowd that it
      was "time to get some plain-spoken folks'' in
      Washington, D.C., but observers assume he didn't mean that plain-spoken.
      --Politex, 9/4/00 from a Reuters report.

      BUSH'S TEXAS CHAIN-SAW MASSACRE (OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE)

      "In the midst of a tour to promote his views on education, Texas Gov. George
      W. Bush may have set a personal record for bloopers
      in one speech. In 15 minutes, he mistook "terrors" (or was it "terriers"?)
      for "tariffs" and "hostile" for "hostage" (twice), and asserted
      that President Clinton has been in office for four -- not eight -- years."
      (WP 8/22)

      Here are the actual sentences from Monday's speech: ""When we carry Iowa
      in November, it'll mean the end of four years of
      Clinton-Gore.... We cannot let terrorists and rogue nations hold this nation
      hostile or hold our allies hostile....."I will work to end
      terrors and tariffs and barriers everywhere across the world so that Iowa
      farmers can sell their product in countries heretofore
      where the doors have been closed."

      Bush also made sure that entrepreneurs would get a lion's share of
      whatever he was promising to give out: ''This campaign not
      only hears the voices of the entrepreneurs and the farmers and the
      entrepreneurs, we hear the voices of those struggling to get
      ahead,'' he said. Some observers understood this to mean that Bush no longer
      feels that the nation's farmers are in need of help
      from the government. Last Friday on the campaign trail the Texas Governor
      accused Gore of advocating "class warfore." --Politex,
      8/23/00

      8/13... "I wish I could turn to the soldiers on that ship," Mr. Bush said,
      erroneously referring to the sailors on an aircraft carrier in
      the backdrop, "and I wish they could hear me: stay in the military, there's
      a new commander in chief coming." --New York Times

      7/19... George W. Bush's new Web site, www.georgewbush.com, states that
      the No. 3 priority of the campaign is "Putting
      Education First." --Al Kamen, Washington Post

      7/1... "Unfairly but truthfully, our party has been tagged as being
      against things. Anti-immigrant, for example. And we're not a
      party of anti-immigrants. Quite the opposite. We're a party that welcomes
      people." --Cleveland, Ohio

      6/28..."The fundamental question is, 'Will I be a successful president
      when it comes to foreign policy?' I will be, but until I'm the
      president, it's going to be hard for me to verify that I think I'll be more
      effective." --Wayne, Michigan, reported by Katharine Q.
      Seelye, New York Times, June 28, 2000.

      6/10... "If you're asking me whether or not as to the innocence or guilt
      or if people have had adequate access to the courts in
      Texas, I believe they have." --Response to an AP Reporter

      5/18..."[Rudy Giuliani] has certainly earned a reputation as a fantastic
      mayor because the results speak for themselves. I mean,
      New York's a safer place for him to be." --The Edge With Paula Zahn

      5/14... "The fact that he relies on facts--says things that are not
      factual--are going to undermine his campaign." --New York
      Times

      5/10...""I think we agree, the past is over."---On his meeting with John
      McCain, Dallas Morning News.

      5/5..."It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it."--In answer
      to the charge that, as Texas governor, he did not make up a
      state budget, Reuters.

      4/26..."I hope we get to the bottom of the answer. It's what I'm
      interested to know." --On Elian negotiations, AP.

      3/2... "I've got a record, a record that is conservative and a record that
      is compassionated." --NYT Debate Transcript

      2/23..."It is not Reaganesque to support a tax plan that is Clinton in
      nature." (Los Angeles)--Slate, 2/29

      2/25... "After he had failed a reporter's pop quiz last fall about foreign
      leaders, including the name of the Indian prime minister,
      Mr. Bush winced today when a moderator mentioned the words "pop quiz."
      Jokingly, Mr. Bush dared the moderator to ask him the
      name of the Indian president. "Do you know who the president of India is?"
      the moderator asked obligingly. "Vajpayee," Mr. Bush
      said, grinning and looking pleased with himself. But Atal Behari Vajpayee is
      the prime minister of India; the president is K. R.
      Narayanan." --New York Times, 2/26

      2/23... "I don't have to accept their tenants. I was trying to convince
      those college students to accept my tenants. And I reject any
      labeling me because I happened to go to the university." --Today

      2/23...It is not Reaganesque to support a tax plan that is Clinton in
      nature." (Los Angeles)--Slate, 2/29

      2/20..."I don't want to win? If that were the case why the heck am I on
      the bus 16 hours a day, shaking thousands of hands,
      giving hundreds of speeches, getting pillared in the press and cartoons and
      still staying on message to win?" --Newsweek (Feb.
      28 edition)

      "I thought how proud I am to be standing up beside my dad. Never did it
      occur to me that he would become the gist for
      cartoonists." --ibid.

      2/20..."Really proud of it. A great campaign. And I'm really pleased with
      the organization and the thousands of South Carolinians
      that worked on my behalf. And I'm very gracious and humbled." --to Cokie
      Roberts (This Week)

      2/17..."The senator has got to understand if he's going to have--he can't
      have it both ways. He can't take the high horse and
      then claim the low road." --to reporters in Florence, S.C. (Slate)

      2/16/00... "If you're sick and tired of the politics of cynicism and polls
      and principles, come and join this campaign." --Hilton
      Head, S.C. (Slate)

      2/15/00... "Bush mispronounced the words "tactical," "nuclear," and Lugar"
      (as in Sen. Dick) in the course of a single sentence. A
      few moments later, he mangled "admirably" beyond recognition, and left
      viewers wondering how many syllables the word
      "strategic" has. (Two, three or four, by Bush's count.) At another point, he
      declared that as Americans, "we ought to make the pie
      higher." Huh?"--Tucker Carlson

      2/14/00..."There is madmen in the world, and there are terror." (AP)
      For parents bothered by the amount of profanity and violence on TV, he
      recommended a simple solution: "Put the 'off' button on."
      (AP)

      2/7/00 (circa)...Bush recalled his time as a Texas oil man and how the
      experience shaped his views in support of entrepreneurs. "I
      understand small business growth.I was one." (AP)

      1/30/00..."This is preservation month. I appreciate preservation. It's
      what you do when you run for president. You've got to
      preserve." Presidential candidate George W. Bush, praising students at
      Fairgrounds Elementary School in Nashua, N.H., for their
      "theme of the month," which was actually perseverance. (Newsweek)

      1/19/00..."What I am against is quotas. I am against hard quotas, quotas
      they basically delineate based upon whatever. However
      they delineate, quotas, I think vulcanize society. So I don't know how that
      fits into what everybody else is saying, their relative
      positions, but that's my position." (Molly Ivins)

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    2. Re:(OT)In defense of Quayle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it was actually a spelling bee, but yes, you're right, he was just reading off the card he was given. What I thought was most amusing is that after he said it, apparently one reporter whispered to another "that doesn't sound right, does it?" The other one said "hmm, I'm not sure, you might be right." It was about 15 minutes before someone finally found a dictionary, and confirmed that he was, in fact, wrong.

    3. Re:(OT)In defense of Quayle by scott_evil · · Score: 1

      You'll find that in Australia, generally anything that is thin and crispy and made from potato is called a chip. Crisps is only for the retarded or British.
      But I repeat myself.

    4. Re:(OT)In defense of Quayle by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      > Fact is that former US VP Dan Quayle was
      > substituting for a school teacher who had made out
      > a spelling lesson plan with a mistake. Quayle
      > merely followed the plan.

      More accurately, he was holding spelling cards with the "right" answers on them, including "potatoe". He was set up. Either that or the teacher should be fired for creating a bad spelling card.

      "Hmmm, potato is a word people frequently misspell. Let's give him a misspelled one and see what happens!"

      Quick, a dozen cameras are on you, a dozen children and a hundred adults surround you, child spells "potato" on blackboard and looks to you to see if it is correct. Your card supplied by the teacher spells "potatoe" on it. What are you gonna do? Too late! You took too much time thinking.

      It was a setup.

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
  105. Indian corpses here! by Stoutlimb · · Score: 3, Informative

    "India isn't blessed with AC all over the place and yet the hot streets aren't littered with burnt corpses."

    How about some right here:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/sout h_asia/ newsid_1991000/1991215.stm

    That was in today's news. 450 dead in Indian heat wave.

  106. Look around for the execs by NotesSauceBoss · · Score: 1

    The president of CoolChips is also the president of Chorus Motors, another Borealis company. Googling him reveals a number of references. Here's an interesting one... http://www.memagazine.org/mepower01/5thharm/5thhar m.html

  107. Quantum Tunneling by Loki_1929 · · Score: 2

    If I'm not mistaken, isn't quantum tunneling extremely inefficient? I've seen it used to carry an audio signal "faster than light" (according to those conducting the experiments) but the signal degredation was pretty bad due to the fact that on the quantum level, everything is a simple matter of chance. Some of the particles being manipulated behave as expected, and many more do not.

    The fact that they haven't even begun to actually try cooling anything suggests to me that this is this week's vaporware and next week's laughware.

    --
    -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
  108. Re:Heh by bigdisk · · Score: 1

    If indeed these claims are correct, and the chips can be made reasonably affordable, you are talking about a revolution.

    1. Cheap, energy efficient refrigerators and air conditioners that slash energy use at a time when we need to think about global warming.

    2. Radically increasing efficiency of combustion engines by converting waste heat into electricity for use in hybrid-electric vehicles.

    Sounds too good to be true, or at least I will keep my skeptical wits about me.

  109. Re:Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who is this "we" that needs to think about global warming. For those who haven't taken Paleoclimatology 101 our current time in the earth's geologic history is referred to as an interglacial. An interglacial is a rare and short lived period of extrordinary warmth. All evidence suggests that we should be expecting a much colder environment in the next few thousand years.

  110. Re:A big, old technology heat sink would be necess by Timmeh · · Score: 1
    File this story with super-efficient data compression, a story that appeared last year on Slashdot.
    Ah yes, Zeosync. Their latest press release is dated January 21, 2002: "ZeoSync to Provide Testing Process For Scientific Community". Apparently they lost 2/3 of their 'Avisory Board' immediately following their press releases regarding their perfect compression.

    Oddly enough, some people are still holding out some hope for this company that has yet to give any definitive proof of this 'perfect compression.'

    If anyone has any updates they wanna post, I'd be interested to see if they're actually planning some peer review stuff in the near future.

  111. Read the post? by hitzroth · · Score: 1

    they work in reverse to make electricity from heat

    So strap one of the little buggers to the chip, convert the heat to electricity and we get a bonus of reduced total power consumption.

    --
    In mathematics, one does not understand things, one merely gets used to them.
    --VonNeumann
  112. How hot would that 5x5 inch plate get? by pnadeau · · Score: 1

    This is bullshit.

    Think of the heat capacity of the air in your house and then think of concetrating all that heat in a 5x5 inch square plate less tyhan 1mm thick.

    I'm not a physisist but that thing would start glowing white hot when the inside temperature was high.

    Why don't they say that you can cool your house with a miniature black hole instead?

    --

    --
    Can't buy what I want because it's free.

  113. I seem to remember... by freeBill · · Score: 2

    ...Boeing supporting some research in the 1970s which purported to find an ability of professional psychics to predict or control the results of quantum mechanical observations.

    You see, if observation causes the collapse of the wave function, an observer should be able to affect the results of his experiments. So, if you have a PETA psychic running the Schroedinger's Cat experiment, you'll have fewer dead cats.

    Right?

    --
    Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.
  114. Re:Extraordinary claims / Carnot efficiency by nniillss · · Score: 1
    The efficiency of the Carnot process depends on the intended usage. Generally, in this process, the heat Q exchanged at one of the reservoirs is proportional to the temperature, the rest is work. In your nomenclature, the following efficiencies follow:

    W/Qh=(Th-Tc)/Th for a machine that converts heat to work

    Qh/W=Th/(Th-Tc) for a heat pump that uses work for providing heat at a useful temperature (where the absorbed heat at Tc is "free" and not counted)

    Qc/W=Tc/(Th-Tc) for a cooling device

    The third (and not the first) case is relevant here. Note that the efficiency is strongly dependent on Th so cooling is much cheaper for small temperature differences.

  115. Power is Power, and not even Intel's lawyers can.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...break the laws of physics.
    Unless this thing CONVERTS heat to electricity, all is does is move the heat across it's gap, increasing the delta T.
    You still have the watts to dissipate SOMEWHERE outside your system.
    I got that new carb that'll get you 100 mpg too..............

  116. In Other News by FrankDrebin · · Score: 1

    Cat-shaped Barcode Scanner Passes Radio Shack Tests

    --
    Anybody want a peanut?
  117. That logo is pretty strange... by jad0 · · Score: 1

    At first I thought it was a dolphin jumping in front of the sun getting whacked in the ribs with a baseball bat. Or is it maybe just a combination of the two universal symbols of cooling - a dolphin holding a pickaxe?

    Obscure.

  118. Re:"Global Warming" and other arcticles of faith.. by cosmo7 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Myth: CFCs cannot reach the stratosphere because they are heavier than air.

    Fact: Air in the lower atmosphere (which extends far above the stratosphere) moves in masses, not as individual molecules. A number of studies have found CFCs and the products of their breakdown in the stratosphere (Rowland, EPA).

    Myth: Volcanoes and other natural sources contribute much more chlorine than CFCs to the ozone layer.

    Fact: Chlorine compounds from natural sources are soluble, and so are washed out of the atmosphere. CFCs, by contrast, are not soluble and so are able to reach the stratosphere. A number of studies have shown that the majority of chlorine in the stratosphere comes from man-made chemicals (Rowland, Taubes, Russell et al, EPA).

  119. Next big stock hit! by mcdade · · Score: 2

    Yep.. this is the one I'm looking for, it's going to go up with all the market hype and media, every idiot is going to invest so buy now and sell early .. you could easily double or triple your money on this one..

    just be warned.. it is a flip stock.. don't hold too long!

  120. Tunnel diodes anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey nevermind the Casimir effect slamming those two plates of metal together, but seems to me any 2 electrode system that uses quantum tunneling will have a negative resistance portion to its I-V curve. This can make neat oscillators at very high frequencies.

    Does this make sense?

  121. cooling below the temperature of its surroundings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ofcourse, this device can only transfer the heat for a very short distance, so why not just stick the heatsink or whatever directly on the cpu? i think the answer would be that this thing can stand more heat than your average cpu. Besides that, because the heat is transfered before it is disposed of, i think this allows you to cool something _below_ the temperature of it surroundings. A regular heatsink doesn't cool anything if the object you want to cool has the same temperature as the surrounding air. This device, however doesn't stop at that point, it will keep transfering heat from one side to the other.

    All this is assuming these things actually work, and i'm quite sceptical about that. I don't really see how electrons can carry heat. Would anyone care to explain?

  122. Lots of patent info by Great_Geek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let me start by saying that I have nothing to do with the company - I only heard of them this morning.

    The claims are quite bold, so it is natural to be skeptical. Someone provided a link to their patents page http://www.borealis.com/technology/patents.shtml which has a lot of issued patents. If this is a scam, then at minimum they started it a few years ago and probably poured over a million dollars into patent fees.

    I picked two patents at random, one is by Avto Tavkhelidze of High Energy Physics Institue in Tbilisi in Georgia. Another is by Isaiah Cox of England, which was first applied for in 1996. At a very quick glance, these patents are not nutty crank patents.

    Do I think this is real? May be the science works, or may be it does not; but that's just one of their worries. Is the production cost low enough, will the thing be robust enough, how easy will it be to install and use.

  123. what about radient heat? by mjake · · Score: 1

    The gap can prevent heat from migrating back to the cool side through conduction or convection, but radiation (infrared light) can still jump the gap. The hotter the hot side gets, the more heat will radiate back to the cold side. So the efficiency of the system would be inversely proportional to how hot the hot side is allowed to get. Just using a simple heat sink/radiator might ruin the efficiency of the system.

  124. I get it by Spinality · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They claim to have actually built a Maxwell's Demon. Like all such claims, it is founded on germs of plausibility, and the prospect of beating the thermodynamic game is so interesting that folks line up to play with it. It's hard to imagine that all the objections posted here can be wrong; though perhaps it will turn out that, after you cut through their marketing hyperbole, there's a valid useful nugget of technology that has some practical applications. One hopes that this is what the Boeing geeks have found, and that they didn't get swindled. (It's sad when smart guys get fooled by a scam.) But time will tell, of course.

    --
    -- We all have enough strength to endure the misfortunes of other people. La Rochefoucauld
  125. Re:A big, old technology heat sink would be necess by Bistromat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sorry, you're wrong. It's legit.

    If your argument is correct, then the thousands of Peltier-cooled devices that already exist, in fact, do not. They're all a hoax.

    The whole point of heat exchange in a processor context is to move the heat far enough away so that it does not affect the processor. Who cares if your heat sink, which is attached to the 'hot' side of the cooler, is at 150 Celsius? The metal certainly doesn't. As long as the *chip* stays cool, there ain't a problem.

    Granted, it's not gonna make laptops run cooler, but it just might let them run faster.

    --nick

  126. The living room. by saintlupus · · Score: 2

    Do you piss on your living room carpet every day

    Yes. I also drive an AMC. Pollution ahoy!

    --saint

  127. obligatory mac joke by mikeee · · Score: 2

    Clearly, it will be a Mac OS X user, after Apple starts to use these for processor cooling and some confusion about what Steve meant when he said the new systems were 'lickable'...

  128. Re:"Global Warming" and other arcticles of faith.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Fact: Air in the lower atmosphere (which extends far above the stratosphere) moves in masses, not as individual molecules. A number of studies have found CFCs and the products of their breakdown in the stratosphere (Rowland, EPA). "

    Masses? How did the CFCs clump together in masses? Someone vents their air conditionner in Oregon, a fridge breaks down in Montreal, the CFCs get together into a mass, and go in the stratosphere?

    Only in the stratosphere? Nowhere else?

  129. Key Word: EVALUATION by endoboy · · Score: 1
    Boeing did not TEST these--they performed an evaluation. Most likely, the evaluation was a paper (or computer) study of the underlying physics of CoolChip's proposed device. The purpose of an evaluation is to assess the POSSIBILITY of a device.

    They did not test hardware--there is no hardware to test. This device is years (at best) from being manufactured

    The impossible is easy. It's the unfeasible that poses the problem.

  130. The Logo by four12 · · Score: 1
    According to the Cool Chips press release, Cool Chips is a majority-owned subsidiary of Borealis Exploration Limited.

    "Borealis" refers to the Arctic regions of the world. The "dolphin" is actually a Beluga whale (no dorsal fin, funny shaped head). Belugas are native to the cold waters of the Arctic and near-Arctic. You see where I am going with this?

  131. Re:A big, old technology heat sink would be necess by sysadmn · · Score: 1

    You're missing the point. The article talks about aerospace applications. In aerospace, you're given a budget of space, weight, power, and cooling air to implement a function. You spend a lot of time making tradeoffs to get as much functionality, reliability, and speed in that budget. Devices like copper heat pipes are used to move heat from hot spots to the cooling air. If this is lighter, cost becomes less of an issue.

    --
    Envy my 5 digit Slashdot User ID!
  132. Not useful for the examples they give by BruceRD · · Score: 1
    "a panel about two inches square will have the capacity to provide the air conditioning for a living room"


    Which shows a basic lack of knowledge of thermodynamics. Even assuming the device works, how is the heat in the room going to get concentrated in a space two inches square so that it can be removed? This quote is designed to make it seem so simple - everyone would like an aircon unit that small - but it would only be able to extract energy from a tiny bit of the room. It would need a rather inconvieniently large metal plate (at least) to actually cool something the size of a room.

    Thats even before we ask where they're exhausting the heat to... 50Angstroms away?

    Now, why would they want to make it seem much more convinient and it could possibly be...
    1. Re:Not useful for the examples they give by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Which shows a basic lack of knowledge of thermodynamics.

      No it doesn't. This chip would replace the compressor/expansion chamber in a conventional A/C unit or refrigerator.

      Even assuming the device works, how is the heat in the room going to get concentrated in a space two inches square so that it can be removed?

      ... the same way it gets concentrated into a refrigerator's compressor intake.

      Thats even before we ask where they're exhausting the heat to... 50Angstroms away?

      Rather like the way my Alpha PAL6035 makes hot air a few mm away from my PIII?

  133. actually.. by Paul+Jakma · · Score: 3, Informative

    according to the CIA world factbook luxembourg has the highest per capita GDP in the world. US is second by a couple of hundred dollars ($36.4k Vs $36.2k gdp/per capita)

    --
    I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
  134. Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do a patent search on www.uspto.gov using

    Borealis AND Technical AND Limited

    You'll find the pantents for this device along with some other -very- interesting things.

  135. Well by jamiethehutt · · Score: 1

    Ive not been able to get to the site yet, due to its /.ed state, but - heat can only be moved it never dissapears, as you cool your processor it heats air and so heats the room. No one has commented on how the heat is despersed (as far as i can tell) so id say this might not work.... Also if this is a mirical heat reducer are we gonna be able to afforde it? I think im just gonna get my self a watter cooler with deionised watter its probly cheeper....

  136. They seem to like slashdot :) by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

    "Welcome to Cool Chips plc. We are currently experiencing high traffic volumes (thanks, Slashdot) which may result in slow access times. Your interest is appreciated; On Monday we will be updating our site to address some of the questions that have been raised. If you are not automatically redirected to our site, ENTER HERE." Seems like they'll also be answering some objections mentioned here...sounds good. Who knows, maybe it IS going to be time to open the wallet? Let's wait 'till their answers are in...

    --
    -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
  137. Re:A big, old technology heat sink would be necess by bannerman · · Score: 1

    Ok, ok. It's obvious to all of us that this technology doesn't just zap heat. Nobody ever claimed that. What they're saying is that they've found a very efficient way to pull heat away from a small area. Yes, you will require an old style heat sink to get rid of that heat in the end. But if there's a better method than liquid cooling to get the heat away from my CPU, I'm all for it. If they can make an air conditioner that requires less power I'm all for that, too. I for one am excited about it.

    --
    I keep forgetting my place. Jesus is for losers. Why do I still play to the crowd?
  138. that's a logo created by engineers by X_Caffeine · · Score: 1

    Actually, I think the logo gives the company some real credibility. This looks like a logo created by old-school engineers, not some dotcom IPO slick with marketers and graphic designers. If you spent much time around engineers in the 70's and 80's, this logo should feel very familiar.

    --
    // I will show you fear in a handful of jellybeans.
  139. Ask for an Interview by shmac · · Score: 1

    I see allot of people excusing this company of either not being real or not actually having this technology. I propose we try and set up a moderated question interview with them were the top 10 questions get submitted. I really think that if this could hit the mainstream in the next 5 years you would see all kinds of positive implications. Regards, Chad S

    --
    Laters, Shmac
  140. Slashdotted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I tried to access the site and got this message:


    Welcome to Cool Chips plc.
    We are currently experiencing high traffic volumes (thanks, Slashdot)
    which may result in slow access times.


    Your interest is appreciated;
    On Monday we will be updating our site to address some of the questions that have been raised. If you are not automatically redirected to our site, ENTER HERE.


    Heh.

  141. You know you plugged it in backwards... by mackman · · Score: 2

    when there's icicles hanging from your heat sink and your CPU monitor reports 1800 degrees celsius.

  142. Not capacitors by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    No, this is different. Capacitors rely on electrostatic charge seperation, these devices reply on quantum tunneling. Capacitors use an insulating layer as the plate seperator, these devices use an actual void as the gap.

    They have a technical decription on their site for more info.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    1. Re:Not capacitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Capacitors can use an actual gap to charge up electricity, in fact that's how most work.

  143. then don't use Localized cooling by X-Pirate · · Score: 1

    If these "cool chips" work, they could be used to cool AIR that is flowing over a circuit / chip. This would avoid hot / cold spots.

  144. What do they want it for? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder what boeing want's to use this technology for

  145. Density by Seyven · · Score: 1

    Something being "real easy to test" does not make the test accurate or significant.

    In your discussion, you're talking about volume. However, the relevant topics are not volume, but density and mass. Objects 'float' when they displace an amount of the fluid (water) with a mass equal to their own. In other words, a 100 ton iceberg floats when it raises the water level by whatever volume 100 tons of water is.

    So, the iceberg in a solid state will raise the water level by 100 tons of water (divided by the area of the pool and all that). When you melt the iceberg, you have 100 extra tons of water... so an equal rise.

    It should be noted that this is primarily applicable on the north pole, where the ice is actually floating. Antarctica, being an actual land mass, has ice that is not currently displacing sufficient water to float.

  146. Look at the patents by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    I haven't seen too many people here look at the patents they have on their site to get an idea as to what they are doing. They seem to be using microfabricated "pits" on the surface facing the gap to generate destructive quantum wave interference thus encouraging tunneling. They also have developed a method for producing the 5-50 nanometer gaps between the surfaces that they need. Also, the materials they reference frequently are interesting, especially diamond (via deposition I assume). I wonder if they are doing something with carbon nanotubes or buckyballs?

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  147. For spacecraft! Boeing makes those too. by TheLink · · Score: 2

    Airplanes don't need to dump heat out using fancy chips - they can just take cold air in. Which I think they already do.

    I think it'll probably be useful for satellites and other spacecraft. I believe Boeing makes those.

    When you're in space, there's a vacuum, you're stuck with radiative cooling - can't do convective cooling, and conductive cooling takes you to the surface and then it's radiative cooling. You can do evaporative cooling, but you'll run out...

    These chips could help make the radiative cooling more effective. Probably in combination with heat pipes and all that - because the chips seem to be thin, so you still need stuff to transfer heat over distances. In summary, no moving parts, smaller heatsinks, improved cooling = smaller, lighter satellites = cheaper launches. Whoopee :).

    For household cooling, it's likely you'll still be pumping coolant around. But maybe you only need a 40 watt motor now, instead of a 1000W motor!

    Link.

    --
  148. Flat A/C by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    First we got flat screen monitors, now we'll have flat A/C units sitting in our window frames. What next, a flat car? That would be a flying carpet, right?

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  149. Be Skeptical -- a physicist's viewpoint by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 2

    I didn't post early enough, so this'll probably
    be invisible, but what the heck.

    The device can't work because the main source of heat conduction in metals is electrical conduction. "Huh?" you ask. Well, heat is just incoherent kinetic energy. Metals and other conductors conduct electricity because electrons are free to wander all over the material. But those electrons don't just carry electric charge -- they also carry kinetic energy. Even incoherent kinetic energy.

    With a few exceptions (like diamond), things that are strongly electrically conductive tend to be strongly heat conductive as well, because the electrons carry heat around as they shunt around the material. That's the fundamental limit for Peltier coolers: the better the Peltier cooler conducts electricity, the more freely the electrons can travel and the more freely they exchange heat between the two sides of the dissimilar-metal junction.
    Contrariwise, the more poorly the junction conducts heat, the harder it is to push enough electrons through it -- and the more inefficient it gets! So Peltier cooler designers are stuck between a rock (thermal conductivity causing losses) and a hard place (resistivity causing heating).

    The problem with this device is that it still suffers from the same problem that Peltier junctions do: the charge carriers are electrons, and they have to be able to travel freely through the device. Short of some kind of Maxwell's Daemon kind of filter in the short tunneling gap, they have the same problem because the electrons that tunnel through the gap will themselves carry heat.

    Their PDF document implies that the electron-carried heat is minor compared to something called "direct conduction", but in fact the reverse is generally true in metals, and they don't seem to discuss much the heat carried by the charge carriers. (I admit I just skimmed the document)

    1. Re:Be Skeptical -- a physicist's viewpoint by wowbagger · · Score: 2

      A) you basically restated what I said.
      B) There can be a "Maxwell's Daemon" - it's called a voltage potential: The e-field across the gap prevents the electrons from going backward.

    2. Re:Be Skeptical -- a physicist's viewpoint by Handpaper · · Score: 1

      A physicist would know that diamond is an electrical insulator and a thermal conductor Oh, and by the way - it's spelt "sceptical"

  150. A supercooler ain't nothing! by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1, Troll


    A supercooler ain't nothing! The same company has a revolutionary new motor.

    Can a lightweight Brooklyn Bridge be far behind? Investors wanted!

  151. Clothes? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    If they can make it in the form of a flexible film I can finally get a shirt that won't make me sweat in August! Just think, air conditioned undies!

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  152. Cooling /. flames? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    I wonder if they can slap some of those chips on some of these postings.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  153. Not a good idea by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    "The theory is: If the ice caps recede, so will glaciers, releasing land for use"

    And what happens when the ice starts to return and you've built Antartic Disney World already?

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  154. This CAN be useful by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

    Everyone seems to be commenting that, oh you're just moving the heat plus 20 % somewhere else, so this doesn't really mean anything. Bullshit, of course heat cannot be simply destroyed, but does that mean the radiator in your car in useless.

    This device obviously isn't going to subtract from the total amount of heat inside a closed box, but neither does my cpu fan. Does that mean I should take if off my cpu and watch my athlon fry itself is 8 seconds?

    The whole point of cooling is to move heat from one place to another. I've they've found a good way to do this it is important. they sound overly optimistic about the efficiency of their device, but realize that a device that could do what they say this on does would be very useful.

    Please think in terms of the rate of heat transfer between a cpu & heatsink instead of the total amount of heat inside the case. Your cpu only care about how hot it is, and not how hot the heatsink attached to this device would get. At some point you hit a limit with normal cooling. Once you have a connetion to the cpu with the best thermal conductivity, and a heat sink big enough to stay very close to room temperature, you aren't going to be able to get the cpu any cooler without putting something colder than room temperature on the cpu. this will mean more heat is sucked out of the cpu, so you'll beed a bigger heatsink to handle that (and any heat generated by the device) but with that bigger heatsink, you CAN make the cpu cooler that it would have been without such a device.

    I want one. And yes, I would use it to cool beer.

    --
    Life is too short to proofread.
  155. The secret of India, Italy, Spain... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    The real secret to staying cool in these places is that the food is so good you never leave the shaded restaurants.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  156. No means yes explaination by DarkHelmet · · Score: 1
    It's a spoof on South Park... There's an episode (The one where they say shit 160 or so times. The british guy says:

    Only in America does no mean yes, pissed means angry, and cursing doesn't actually mean bringing on a curse!

    Or something to that effect.

    --
    /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
  157. Thermodynamics by lobotomy · · Score: 1

    I think Homer Simpson said it best:

    "In this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics."

    I am a card-carrying skeptic. Show me.

  158. Oh golly gee whiz batman!!! by bobcat7677 · · Score: 1

    To anyone who might have allowed the thought of investing in this company cross their mind... First of all, the company is incorporated in Gibraltar? WTF??? What kind of company incorporates in a disputed British territory off the coast of Spain??? Secondly, it's traded in PINK SHEETS!!! The lowest under-link of the investment food chian. You might as well go ask one of those guys on the street corner holding a sign that says "The end is near" if you can invest in his concept. Lastly, they couldn't make any firm claims on how well the technology actually performs...just a bunch of "projections". Hmmm, I wonder if I could incorporate in some offshore territory and then put up a spiffy website with a bunch of "projections" to get people to invest in my pink sheet company? :P Just my $0.02... ***ching***ching*** $0.04 ***ching***ching*** $0.08 ***ching***ching*** $0.16 ***ching***ching*** ...

  159. Re:A big, old technology heat sink would be necess by ssyladin · · Score: 1
    What you're saying is in the real of the paranormal and of actual hoaxes out there - you know just enough to be dangerous but not enough to be insightful.

    Your point, that you're only drawing the heat away to another area a small distance away plus the inefficiency is absolutely correct. However, that's how a traditional heatsink works, and its absolutely valid. Thermal flux is based on the surface area of contact. If the new heatsinks were designed with this miracle material so the bottom fits the chip (144mm square) and the top is 288mm square, then you've doubled the area that heat can be dissipated, probably giving you a cooling efficiency increase of 50% (not 100% because nothing in the thermal world is 100% efficent). Now, isn't 66 degrees C better than 100???

    Beware physics like you would the Force - it can be used for good or for evil!

  160. Almost there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're thinking of existing Thermoelectric coolers (ie Peltier devices), which DO have these limitations.

    These "cool chips" would appear to use a Peltier to draw the heat from a cool side to a hot side (much more efficiently, they claim), then take the additional step of converting the heat back to electricity.

    In a laptop, you could recharge your battery with the heat from your processor. The battery would be the final place the heat energy is "pumped off" to.

  161. This is Most likely a Hoax by LostAbbott · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    If you check the ticker symbol refrenced in the Boing Press release (BOREF). You will find that the company is BOREALIS EXPL LTD this company has been around for a while and last time they were trying to sell shares in an Iorn Mine. Eventually It was found out that they had stoled the Iorn Mine from Debeer's and did not actually own anything. Looks more like cold fusion... -Abbott

  162. Re:Typical cock-sucking Yank attitude by Chas2K · · Score: 1

    Fuck you. If you're Brit ask your Mum and Grandmum who fed them during WWII and gave up thousands of lives and millions of dollars to do it. If you're on the continent ask who helped turn back two German dictators, fed Berlin with an airlift, and stood up against the Russians until they folded. Not to invade and take over, but to see to it that they didn't. Ask yourself who'd you expect to do it all again.

    So fuck you. It's none of your damn business if I run an airconditioner in the summer. You'd do the same if your cesspool had enough energy.

  163. WHOIS coolchips.gi? Strange result by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 1

    Why does WHOIS say that .gi is an invalid tld?

    At the same time, it says that .tv is a valid tld.

    The .tv domian is for the Republic of Tuvalu, and .gi is for Gibraltar. Why should WHOIS treat these domains differently?

    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
  164. Coolchips? Wow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a brilliant invention.

    There is no question that this technology is real. It's nothing more than a moidified Peltier cooler.

    The use of the phrase "Electron Tunneling" is a little bit misleading. The fact is that peltiers use electron tunneling already. All thin depletion zone diods have tunneling effects.

    In a peltier cooler, the electrons tunnel across a thin depletion zone formed at a diode boundary.

    In the cool chips technology, they have replaced the solid state depletion zone with a physical separation. There is nothing magic or unusual abuot what they are doing - it's just extrodinarilly brilliant.

    Because there is no contact between the two sides there can be no transmission of phonons across the boundary, unlike in a diode type device. (Phonons are responsible for the conduction part of heat transfer.)

    I would love to know how they managed to physically separate two electrodes by such a small ammount, but I'm sure those details will be available in the final patent.

    Really it is just extremely sound - I would even go as far as to say blatantly obvious - science.

  165. Coolchip Farming? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you could use a cube of these chips to farm heat

    Slot in a new one every week and send the old one to the power plant to have the waste heat recovered!!

  166. Maxwell's demon by HighTeckRedNeck · · Score: 1

    It is just that they have found a version of Maxwell's demon. The electrons in a metal are considered to be somewhat free and bounce around in what is called an "electron gas". Some will be going fast and some slow in a distribution called a Maxwell distribution. It is somewhat like a Chi square with a longer tail that gets longer the higher the temperature. Now those electrons on the fast side near the surface of the metal can pop out for a little distance but get pulled back by electronic attraction. Consider two metal surfaces very closely spaced. If their temperature is the same the Maxwell distribution of both is the same and as many electrons will go one way as the other. Now apply an electronic potential of just one vote over a gap of a nanometer. The electronic field potential is equivalent to a few billion votes per meter, which will highly bias the distribution of the tunneling toward the positive side. As the electrons that tunnel are the fast ones and the fast ones carry high kinetic energy there will be a net energy flow toward the positive pole. The negative side will have its distribution cut off the top, which will, in bulk, appear as a lower temperature and the positive side will have its distribution augmented at the top which will appear, in bulk, as a higher temperature. The electrons coming in at the electrical connections will be following the standard Maxwell for that temperature, so they will have an "average temperature". The real trick will be to create a device rigid enough to maintain a gap with an electrostatic attraction that could be in the tons per square inch range. I am not sure even diamond would be rigid enough.

    1. Re:Maxwell's demon by bob_jenkins · · Score: 1

      I recall that electrons like jumping from points more than from flat surfaces. If the surfaces of the electrodes are not flat, would that help?

      Flip side, wouldn't the electrode surfaces grow stalagtites that eventually meet as bridges spanning the gap?

    2. Re:Maxwell's demon by HighTeckRedNeck · · Score: 1

      If you look at their patents they are trying to reduce the work function (energy needed to lose an electron) by creating shaped pits that create "interfering probability wave functions" or something to that effect. Spikes concentrate the electrical field and thereby increase the electron flow. Whether that will be the higher speed ones that would cut off the top of the speed distribution (leaving a lower average speed - temperature) I can't say. And yes there is an "electronic creep" in metals that would cause the gap to be bridged eventually. Another of their patents was about doping diamond to create conductivity so I suspect they are already well aware of the physical stress problem. I also saw a patent about using piezoelectric materials to regulate the gap size. I suspect that even with pits there will be a tendency for the electronic creep to limit the lifetime of the device, shame about that. I do have some ideas though. I'll have to see just how broad their patents are.

    3. Re:Maxwell's demon by bob_jenkins · · Score: 1

      Having bridges might be a feature, not a bug. Once you have bridges, you can rely on them to stabilized the distance between the electrodes. They'd allow some phonons to travel the wrong way, but still 99% of the surfaces won't touch.

    4. Re:Maxwell's demon by HighTeckRedNeck · · Score: 1

      If the bridges formed from the conductive material of the points they would also conduct electrical current, shorting out the device. With a low impedance power supply needed to create the high currents this might cause localized melting and depending on the materials the "fuse" could blow or vaporize. I suspect device characteristics would change a bit. Laughing a bit, I think the piezoelectric separation device could be used to pound them down, power being removed during this operation. I suspect malleable materials would need to be used but they would be more difficult to keep rigid. A thin layer of malleable material on a rigid substrate might work. It might act as a conformational coating if an ac current were put through the piezoelectric material to vibrate it against the other side. Rebuild the thing once a day or so. Actually I should patent that idea.

  167. OT: Baffling Logos by hey! · · Score: 2

    As long as we are on the topic of baffling logos, I've always wondered about this one: Sherwin William Paint. It is a can of red paint being poured over a globe. The can has the initials "SWP". Motto: Cover the World.

    Some artist was having some fun with the management over at Sherwin Williams. I wonder if they have a jingle set to the Internationale?

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  168. Combination Refer/Speaker; Useful? by awfar · · Score: 1

    So, modulate Iforward and make your fridge talk, play Bach, or tunes as well. Useful? Probably not but fun?

  169. I am the big funky heat sink outside my laptop by chipotle_pickle · · Score: 1

    I thought everybody knew.

  170. Heat is never "pumped off as electricity" by chipotle_pickle · · Score: 1

    You are probably posting AC because you are joking and you don't want us to bug you about this, but we don't want to confuse anyone. Heat is never converted to electricity. Temperature differentials are.

  171. Uhm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To all of those folks out there who are saying that this technology can't work because the heat still has to go SOMEWHERE... if you can funnel the heat using , and then turn that heat into electricity using , there is no problem.

  172. What's the Catch? by rapidweather · · Score: 1

    If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. "panel about five inches square will supply enough cooling power to cool an entire house." I wonder what my light bill would be to power this thing.

  173. The goal is hotter heat sink relative to air temp by Totally_Lost · · Score: 1

    A red hot heat sink will transfer more heat to ambient air with less surface area and less CFM.
    Of course, 800 degree air has it's problems too :)

  174. Oil is not just for burning... by Handpaper · · Score: 1

    So we plant enough trees to absorb all the CO2 released by burning fossil fuel. Aside from the fact that this would (in time) result in a shortage of arable land for anything else, it still remains that plastics can quite easily be made from oil, but I've never seen a viable method of making them from trees.

    1. Re:Oil is not just for burning... by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      You'd cut down the trees and bury them in sealed, non-biodegrading landfills. Old growth forests are more or less CO2 neutral. This would get around the land shortage problem. It would also provide a lot of useful wood that could be built with (not as good as a landfill, but still keeps it out of the atmosphere, the occasional burned building aside.)

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
  175. Oy! by bio-droid · · Score: 2, Informative
    Ack -- I can't stand the noise any longer! Those who dispute the physical viability of cooling via quantum tunneling, please see Hishinuma et al, Applied Physics Letters, 23 April, 2001. The CoolChips folks claim (see the slide show) to have beaten the Stanford group by several years, but CoolChips also relies upon details the Hishinuma paper for justification. As for the various concerns voiced about large electrostatic forces between the cathode and anode, there are no such forces because there is no charge imbalance. When an electron tunnels across the gap it is replaced. Its a circuit. The physical principle behind the device is quite sound. The materials science and device engineering are, of course, another matter entirely. I wish them luck, but I am not yet any more likely to invest than the rest of you.

    - Rob

  176. Re:Coolchips? Wow. by bob_jenkins · · Score: 1

    Couldn't you just throw some grit in between the electrodes? That won't totally keep them from touching, both touch the grit, but it would keep 99.9% of the two surfaces from touching.

  177. Re:The goal is hotter heat sink relative to air te by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

    That's what I was wondering. My fridge has several square feet of cooling area. All that heat coming out of 1" square would be quite a hot square.

    --
    "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
  178. 70-80% efficiency?? how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but according to the laws of thermodynamics, the maximum effiency of any engine is 50% (Carnot engine). This would be in an ideal environment, which doesn't exist. Now read the following quote:

    Most existing cooling systems use compressors and environment-damaging fluids and are 40-50% efficient. Smaller thermoelectric cooling devices, despite more than $1 billion spent on research, are only 8% efficient. Cool Chips are projected to operate at 70-80% of the maximum theoretical efficiency (Carnot) for cooling.

    So, we have 70-80% of Carnot efficiency. This would be (best case) 80% * 50% = 40%
    I thought they said they were better than the competition? Maybe the 40-50% efficient competitors figure is also in terms of Carnot efficiency.

    Can anybody correct/confirm this?

  179. Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Squalish sez: Check your map. Every major city in the world was founded at the intersection of two bodies of water. The ocean forms a nice junction, so most of the cities on earth will either be underwater or have nice new beachfront property.

    Check your facts - what you say implies that cities are in the water (how else can water meet water except in the water?). In fact, most cities near the coast became important as the lowest (nearest the sea)crossing point over a river. I don't know about how cities away from the coast form, but that's what happened in the past in Europe.

    Aren't we a bit off-topic here. Back to slagging off the Americans and Europeans, then.

  180. hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you dumb ass, stupid, reguritating parrot

    You have fallen victim to the common lie that technology is an ever marching progression making our lives better. thnk again. this viewpoint is the one companies WANT YOU TO HAVE so you keep buying more crap.

    people in the US die from heat stroke because they are too studid and incompetent to take precautions against it.

    and by the way, who ever started that assumption that all people should live as absolutely as long as they can? I say if heat got a few -- good.

  181. Re: People die in the US every year from heat by @madeus · · Score: 2

    Notice the HHOJ (Ha Ha Only Joking) at the end ;-)

    And anyway I'm a Scotsman, so what do I care if a bunch of Englishmen get farmed off to Austrialia ;-)

    Seriously, I know bit about it already - didn't know about that Museum though, will definately pay it a visit next time I am in Nottingham, cheers!

    PS: It's 27 hear in London, wearing shorts in the office, whoohoo!

  182. Re: People die in the US every year from heat by DrSkwid · · Score: 2

    HHOJ (Ha Ha Only Joking)

    hehe 10 yrs in BBS & Internet and i thought HHOJ wtf does that mean!

    what do I care if a bunch of Englishmen get farmed off to Austrialia

    Australians note that there are probably more Scots in Australia than in Scotland.

    I do appreciate the joke but it's one of my pet peeves in the world. A direct attack by the ruling elite on the poorest people. Made poor by the industrial revolution that empowered that elite.

    My own family was a victim of the Scottish clearances *and* the transportations.

    I stood in the dock in the museum (the museum is inside the former Crown Court of Nottingham) and went through a mini mock trial of one of the Luddite rioters from 1831 and then proceeded to tour the remand cells from whence prisoners were transported / moved to other prisons etc.

    My character was hung until dead on the steps outside.

    History teaches much about the human spirit. I wish more people were interested in it.

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  183. Cool Chips Story on Small Times by jackhmason · · Score: 1

    Company Counts On Hot Sales For Smaller and Cheaper Chills
    By Jack Mason
    Small Times Correspondent

  184. Dolphin Demon by LtQuiJ · · Score: 1
    The cool chip site is real gem - I'd invest in them for the entertainment value, no question. But physics??

    See this explanation for some cautionary tales; it's not exactly the same, but you'll get the gist.

    Someone has done their physics homework well and got a real patent (yes, I looked it up at the The US Patent office) apparently on the strength of some nano-technobabble. Jeepers.

    So, now Mr. Dolphin, tell us how much power it takes to cool our chips?

  185. Actually, not a troll by dbrutus · · Score: 2

    As with all global climate effects, sea level is not a simple homogenous model. Here's a scholarly article that explains some of the variables. Things are not as settled as they appear in the greenpeace fundraising letters.

    http://www.co2andclimate.org/Articles/2000/sea.h tm

  186. Sorry for getting graphic by dbrutus · · Score: 2

    To carry your example to a more realistic level, do you put a colostomy bag on infants and toddlers or do you put diapers on them and when the inevitable accidents accumulate, you rent a carpet cleaner twice a year? The easy mitigation steps have generally been taken in the first world (3rd world industry not covered by Kyoto is a different matter). Kyoto is as unrealistic and dangerous as those colostomy bags.

    Kyoto doesn't make proper provision for carbon sinks. That's just foolish.

  187. Carbon sinks are not just trees by dbrutus · · Score: 2

    Trees are just one example of a carbon sink. Kyoto doesn't recognize any of them. The US considered carbon sinks as part of a comprehensive strategy to control CO2 levels, the EU wanted to keep the blinders on and just look at emissions. So Kyoto breaks down. The broader US approach would allow more scope for inventive solutions like planting trees, cleaning CO2 out of the atmosphere to create pollution credits that could be sold (creating a clean air industry while they're at it), and leaving an open framework for the inventiveness of humanity to come up with new solutions the politicians hadn't even dreamed of.

    The EU was not amused. Screw the EU.

  188. Thin air is a very common way to generate cold... by orichter · · Score: 1

    Actually, thin air is exactly how you generate cold. You compress it let it cool toward room temperature, and then you let it expand (thin) to cool below room temperature. So in essence, you do generate cold out of thin air. Your meaning is valid, but that was an ironic choice of words.

  189. Re:Typical cock-sucking Yank attitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But no no, fuck you.

    Go look up the history of that war, pay close attention to dates. Note when the US think the war started, and then cross reference that with Britain declaring war. You might also note that the battle of britain had been *won* during that period. Then wonder how much jacking off a US prez can do in two full years while the western world crumbles.

    Your attitude fucking amazes me. If the US could have gotten away with it the US would not have entered the war - until it was too late. But oh, you did it fucking all. Christ on a fucking stick, you still bang on about the Japs hitting a military target - try the fucking blitz bozo.

  190. CoolChips FAQ by Polaris · · Score: 1

    Looks like the company has been reading Slashdot, and has posted replies to a lot of the questions raised here.