When someone says i can give you a working toyota gearbox, i would expect it to be well a working toyota gearbox i can fit into my toyota. If they said *model* or *scale replica* then perhaps i would expect the the toy they did make with the *help* of 3d printing. You do know that car enthusiast have and do make real gear boxes without jumping on the 3d printing bandwaggon.
These 3d printer nut jobs are going around saying things like "you will be able to just print that soon" and post articles like this. It gets tiresome. 3d printing is 20 years old and it can't even print the metal case to a iPhone (its forged to get the correct micro structure). It is useful for some parts and prototyping, but stop with "printed a real working gearbox" bullshit already.
2.5 is not 1/20 of 100. And still the math is way way off. Your claiming you could run *all* of Britain with the lagoon claim, while my calculations match claims that papers have made and doesn't have lots of math mistakes.
And you think its going to sit there just working for 25 years without maintenance? And yea if there is just 1 crane in the world that can do what you need to do. Expect to pay a perimuim, and have very long lead times. don't forget the expensive underwater cables as well.
I approximated the bay as a triangle so its half the volume. 2.5m of height is 1000kg*g*h for a potental energy of 24500J per m3. That is far less than.272kWh. 1kWh is 3.6MJ. So you over estimated the potential energy of a m3 of water by a very large factor. Also where did 100 million come from?
Those numbers seem off. Lets assume you not cutting it off right out at the sea, but a bit closer in, for the simple reason that a dam 50km in length is well probably not going to work in the deeper areas, ecologically or economically. Closer however we can assume a triangle shape and lets be optimistic and assume 20km wide and somehow the greenies sign off on that (seriously ecologically this is a really hard sell). That 20km wide 20km long with a 5m head. This is very unrealistic, we are assuming we can empty and fill the lagoon instantly at peak head: 20kmx20km/2*5=1Billion m3. Potential energy with a 5m drop, rise x2 drop x2 is 1e11J. Or 27MWh per day. This is no where near 25% UKs power needs. Wiki claims average consumption of 840GWh per day.
Ships cost a bit to buy. But cost far more to run. Running costs is everything. A crew of 50, boom just salaries are costing a lot and charge out rates need to cover the costs when the ship is not in use, and for technical ships crews are typically larger, highly skilled and well paid. It would easily be 100k + per day and wouldn't take much to get it into the 1M per day.
It is based on a bit more than 2 things. Early elemental abundance, cosmic microwave background radiation, large scale structure or lack thereof... etc.
Or perhaps there mega stars theory is correct (whatever its called). It has more metal that expected. There are many things that could account for this. But early on massive stars may have been possible and would burn out very fast into huge supernovae, populating a very young universe with metals earlier than expected.
Interesting. And what about heat generated from the Eric Derexlers machines? That always seems to be ignored or estimated at very low levels. My BOTE was some portion of inter atomic bonds, ie ~1eV or so, and that results in quite a bit of heat.
Diets and supplements is 10B a year industry and won't go away anytime soon. Also don't forget that average effects is not the same as specific effects. We know that metabolism variation among individuals is pretty huge.
Personally i can put up with rats in the toilet if i have WiFi.
On a more serious note. It is only the top end expensive places that charge for internet. The backpackers and cheap motels i have stayed not only have free internet, but it was fast as well. Hell even some campsites i have been too have free internet.
Technospeak in star trek is called techobabble.It is actually a thing, about mixing words that make no sense at all, to sound technical. It has less chance of becoming tomorrow future reality than Harry fucking Potter.
Yea alot of the old shit was done to a very low standard. I mean really Shit Standard. These days we demand stuff that is better. Just because its old doesn't make it good.
Sure it may have seemed good the first time because you where like 5 years old. Trek was and always will be "pop" TV and Cinema.
the electric sun theory explains exactly nothing. The electric universe theory explains even less. Your explanation makes less sense than the star trek technospeak.
If the machines where given a similar mass budget to human crews. Sure they could.
Right now the machines we send and tiny fractions of the mass budget (and cash budget) that people compare to manned missions. And yet the machines still get more done.
Wormholes and Alcubierre warp drives are both constructs within the framework of the currently-accepted physical theories
Err no they are not. First of all the all violate energy principals widely accepted to hold. Second they need *negative mass* that has *zero* theoretical underpinnings. That is, withing the currently accepted physical theories they are quite impossible. Then add the fact that the basic Alcubierre drive needs more energy than the visible universe and is causally disconnected from the rest of the universe....
We find maths that describes reality, not the other way round. A good example is how high will a ball go when thrown upwards at a given speed. One of the solutions can give a complex number. We just ignore it as physically impossible.
Just because the math has a solution in some abstract mathematical sense does not mean is represents anything to do with reality.
The thing that is not plausible, is that relocating a substantial part of humanity off planet is easier than building a lot of green houses with hydroponics or areo poinics.. or just plane old green houses.
Thermodynamics doesn't apply at large scales. Relativity doesn't necessarily conserve energy, for example; where does the energy from red-shifted photons go?
That is a fairly easy undergrad problem. It is very easy to show thermodynamics, conversation of energy, conservation of momentum and everything else is *not* violated in *all* frames of reference.
Gravity waves travel at the speed of light. Not faster. Quantum entanglement does not affect anything. It is a mathematical construct to derive the outcomes of measurements. It has been proven many many times that no information or anything else for that matter is "transmitted", let alone faster than light.
Slashdot Mirror
When someone says i can give you a working toyota gearbox, i would expect it to be well a working toyota gearbox i can fit into my toyota. If they said *model* or *scale replica* then perhaps i would expect the the toy they did make with the *help* of 3d printing. You do know that car enthusiast have and do make real gear boxes without jumping on the 3d printing bandwaggon.
These 3d printer nut jobs are going around saying things like "you will be able to just print that soon" and post articles like this. It gets tiresome. 3d printing is 20 years old and it can't even print the metal case to a iPhone (its forged to get the correct micro structure). It is useful for some parts and prototyping, but stop with "printed a real working gearbox" bullshit already.
Only Americans think that every issue can be summed up with partisan politics.
2.5 is not 1/20 of 100. And still the math is way way off. Your claiming you could run *all* of Britain with the lagoon claim, while my calculations match claims that papers have made and doesn't have lots of math mistakes.
And you think its going to sit there just working for 25 years without maintenance? And yea if there is just 1 crane in the world that can do what you need to do. Expect to pay a perimuim, and have very long lead times. don't forget the expensive underwater cables as well.
I approximated the bay as a triangle so its half the volume. 2.5m of height is 1000kg*g*h for a potental energy of 24500J per m3. That is far less than .272kWh. 1kWh is 3.6MJ. So you over estimated the potential energy of a m3 of water by a very large factor. Also where did 100 million come from?
Those numbers seem off. Lets assume you not cutting it off right out at the sea, but a bit closer in, for the simple reason that a dam 50km in length is well probably not going to work in the deeper areas, ecologically or economically. Closer however we can assume a triangle shape and lets be optimistic and assume 20km wide and somehow the greenies sign off on that (seriously ecologically this is a really hard sell). That 20km wide 20km long with a 5m head. This is very unrealistic, we are assuming we can empty and fill the lagoon instantly at peak head: 20kmx20km/2*5=1Billion m3. Potential energy with a 5m drop, rise x2 drop x2 is 1e11J. Or 27MWh per day. This is no where near 25% UKs power needs. Wiki claims average consumption of 840GWh per day.
Ships cost a bit to buy. But cost far more to run. Running costs is everything. A crew of 50, boom just salaries are costing a lot and charge out rates need to cover the costs when the ship is not in use, and for technical ships crews are typically larger, highly skilled and well paid. It would easily be 100k + per day and wouldn't take much to get it into the 1M per day.
The big bang hypothesis is based on two things:
It is based on a bit more than 2 things. Early elemental abundance, cosmic microwave background radiation, large scale structure or lack thereof... etc.
Or perhaps there mega stars theory is correct (whatever its called). It has more metal that expected. There are many things that could account for this. But early on massive stars may have been possible and would burn out very fast into huge supernovae, populating a very young universe with metals earlier than expected.
Data caps? What century are you in. I haven't had a data cap on my connections since about 2000. 20Mbit down, and 2Mbit up. No limits.
Interesting. And what about heat generated from the Eric Derexlers machines? That always seems to be ignored or estimated at very low levels. My BOTE was some portion of inter atomic bonds, ie ~1eV or so, and that results in quite a bit of heat.
Diets and supplements is 10B a year industry and won't go away anytime soon. Also don't forget that average effects is not the same as specific effects. We know that metabolism variation among individuals is pretty huge.
Personally i can put up with rats in the toilet if i have WiFi.
On a more serious note. It is only the top end expensive places that charge for internet. The backpackers and cheap motels i have stayed not only have free internet, but it was fast as well. Hell even some campsites i have been too have free internet.
Technospeak in star trek is called techobabble.It is actually a thing, about mixing words that make no sense at all, to sound technical. It has less chance of becoming tomorrow future reality than Harry fucking Potter.
Yea alot of the old shit was done to a very low standard. I mean really Shit Standard. These days we demand stuff that is better. Just because its old doesn't make it good.
Sure it may have seemed good the first time because you where like 5 years old. Trek was and always will be "pop" TV and Cinema.
the electric sun theory explains exactly nothing. The electric universe theory explains even less. Your explanation makes less sense than the star trek technospeak.
Its uses the new H26 whatever codec and it has over 50 patents claimed. That is what licensing.
We will now have world peace since you sorted that out.
As long as someone else is *paying*. That is where most of the argument really goes. Whos fault hence whos paying.
If the machines where given a similar mass budget to human crews. Sure they could.
Right now the machines we send and tiny fractions of the mass budget (and cash budget) that people compare to manned missions. And yet the machines still get more done.
I got a better plan. Build green houses with lights. Much easier than moving humanity around. Seriously sci fi misses the most obvious stuff.
Wormholes and Alcubierre warp drives are both constructs within the framework of the currently-accepted physical theories
Err no they are not. First of all the all violate energy principals widely accepted to hold. Second they need *negative mass* that has *zero* theoretical underpinnings. That is, withing the currently accepted physical theories they are quite impossible. Then add the fact that the basic Alcubierre drive needs more energy than the visible universe and is causally disconnected from the rest of the universe....
We find maths that describes reality, not the other way round. A good example is how high will a ball go when thrown upwards at a given speed. One of the solutions can give a complex number. We just ignore it as physically impossible.
Just because the math has a solution in some abstract mathematical sense does not mean is represents anything to do with reality.
The thing that is not plausible, is that relocating a substantial part of humanity off planet is easier than building a lot of green houses with hydroponics or areo poinics.. or just plane old green houses.
Thermodynamics doesn't apply at large scales. Relativity doesn't necessarily conserve energy, for example; where does the energy from red-shifted photons go?
That is a fairly easy undergrad problem. It is very easy to show thermodynamics, conversation of energy, conservation of momentum and everything else is *not* violated in *all* frames of reference.
Gravity waves travel at the speed of light. Not faster. Quantum entanglement does not affect anything. It is a mathematical construct to derive the outcomes of measurements. It has been proven many many times that no information or anything else for that matter is "transmitted", let alone faster than light.