The Pheonix may be an international effort, but the "CEO" of the project is NASA which is based in America, the land of such great units like the slug and fortnights per furlong.
Consider yourself lucky that the temperature was not reported in the more appropriate terms such as Kelvin or Rankine, then 99% of the world population would be confused.
No offense, but I think you misunderstood the article a little bit (or maybe I did). After reading the article you linked I get the picture that they want to take CO2 from the atmosphere and use it in part to create a METHANOL type fuel. What you said in your comment indicates that they will make normal gasoline type fuel that we can all put in our cars. This is not true. Methanol can not burn in a gasoline engine.
Also, there is no way they can take CO2, one of many byproducts from combustion, and use it to create gasoline. Why? Combustion is an extremely irreversible process. The intense heat destroys all bonds and there is no way to go back.
Take this basic methane combustion reaction CH4 + 2(O2 + 3.76N2) -> CO2 + 2H20 + 7.52N2 + trace species The trace species includes stuff like NO, NO2,CO,H2,OH.
Do you realize there are hundreds and hundreds of elementary reactions that make up the reaction I listed above? You can not go back and create Hydrocarbons.
The article says that they want to create new methanol type fuels. That would require everybody to have new car engines and new gas pumps. Not to mention the energy output in methanol is even lower than ethanol, which is already lower than gasoline.
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the gas price in the UK and other European countries such as the Netherlands include taxes for medical coverage and other items? You can't compare UK prices to US prices because of that.
How is it hateful to state that Tim worked for several high profile democrats? It's the truth, you can look it up. You can also look up the quotes above what he says about Bush. That isn't fair and balanced. You should be ashamed of yourself and whoever modded my post as troll. I would expect greater from the slashdot community. I didn't hate speech on Tim, I said I was sad to see him go. Everyone seems to forget Tim's background with the democratic party, it doesn't mean he is a bad person and that I was insulting him. Geez.
Fair and balanced? Isn't this the same Tim Russert who seriously compared George Bush to Adolf Hitler? The same Tim Russert who said that Bush wanted 9/11 to happen?
Before he hosted a tv show he worked closely with several high profile Democrats. He is a former counselor to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Governor Mario Cuomo. He's hosted the Democrat National Conventions.
He was anything but fair and balanced. However, I am sad to see him go.
Be wary of relying on a dog for protection from thieves. Have you ever seen the show "It takes a Thief"? The show is about two ex-burglars and they attempt to burglarize someone's house (after Discovery Channel gets their permission). They then give the house a security makeover. Similar to how people hack into a business to find weaknesses to fix. There was one episode where the man and his wife were absolutely convinced that all the security they needed was their big obnoxious dog. The dog actually didn't bark a single time and let the burglar walk into the house, and then let it be pushed outside. The house was then trashed and valuable items stolen.
Don't trust a dog to protect your house.
I have a question for you. Let's say that the police come to your house with a search warrant. The police search every room in your house, but you tell them that they can't go into the linen closet. They tell you to move and let them search the linen closet but you block them and tell them to go away. Can you imagine what would happen to you if you tried this? This is exactly what Saddam did to the U.N. Weapons Inspectors. The inspectors were continuously blocked from searching certain areas in Iraq. That was illegal, and that was grounds to invade Iraq according to U.N. resolutions (which no country but the U.S. had the guts to follow through with). The U.N. should have invaded Iraq, not just America.
I know that if I try to prevent the police with a search warrant from going into a room in my house, I would be arrested and thrown into jail.
Also, why do you keep saying that you are all Phds? Like that matters? I am in graduate school right now and I know lots of phd candidates and friends who got their phd who don't know jack crap about politics. Having a PhD doesn't mean your comments are more credible about Iraq
It is sad but true, but consider this: How many white guys from America were a part of the hijacking teams on 9/11? There were 19 attackers, fifteen of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt, and one from Lebanon.
I attend Auburn University, and if you have been following the news recently you would know that a freshmen girl was murdered and her car gutted and set on fire, and a girl at UNC was murdered as well. Look at who committed these crimes?
Saying that, I know white guys commit crimes too. I'm not an idiot or a racist. (e.g the Oklahoma city bombs), but in regards especially to airport security, you have to play the percentages. You can't blame security for taking a closer look. They aren't arresting people. They aren't seeing someone driving a car, pulling him over and arresting him for no reason. Just get to the airport a little bit earlier to account for the time it takes for the special inspection.
Myself, I make sure I have nothing in my carry-on that looks dangerous, and I get to the airport 1.5-2 hours early. I take my time in getting in line and going through security. I am relaxed because I know I have enough time.
Are you serious? I hope your post was a joke. The canoe example is ridiculous. The operator of a canoe creates thrust by using oars and pushing against the water, of course they aren't going to have to throw a superheated gas at high velocity out the back of the canoe. Also, a canoe is supported by bouyancy in the water. A canoe doesn't have to fight gravity. Could you see a launch vehicle having oars coming out of the side that pushed the air in a sweeping pattern to create thrust? Propellers are sort of like that, however you aren't going to launch a rocket with an array of propellers. What are you going to do once the launch vehicle is out of the very small area of the atmosphere where lift can be generated? I think you need to review the principles of fluid dynamics, specifically how a rocket flies and how a canoe moves through the water. Then review the concepts of Thrust and ISP.
Solar powered launch is not feasible. Only solid-fuel and liquid-fuel rockets give enough ISP to launch a vehicle into orbit. It's not about the "cool" factor, or the big, loud, excitement factor. I would love for a new technology to come about, but right now there aren't any on the horizon.
There are some new propulsion ideas that would make a round-trip feasible, and these take place once the spacecraft is already into orbit around Earth. The Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket (VASIMR) can potentially cut the trip to Mars to 3 months.
You're right, we don't know what electricity is. The aerospace capital of the U.S. (huntsville, AL) is illuminated by millions of candles. NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, and the dozens upon dozens of Aerospace Engineering companies that work on building such things as new fighter jets, helicopters, armored troop vehicles, jet engines, rocket engines, etc. all do their work by candle light. I actually sent this letter by the U.S. mail to my friend in California who typed it up and posted it here for me. (You're welcome).
Can someone explain to me why a company has to pay the FCC huge gobs of money in order to use a frequency in the air? What keeps someone from using whatever the heck frequency that they want to? How can someone, in this case the FCC, take control of all frequencies and then 'sell' them to the highest bidder? To me it seems like saying you can't breathe the air around my house unless you pay me, which is dumb of course because nobody owns the atmosphere. I just don't get it, I don't understand this aspect of our economy.
Slashdot Mirror
The Pheonix may be an international effort, but the "CEO" of the project is NASA which is based in America, the land of such great units like the slug and fortnights per furlong.
Consider yourself lucky that the temperature was not reported in the more appropriate terms such as Kelvin or Rankine, then 99% of the world population would be confused.
No offense, but I think you misunderstood the article a little bit (or maybe I did). After reading the article you linked I get the picture that they want to take CO2 from the atmosphere and use it in part to create a METHANOL type fuel. What you said in your comment indicates that they will make normal gasoline type fuel that we can all put in our cars. This is not true. Methanol can not burn in a gasoline engine.
Also, there is no way they can take CO2, one of many byproducts from combustion, and use it to create gasoline. Why? Combustion is an extremely irreversible process. The intense heat destroys all bonds and there is no way to go back.
Take this basic methane combustion reaction
CH4 + 2(O2 + 3.76N2) -> CO2 + 2H20 + 7.52N2 + trace species
The trace species includes stuff like NO, NO2,CO,H2,OH.
Do you realize there are hundreds and hundreds of elementary reactions that make up the reaction I listed above? You can not go back and create Hydrocarbons.
The article says that they want to create new methanol type fuels. That would require everybody to have new car engines and new gas pumps. Not to mention the energy output in methanol is even lower than ethanol, which is already lower than gasoline.
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the gas price in the UK and other European countries such as the Netherlands include taxes for medical coverage and other items? You can't compare UK prices to US prices because of that.
How is it hateful to state that Tim worked for several high profile democrats? It's the truth, you can look it up. You can also look up the quotes above what he says about Bush. That isn't fair and balanced. You should be ashamed of yourself and whoever modded my post as troll. I would expect greater from the slashdot community. I didn't hate speech on Tim, I said I was sad to see him go. Everyone seems to forget Tim's background with the democratic party, it doesn't mean he is a bad person and that I was insulting him. Geez.
Fair and balanced? Isn't this the same Tim Russert who seriously compared George Bush to Adolf Hitler? The same Tim Russert who said that Bush wanted 9/11 to happen? Before he hosted a tv show he worked closely with several high profile Democrats. He is a former counselor to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Governor Mario Cuomo. He's hosted the Democrat National Conventions. He was anything but fair and balanced. However, I am sad to see him go.
Be wary of relying on a dog for protection from thieves. Have you ever seen the show "It takes a Thief"? The show is about two ex-burglars and they attempt to burglarize someone's house (after Discovery Channel gets their permission). They then give the house a security makeover. Similar to how people hack into a business to find weaknesses to fix. There was one episode where the man and his wife were absolutely convinced that all the security they needed was their big obnoxious dog. The dog actually didn't bark a single time and let the burglar walk into the house, and then let it be pushed outside. The house was then trashed and valuable items stolen. Don't trust a dog to protect your house.
I have a question for you. Let's say that the police come to your house with a search warrant. The police search every room in your house, but you tell them that they can't go into the linen closet. They tell you to move and let them search the linen closet but you block them and tell them to go away. Can you imagine what would happen to you if you tried this? This is exactly what Saddam did to the U.N. Weapons Inspectors. The inspectors were continuously blocked from searching certain areas in Iraq. That was illegal, and that was grounds to invade Iraq according to U.N. resolutions (which no country but the U.S. had the guts to follow through with). The U.N. should have invaded Iraq, not just America. I know that if I try to prevent the police with a search warrant from going into a room in my house, I would be arrested and thrown into jail. Also, why do you keep saying that you are all Phds? Like that matters? I am in graduate school right now and I know lots of phd candidates and friends who got their phd who don't know jack crap about politics. Having a PhD doesn't mean your comments are more credible about Iraq
It is sad but true, but consider this: How many white guys from America were a part of the hijacking teams on 9/11? There were 19 attackers, fifteen of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt, and one from Lebanon.
I attend Auburn University, and if you have been following the news recently you would know that a freshmen girl was murdered and her car gutted and set on fire, and a girl at UNC was murdered as well. Look at who committed these crimes?
Saying that, I know white guys commit crimes too. I'm not an idiot or a racist. (e.g the Oklahoma city bombs), but in regards especially to airport security, you have to play the percentages. You can't blame security for taking a closer look. They aren't arresting people. They aren't seeing someone driving a car, pulling him over and arresting him for no reason. Just get to the airport a little bit earlier to account for the time it takes for the special inspection.
Myself, I make sure I have nothing in my carry-on that looks dangerous, and I get to the airport 1.5-2 hours early. I take my time in getting in line and going through security. I am relaxed because I know I have enough time.
Are you serious? I hope your post was a joke. The canoe example is ridiculous. The operator of a canoe creates thrust by using oars and pushing against the water, of course they aren't going to have to throw a superheated gas at high velocity out the back of the canoe. Also, a canoe is supported by bouyancy in the water. A canoe doesn't have to fight gravity. Could you see a launch vehicle having oars coming out of the side that pushed the air in a sweeping pattern to create thrust? Propellers are sort of like that, however you aren't going to launch a rocket with an array of propellers. What are you going to do once the launch vehicle is out of the very small area of the atmosphere where lift can be generated? I think you need to review the principles of fluid dynamics, specifically how a rocket flies and how a canoe moves through the water. Then review the concepts of Thrust and ISP. Solar powered launch is not feasible. Only solid-fuel and liquid-fuel rockets give enough ISP to launch a vehicle into orbit. It's not about the "cool" factor, or the big, loud, excitement factor. I would love for a new technology to come about, but right now there aren't any on the horizon. There are some new propulsion ideas that would make a round-trip feasible, and these take place once the spacecraft is already into orbit around Earth. The Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket (VASIMR) can potentially cut the trip to Mars to 3 months.
You're right, we don't know what electricity is. The aerospace capital of the U.S. (huntsville, AL) is illuminated by millions of candles. NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, and the dozens upon dozens of Aerospace Engineering companies that work on building such things as new fighter jets, helicopters, armored troop vehicles, jet engines, rocket engines, etc. all do their work by candle light. I actually sent this letter by the U.S. mail to my friend in California who typed it up and posted it here for me. (You're welcome).
Can someone explain to me why a company has to pay the FCC huge gobs of money in order to use a frequency in the air? What keeps someone from using whatever the heck frequency that they want to? How can someone, in this case the FCC, take control of all frequencies and then 'sell' them to the highest bidder? To me it seems like saying you can't breathe the air around my house unless you pay me, which is dumb of course because nobody owns the atmosphere. I just don't get it, I don't understand this aspect of our economy.