I took a career aptitude test in middle school. The results came back and the list of possibilities was several pages long. I can't say that it was very helpful in making a decision.
Then I guess that it is a good thing that they are the ones doing the work, and not you. Ever think that they could maybe do the work from the side, and all the really need in order to get started is to get the weight off of it? Think before you speak.
32 megawatt lasers definitely don't have unlimited ammunition though, not currently - we need some big developments in DC storage mediums before that occurs.
No we don't. We're talking about Nimitz class carriers here. Those things have 208 megawatts at the ready. You could fire 6000 of these 32kW lasers at the same time and still have power left over....and you could fire them all day long.
Power isn't an issue for this particular application.
32kW is well within the capability of relatively small diesel generators. Any reasonably sized military vessel could mount several of these if desired.
*) Standard missiles can engage targets 50-100 miles away. Power on the laser is diminished the farther you go, making it practical for close in targets.
*) Accuracy is better due to zero flight time. I wouldn't want to be behind the target, tho. I'm sure that the tracking is not 100%.
*) Ammo is limited by the fuel on the ship.
*) Just a big cloud of exhaust from the stacks
The intended purpose for this laser is to augment the current Gatling guns used for close-range missile/shell defense. The article states that these lasers have at least twice the range of the Gatling guns, thus they do have significantly better range.
That is true, but it is also MUCH better than having rounds flying through the air. Part of why the existing system fires so many rounds is the fact that individually, they aren't particularly accurate. You have to volley massive numbers of them to have a reasonable likelihood of quickly taking out the target.
Being that this is intended for use on large vessels like the Nimitz, the fuel is the radioactive material in the reactor, which is good for decades, and thus the ammunition is effectively infinite. Or do you anticipate the ship engaging in a non-stop decades long battle?
The pollution would be the spent fuel from the reactor, not exhaust.
Interesting. By that logic, a Nimitz class carrier could bring to bear 208000kJ/sec (the reactors provide 208megawatts) assuming it had lasers large/numerous enough.
That would, of course, cause power to be diverted from all other systems, but who among us wouldn't love the idea of being present in the control room and having the lights dim as the ship fires it's ultimate weapon.
So if they cut power to all other systems, they could fire 6500!!! of these lasers at the same time!
Even if it does take 15 seconds to destroy a single target with a 32kw laser, good luck getting anywhere remotely close to a ship that has a dozen of these things.
So you are positing that all people with environmental allergies need to do to be cured is go outside more.
Yes, exactly. My wife previously had severe pollen and mold allergies, but a few years ago, she started taking allergy shots. Allergy shots really do nothing more than regularly expose you to the allergens that cause you problems. You can achieve the same result by spending a lot of time outside. One of my friends also had allergies, but then started to coach high school tennis. After a few summers of that, his allergies were gone.
Mod me off-topic if you like, but the term "CPU" stands for the main computer chip that is inside of the metal box that you are referring to as a CPU. You should be calling that metal box a "computer".
I don't know where that computer is a "CPU" stuff started, but I find it annoying as hell.
I hate those boots. They inevitably get hard and make depressing the retaining clip difficult. If you have to use one of those in a place with little finger room, good luck getting it out without a flat-head screwdriver or something.
Actually, maybe it would... Perhaps drawing heat away from the magma dome under Yellowstone would help to settle it down. Or maybe not. Either way, from what I hear it is already due for another eruption.
I ordered an iphone 4 and also changed my plan to a family plan, but I still got to keep my original "unlimited" (5GB) data plan. As long as you don't want to add tethering, you pretty much get to keep your old data plan.
Depends on your definition of functional. If something isn't easily usable, can you call it functional? Prior to the iphone, ease of use was not really a feature of most cell phone UI's. That might be changing now, but there is still something to be said for doing a limited set of things rather well, or at least in a straightforward way, rather than trying to do everything.
Any time a monetary fine is suggested at all, there's something terribly wrong with the picture. Nobody can logically explain why it's okay to take someone's money when it isn't okay to take someones money.
It's about justice. No, killing the criminal doesn't bring back the victim. But what would you suggest as punishment? A forced apology? Yes, the death penalty is hypocritical, but not necessarily unjust. Would it be better to put them in prison for life, incurring a significant cost on society? They have already proven that they can not be trusted to live with the rest of us.
Personally, I'm ok with the death penalty in cases where there is undeniable evidence of intentional murder. (30 eye witnesses, etc. Note: DNA evidence on it's own does not qualify) People like that have absolutely no place in society. However, in many (most?) cases, we don't have undeniable evidence, so I would consider the death penalty to be unjust. There have been many cases where people on death row have been exonerated.
But a mass gun/mass modification device might be possible. It would probably require mc^2 energy to modify mass, but it might be possible. This could have the effect of a gravity gun... Hit something with it, and it immediately falls under it's own increased weight.
That's why we aren't talking about building 1960 style reactors. Newer designs are much more efficient. Even if we used all of the easily accessible uranium, there are reactor designs that operate off of other nuclear fuels, such as thorium, which we have ridiculous amounts of.
The average acceleration of the ship as a whole would still only be 1g because you would have to stop accelerating in order to move the bridge back to the front again.
Not true. we might be able to create a microscopic black hole that is massive enough to exist long enough that we could attempt this and observe the result. But you are right that attempting it on a natural black hole is pretty much impossible.
- The wind blows against the car/propeller (which is initially stationary), causing the car to roll forward.
- The wheels of the car are connected to the propeller, geared as such to push air backward.
- This backward moving air creates a larger obstruction than the stationary car, which causes the car to accelerate.
- And so on, until the forces on the car equalize.
...or something like that. Makes me want to build a small model to experiment with.
I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere that spacex already has something like 30 payloads booked for future flights. Maybe those aren't firm contracts, but it doesn't sound like they are having any trouble with demand.
Slashdot Mirror
...
...We'll just put down a "no" for that one.
I took a career aptitude test in middle school. The results came back and the list of possibilities was several pages long. I can't say that it was very helpful in making a decision.
Sony is based in Japan, not the USA.
Then I guess that it is a good thing that they are the ones doing the work, and not you. Ever think that they could maybe do the work from the side, and all the really need in order to get started is to get the weight off of it? Think before you speak.
32 megawatt lasers definitely don't have unlimited ammunition though, not currently - we need some big developments in DC storage mediums before that occurs.
No we don't. We're talking about Nimitz class carriers here. Those things have 208 megawatts at the ready. You could fire 6000 of these 32kW lasers at the same time and still have power left over. ...and you could fire them all day long.
Power isn't an issue for this particular application.
32kW is well within the capability of relatively small diesel generators. Any reasonably sized military vessel could mount several of these if desired.
*) Standard missiles can engage targets 50-100 miles away. Power on the laser is diminished the farther you go, making it practical for close in targets. *) Accuracy is better due to zero flight time. I wouldn't want to be behind the target, tho. I'm sure that the tracking is not 100%. *) Ammo is limited by the fuel on the ship. *) Just a big cloud of exhaust from the stacks
The intended purpose for this laser is to augment the current Gatling guns used for close-range missile/shell defense. The article states that these lasers have at least twice the range of the Gatling guns, thus they do have significantly better range.
That is true, but it is also MUCH better than having rounds flying through the air. Part of why the existing system fires so many rounds is the fact that individually, they aren't particularly accurate. You have to volley massive numbers of them to have a reasonable likelihood of quickly taking out the target.
Being that this is intended for use on large vessels like the Nimitz, the fuel is the radioactive material in the reactor, which is good for decades, and thus the ammunition is effectively infinite. Or do you anticipate the ship engaging in a non-stop decades long battle?
The pollution would be the spent fuel from the reactor, not exhaust.
Interesting. By that logic, a Nimitz class carrier could bring to bear 208000kJ/sec (the reactors provide 208megawatts) assuming it had lasers large/numerous enough.
That would, of course, cause power to be diverted from all other systems, but who among us wouldn't love the idea of being present in the control room and having the lights dim as the ship fires it's ultimate weapon.
So if they cut power to all other systems, they could fire 6500!!! of these lasers at the same time!
Even if it does take 15 seconds to destroy a single target with a 32kw laser, good luck getting anywhere remotely close to a ship that has a dozen of these things.
So you are positing that all people with environmental allergies need to do to be cured is go outside more.
Yes, exactly. My wife previously had severe pollen and mold allergies, but a few years ago, she started taking allergy shots. Allergy shots really do nothing more than regularly expose you to the allergens that cause you problems. You can achieve the same result by spending a lot of time outside. One of my friends also had allergies, but then started to coach high school tennis. After a few summers of that, his allergies were gone.
Mod me off-topic if you like, but the term "CPU" stands for the main computer chip that is inside of the metal box that you are referring to as a CPU. You should be calling that metal box a "computer".
I don't know where that computer is a "CPU" stuff started, but I find it annoying as hell.
I hate those boots. They inevitably get hard and make depressing the retaining clip difficult. If you have to use one of those in a place with little finger room, good luck getting it out without a flat-head screwdriver or something.
Actually, maybe it would... Perhaps drawing heat away from the magma dome under Yellowstone would help to settle it down. Or maybe not. Either way, from what I hear it is already due for another eruption.
I ordered an iphone 4 and also changed my plan to a family plan, but I still got to keep my original "unlimited" (5GB) data plan. As long as you don't want to add tethering, you pretty much get to keep your old data plan.
Depends on your definition of functional. If something isn't easily usable, can you call it functional? Prior to the iphone, ease of use was not really a feature of most cell phone UI's. That might be changing now, but there is still something to be said for doing a limited set of things rather well, or at least in a straightforward way, rather than trying to do everything.
Any time a monetary fine is suggested at all, there's something terribly wrong with the picture. Nobody can logically explain why it's okay to take someone's money when it isn't okay to take someones money.
It's about justice. No, killing the criminal doesn't bring back the victim. But what would you suggest as punishment? A forced apology? Yes, the death penalty is hypocritical, but not necessarily unjust. Would it be better to put them in prison for life, incurring a significant cost on society? They have already proven that they can not be trusted to live with the rest of us.
Personally, I'm ok with the death penalty in cases where there is undeniable evidence of intentional murder. (30 eye witnesses, etc. Note: DNA evidence on it's own does not qualify) People like that have absolutely no place in society. However, in many (most?) cases, we don't have undeniable evidence, so I would consider the death penalty to be unjust. There have been many cases where people on death row have been exonerated.
Gravity makes a siphon work, not air pressure.
But a mass gun/mass modification device might be possible. It would probably require mc^2 energy to modify mass, but it might be possible. This could have the effect of a gravity gun... Hit something with it, and it immediately falls under it's own increased weight.
I can think of a couple where nuclear is a non-starter.
Care to elaborate?
That's why we aren't talking about building 1960 style reactors. Newer designs are much more efficient. Even if we used all of the easily accessible uranium, there are reactor designs that operate off of other nuclear fuels, such as thorium, which we have ridiculous amounts of.
The average acceleration of the ship as a whole would still only be 1g because you would have to stop accelerating in order to move the bridge back to the front again.
Not true. we might be able to create a microscopic black hole that is massive enough to exist long enough that we could attempt this and observe the result. But you are right that attempting it on a natural black hole is pretty much impossible.
No, it travels with the wind.
...or something like that. Makes me want to build a small model to experiment with.
- The wind blows against the car/propeller (which is initially stationary), causing the car to roll forward.
- The wheels of the car are connected to the propeller, geared as such to push air backward.
- This backward moving air creates a larger obstruction than the stationary car, which causes the car to accelerate.
- And so on, until the forces on the car equalize.
I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere that spacex already has something like 30 payloads booked for future flights. Maybe those aren't firm contracts, but it doesn't sound like they are having any trouble with demand.
Kind of sounds like a giant Tesla coil.