The remaining option is beam riders. We send a beam of momentum, carried by photons (laser beam) or matter in some form (a stream of small very rugged missiles launched by a magnetic cannon at say 0.5c might work). This lets you leave your engine at home, which means it can be very nig and solar powered.
Focusing a high powered, coherent beam, and aiming it accurately at those kinds of distances is amazingly difficult, and several orders of magnitude beyond our current targeting capability. Beam riders are no more feasible in the near term than any of the other proposed solutions.
Antimatter reactions are ridiculously energetic, with an energy density of some 90PJ/kg. The problem is that there is no known naturally occurring source of antimatter, we have to produce all that we want to use. That makes it nothing more than a battery technology. Add in the inefficiencies of antimatter production, and you're talking about energy requirements equivalent to centuries at our current global consumption rate just to get into orbit. Finding a way to densely store the stuff is just one of many very difficult problems that need to be solved.
You should look at the chart again. The top two cards of each graphics series is going to be in the $200 and up range when purchased, so tallying those up from the December survey, you get somewhere around 45% of the users. Significantly higher than the 5% you seem to have pulled out of nowhere.
Now what is the general market? The people who are going to buy their own graphics cards are going to be professionals doing 3D or computational work, gamers, and HTPC builders. Everyone else is going to stick to their integrated Intel graphics and be none the wiser. The HTPC market is going to buy all low end stuff, the professional market is going to buy primarily high end stuff, and the gamer market, according to that survey, seems to be right in the middle of that price range. For people who actually would buy a video card, which is the only market that matters to video card manufacturers, $250 indeed does seem to be mid-range.
As for the new Chinese stealth fighter, it's reported to be an even match for the Raptor
Everything I've seen released about that aircraft seems to indicate it is in fact not a fighter, but rather an attack bomber, similar to an F-111 or Tornado. They have attack radars, and can fire air-to-air missiles, but won't cut it in a dogfight with a fighter.
No. The mistake was my own, with a slight misunderstanding of binding energy. Binding energy is plotted per nucleon, and while nickel does have a higher binding energy per nucleon than copper, copper has one more proton to more than offset the difference. Since they're fusing with a single proton, with no lost mass, there are still small gains to be had through fusion.
The problem still remains that there are only two stable isotopes of copper, which produced through fusion with hydrogen, would account for around 4.5% of naturally occuring nickel. After reading their paper, their energy measurements assumed reaction of all nickel, meaning they had not refined it. Their paper claims these isotopes spontaneously decay, transmuting a proton to a neutron, and releasing a positron and neutrino, and restarting the process until the nickel gets stepped up to copper-63, when the fuel is finally spent. That doesn't seem right to me, but I have no experience to refute it.
Actually, its the opposite. Nuclear binding energy is a measurement of the amount of mass lost to energy during the nucleon binding. In order to go from higher binding energy to lower, you need to input energy to replace that mass.
Nuclear reactions give off energy based off the change in binding energy. Nickel and copper isotopes are already about as high binding energy as you can get, meaning there will be negligible energy released, if any is released at all. They're going to have to consume large amounts of fuel for any significant energy output.
They're claiming no radioactive waste, which means they're going straight from one stable isotope of nickel to one stable isotope of copper. That means they're going from Ni62 to Cu63. Nickel-62 has the highest binding energy of any known isotope of any known element. You cannot extract any energy from any nuclear reaction involving that isotope, fission or fusion.
Re:Translation: the Wachowskis watched more anime
on
The Matrix Re-Reloaded
·
· Score: 1
The Gundams in the third film were a dead giveaway though
I've never really understood that. Bipedal transport makes sense all-terrain. When you're fighting on a flat, paved road, wheels work so much better.
Similarly, arms made sense on the Aliens loader, because it was a giant forklift. For combat, using arms and hands with giant oversized weapons just looks foolish. Requiring the operator to aim the guns down the barrel is doubly so. Why wouldn't you just put a gun platform on a turret, with a proper targeting mechanism?
What I'm saying is that the attacks occur regularly. Were they actually hopeless, no one would bother trying them. The fact that they do occur means they are getting through and compromising targets. There's nothing wrong with SSH. I'm saying there are plenty of Unix users and admins with bad setups and bad passwords. Users are the problem, not the system itself.
Come on. Anyone with any real security sense has been saying that all along. A basic firewall and some common sense is all that's needed to keep a Windows system secure from the average attacker. Meanwhile, the SSH dictionary attacks I get daily indicate that enough Linux/Unix users have sufficiently bad passwords to make it worthwhile.
And when people sent everything through the mail system, that was supportable. That sort of rapid package service still available through small messenger services in the cities, but in order to make it a viable business, their prices are considerably higher than the Post Office ever charged.
If you use the by-mail version of Netflix, you pay nothing for postage and pay only the Netflix membership fee. Industrious users will wind up with not only a happy memory of the movie, but their own backup copy of it for later viewing.
Netflix HD is 720p or 1080p VC-1, running at a maximum bitrate of 6Mbps. While comparable in bitrate and better in quality than a DVD, it's still lesser quality than broadcast HD MPEG2 (from a station with good encoders), and far lesser than is available from Bluray.
There are certain applications where hydrocarbon energy storage makes sense. High power electric motors and batteries are still very expensive compared to an internal combustion engine of the same output. Batteries simply don't have the power density to run airliners. It's easier to ship fuel to generators at remote outposts than charged batteries.
If you were simply dumping this energy back onto the grid, you are correct. You would just use a normal solar plant directly. The 40% efficiency conversion you would get with a collecting tower and heat engine would far exceed the hoped for 15% conversion you get out of this device, and the subsequent 40% conversion when burning it.
At low speeds, rolling friction from the tires is the primary draw on the engine. At highway speeds, aerodynamic drag very rapidly overtakes friction. By drafting one car inches from the next, the drag on each drops tremendously. This system could easily drop highway fuel consumption in half, as well as increase the range electric vehicles can travel before having to kick in their generator.
The idea isn't that everyone will start driving everywhere on their own, but rather that the people who already are driving will do so much more economically.
I completely disagree with you on that.
A product designed by an engineer is sold to a layman, who is by definition not able to assess the inherent dangers of its use. If he was, he wouldn't need the service of an engineer to design the product in the first place. A layman is not an engineer. An engineer thus has either to transfer all the knowledge necessary to operate the product safely to the customer, or to make its use not dangerous, even the use the product was not originally intended for.
A lawn mower can be a very dangerous device. It has a large, sharp blade, spinning at a high rate of speed. Common sense dictates that you treat such an implement with care and respect, and make sure nothing to care about gets near the large spinning blade. If you pick up the lawn mower and use it as a hedge trimmer, you deserve your fate. You should not be able to sue someone for not explicitly indicating the possible harm.
So instead of abusing the legal system for wealth and profit, they are abusing the legal system to bypass the legislative branch of the government and make unofficial law? That's so much better.
The facts are simple. A shipping company is not going to risk losing a $500 million dollar ship, $30 million in cargo, and the lives of its crew members when it can pay a tiny fraction of that to get their ship back.
Why not? It's exactly that line of thinking that has allowed frivolous lawsuits to become as prolific as they have. It's easier and cheaper to just settle for a few tens of thousands of dollars than to spend the time fighting it out in court.
Slashdot Mirror
Daedalus is the one who survived. Icarus would be the spacecraft that actually tried to enter orbit, and got burned up in the star.
I must confess, you have an astonishingly good idea there doctor.
The remaining option is beam riders. We send a beam of momentum, carried by photons (laser beam) or matter in some form (a stream of small very rugged missiles launched by a magnetic cannon at say 0.5c might work). This lets you leave your engine at home, which means it can be very nig and solar powered.
Focusing a high powered, coherent beam, and aiming it accurately at those kinds of distances is amazingly difficult, and several orders of magnitude beyond our current targeting capability. Beam riders are no more feasible in the near term than any of the other proposed solutions.
Antimatter reactions are ridiculously energetic, with an energy density of some 90PJ/kg. The problem is that there is no known naturally occurring source of antimatter, we have to produce all that we want to use. That makes it nothing more than a battery technology. Add in the inefficiencies of antimatter production, and you're talking about energy requirements equivalent to centuries at our current global consumption rate just to get into orbit. Finding a way to densely store the stuff is just one of many very difficult problems that need to be solved.
You should look at the chart again. The top two cards of each graphics series is going to be in the $200 and up range when purchased, so tallying those up from the December survey, you get somewhere around 45% of the users. Significantly higher than the 5% you seem to have pulled out of nowhere.
Now what is the general market? The people who are going to buy their own graphics cards are going to be professionals doing 3D or computational work, gamers, and HTPC builders. Everyone else is going to stick to their integrated Intel graphics and be none the wiser. The HTPC market is going to buy all low end stuff, the professional market is going to buy primarily high end stuff, and the gamer market, according to that survey, seems to be right in the middle of that price range. For people who actually would buy a video card, which is the only market that matters to video card manufacturers, $250 indeed does seem to be mid-range.
No, they have to Virtual Desktop in.
As for the new Chinese stealth fighter, it's reported to be an even match for the Raptor
Everything I've seen released about that aircraft seems to indicate it is in fact not a fighter, but rather an attack bomber, similar to an F-111 or Tornado. They have attack radars, and can fire air-to-air missiles, but won't cut it in a dogfight with a fighter.
No. The mistake was my own, with a slight misunderstanding of binding energy. Binding energy is plotted per nucleon, and while nickel does have a higher binding energy per nucleon than copper, copper has one more proton to more than offset the difference. Since they're fusing with a single proton, with no lost mass, there are still small gains to be had through fusion.
The problem still remains that there are only two stable isotopes of copper, which produced through fusion with hydrogen, would account for around 4.5% of naturally occuring nickel. After reading their paper, their energy measurements assumed reaction of all nickel, meaning they had not refined it. Their paper claims these isotopes spontaneously decay, transmuting a proton to a neutron, and releasing a positron and neutrino, and restarting the process until the nickel gets stepped up to copper-63, when the fuel is finally spent. That doesn't seem right to me, but I have no experience to refute it.
Actually, its the opposite. Nuclear binding energy is a measurement of the amount of mass lost to energy during the nucleon binding. In order to go from higher binding energy to lower, you need to input energy to replace that mass.
Nuclear reactions give off energy based off the change in binding energy. Nickel and copper isotopes are already about as high binding energy as you can get, meaning there will be negligible energy released, if any is released at all. They're going to have to consume large amounts of fuel for any significant energy output.
They're claiming no radioactive waste, which means they're going straight from one stable isotope of nickel to one stable isotope of copper. That means they're going from Ni62 to Cu63. Nickel-62 has the highest binding energy of any known isotope of any known element. You cannot extract any energy from any nuclear reaction involving that isotope, fission or fusion.
The Gundams in the third film were a dead giveaway though
I've never really understood that. Bipedal transport makes sense all-terrain. When you're fighting on a flat, paved road, wheels work so much better.
Similarly, arms made sense on the Aliens loader, because it was a giant forklift. For combat, using arms and hands with giant oversized weapons just looks foolish. Requiring the operator to aim the guns down the barrel is doubly so. Why wouldn't you just put a gun platform on a turret, with a proper targeting mechanism?
What I'm saying is that the attacks occur regularly. Were they actually hopeless, no one would bother trying them. The fact that they do occur means they are getting through and compromising targets. There's nothing wrong with SSH. I'm saying there are plenty of Unix users and admins with bad setups and bad passwords. Users are the problem, not the system itself.
Come on. Anyone with any real security sense has been saying that all along. A basic firewall and some common sense is all that's needed to keep a Windows system secure from the average attacker. Meanwhile, the SSH dictionary attacks I get daily indicate that enough Linux/Unix users have sufficiently bad passwords to make it worthwhile.
Just going off information found on wikipedia, fourth paragraph.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netflix#Internet_video_streaming
And when people sent everything through the mail system, that was supportable. That sort of rapid package service still available through small messenger services in the cities, but in order to make it a viable business, their prices are considerably higher than the Post Office ever charged.
If you use the by-mail version of Netflix, you pay nothing for postage and pay only the Netflix membership fee. Industrious users will wind up with not only a happy memory of the movie, but their own backup copy of it for later viewing.
I think most people would call that theft.
Netflix HD is 720p or 1080p VC-1, running at a maximum bitrate of 6Mbps. While comparable in bitrate and better in quality than a DVD, it's still lesser quality than broadcast HD MPEG2 (from a station with good encoders), and far lesser than is available from Bluray.
There are certain applications where hydrocarbon energy storage makes sense. High power electric motors and batteries are still very expensive compared to an internal combustion engine of the same output. Batteries simply don't have the power density to run airliners. It's easier to ship fuel to generators at remote outposts than charged batteries.
If you were simply dumping this energy back onto the grid, you are correct. You would just use a normal solar plant directly. The 40% efficiency conversion you would get with a collecting tower and heat engine would far exceed the hoped for 15% conversion you get out of this device, and the subsequent 40% conversion when burning it.
At low speeds, rolling friction from the tires is the primary draw on the engine. At highway speeds, aerodynamic drag very rapidly overtakes friction. By drafting one car inches from the next, the drag on each drops tremendously. This system could easily drop highway fuel consumption in half, as well as increase the range electric vehicles can travel before having to kick in their generator.
The idea isn't that everyone will start driving everywhere on their own, but rather that the people who already are driving will do so much more economically.
Don't tell me you saw a program on Discovery about an evacuated undersea tube and you think they'll have those everywhere in 20 years.
Actually, it was on NBC, and in fact it the first one will open in 2032.
I completely disagree with you on that. A product designed by an engineer is sold to a layman, who is by definition not able to assess the inherent dangers of its use. If he was, he wouldn't need the service of an engineer to design the product in the first place. A layman is not an engineer. An engineer thus has either to transfer all the knowledge necessary to operate the product safely to the customer, or to make its use not dangerous, even the use the product was not originally intended for.
A lawn mower can be a very dangerous device. It has a large, sharp blade, spinning at a high rate of speed. Common sense dictates that you treat such an implement with care and respect, and make sure nothing to care about gets near the large spinning blade. If you pick up the lawn mower and use it as a hedge trimmer, you deserve your fate. You should not be able to sue someone for not explicitly indicating the possible harm.
So instead of abusing the legal system for wealth and profit, they are abusing the legal system to bypass the legislative branch of the government and make unofficial law? That's so much better.
The facts are simple. A shipping company is not going to risk losing a $500 million dollar ship, $30 million in cargo, and the lives of its crew members when it can pay a tiny fraction of that to get their ship back.
Why not? It's exactly that line of thinking that has allowed frivolous lawsuits to become as prolific as they have. It's easier and cheaper to just settle for a few tens of thousands of dollars than to spend the time fighting it out in court.
That sounds surprisingly similar to the premise of The Mouse That Roared.
PXE can't, but I would bet you could rig up such a solution using gPXE/etherboot burned onto a boot ROM.