The book "Reinventing Fire" by Amory Lovins goes into detail in how to make the grid less vulnerable to inclement weather (including space weather). "Finally, letting distributed generators compete and interconnect fairly could nearly eliminate blackout risks by organizing the grid into local “microgrids” that normally interconnect but can stand alone at need (“islanding”). This resilient future, already demonstrated in about 20 experiments worldwide... " http://www.rmi.org/electricity
A boat is a hole in the water into which money is poured. We've had a Navy since our inception and yet universal disarmament hasn't happened yet. Let's just scuttle all our ships.
There was a good bit of debate among nuclear physicists around the time of the oil crisis on how to best accomplish practical fusion. A Manhattan Project or Apollo Program type approach seemed wasteful given the large available coal resource and it was pretty clear that the problem was bigger than either of those to examples. So, a long term program timed to pay off when the coal ran out was adopted. That decision now frames how many PhD's are produced each year in related fields and how we intersect with the international research community etc.... But, we are probably getting the most bang for our research buck using this moderate approach.
Global warming was not a concern at that time. Fortunately though, other smaller research efforts initiated at that time have delivered sooner and those can provide a solution to end carbon dioxide emissions.
No, just having fun. I'm a big supporter of nuclear fusion research and nuclear propulsion for the Navy. It is just commercial nuclear fission that makes no sense in so many ways.
We do improve our energy efficiency. For example, combined cycle gas generators are 60% efficient, about twice a good as nuclear reactors. So, in the absence of cogen, 40% of the heat is discarded. But, so it the other 60%. Turning on a light heat the wall the light shines on..... So, it is 100% waste heat eventually. It is the 100% stuff (after use) that must be emitted to space and that is what the paper proposes to search for.
That is covered with their parameter nu. From their table 1: "Power of other waste disposal (e.g. neutrino radiation, non-thermal emission, kinetic energy, energy-to-mass conversion)" so yes, there may be ways to reduce the signature.
Energy used efficiently is still energy used. There is always waste heat. The paper addresses what would be an o[optimal waste heat temperature. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.1134... If you want your waste heat half as warm, your Dyson Sphere has to have four time the radius so you material use becomes excessive.
That is covered with their parameter nu. From their table 1: "Power of other waste disposal (e.g. neutrino
radiation, non-thermal emission,
kinetic energy, energy-to-mass conversion)" so yes, there may be ways to reduce the signature.
Not really. The luminosity of a Dyson Sphere will be the same as the luminosity of the star it surrounds. The color temperature of the radiation will be lower by a factor of the square root of the ratio of the radius of the star to the radius of the sphere.
They are usually putting gamma equal to alpha in the paper so Dyson spheres, cubes or pyramids is pretty much what they have in mind. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.1134...
I suppose if you condensed the material in an AGN jet you get chunk of mass going that fast and reaching another galaxy. There are high velocity stars (not that high though) that might be three body interaction ejections from Andromeda http://www.technology.org/2013...
Slashdot Mirror
The book "Reinventing Fire" by Amory Lovins goes into detail in how to make the grid less vulnerable to inclement weather (including space weather). "Finally, letting distributed generators compete and interconnect fairly could nearly eliminate blackout risks by organizing the grid into local “microgrids” that normally interconnect but can stand alone at need (“islanding”). This resilient future, already demonstrated in about 20 experiments worldwide... " http://www.rmi.org/electricity
A cup of hot tea can produce infinite improbability which is better.
I can tell I make you cowardly....
"there was no engineer involved"
What other equivalence is there?
Topologically, a teacup with a handle is a torus. No BS.
More expensive, worse for proliferation and even less stable....
And yet reserve growth is much more common....
What does a redundant mod on a recursive post mean?
multi-account?
A boat is a hole in the water into which money is poured. We've had a Navy since our inception and yet universal disarmament hasn't happened yet. Let's just scuttle all our ships.
So, you agree that fission is unsafe. I wonder if their are alternatives available today that are replacing it? http://will.illinois.edu/nfs/R...
Instability leading to huge accidents, no solution for the waste, weapons proliferation, too expensive, fuel source depleting....
There was a good bit of debate among nuclear physicists around the time of the oil crisis on how to best accomplish practical fusion. A Manhattan Project or Apollo Program type approach seemed wasteful given the large available coal resource and it was pretty clear that the problem was bigger than either of those to examples. So, a long term program timed to pay off when the coal ran out was adopted. That decision now frames how many PhD's are produced each year in related fields and how we intersect with the international research community etc.... But, we are probably getting the most bang for our research buck using this moderate approach.
Global warming was not a concern at that time. Fortunately though, other smaller research efforts initiated at that time have delivered sooner and those can provide a solution to end carbon dioxide emissions.
No, just having fun. I'm a big supporter of nuclear fusion research and nuclear propulsion for the Navy. It is just commercial nuclear fission that makes no sense in so many ways.
Not another anti-nuclear post from mdsolar.....
Maybe it's a moon sign....
We do improve our energy efficiency. For example, combined cycle gas generators are 60% efficient, about twice a good as nuclear reactors. So, in the absence of cogen, 40% of the heat is discarded. But, so it the other 60%. Turning on a light heat the wall the light shines on..... So, it is 100% waste heat eventually. It is the 100% stuff (after use) that must be emitted to space and that is what the paper proposes to search for.
That is covered with their parameter nu. From their table 1: "Power of other waste disposal (e.g. neutrino radiation, non-thermal emission, kinetic energy, energy-to-mass conversion)" so yes, there may be ways to reduce the signature.
suggests that the aliens might not abandon these stars just as the energy get is getting good. He may have a point there.
Energy used efficiently is still energy used. There is always waste heat. The paper addresses what would be an o[optimal waste heat temperature. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.1134... If you want your waste heat half as warm, your Dyson Sphere has to have four time the radius so you material use becomes excessive.
That is covered with their parameter nu. From their table 1: "Power of other waste disposal (e.g. neutrino radiation, non-thermal emission, kinetic energy, energy-to-mass conversion)" so yes, there may be ways to reduce the signature.
Not really. The luminosity of a Dyson Sphere will be the same as the luminosity of the star it surrounds. The color temperature of the radiation will be lower by a factor of the square root of the ratio of the radius of the star to the radius of the sphere.
They are usually putting gamma equal to alpha in the paper so Dyson spheres, cubes or pyramids is pretty much what they have in mind. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.1134...
I suppose if you condensed the material in an AGN jet you get chunk of mass going that fast and reaching another galaxy. There are high velocity stars (not that high though) that might be three body interaction ejections from Andromeda http://www.technology.org/2013...