You can live in Hiroshima. There is a memorial building that was at about ground zero that survived (atomic bomb dome). It was also one of the few concrete structures in the city. Consider that it was about a 40kT bomb. We don't have much nukes that small anymore.
And the SF crew carried radiation detectors that were "ticking" frequently enough to indicate...
Background levels of radiation have a radiation detector "ticking" frequently, just a little under once a second. In a concrete building it can be higher. A high altitude city it can be 2-3 times again. In an airliner at 40000 feet its even higher still.
Modern "synth" doesn't synth at all. They get gigabytes of prerecording and use that. The Vienna Philimonica orchestra has one of the biggest sets specially recorded.
Trace levels of different heavy elements is what they look for. You need a database of what the different power plants are spitting out, and what the enrichment is putting out, if any. Different fueling schedules, temperatures and different fuel make up will produce different ratios of things with respect to Pu. There would be some variation just in a single plant too as the neutron spectrum is not completely homogeneous. From that you can estimate what is in an enriched bomb material, and what will be left after the fact. You do however need a good set of high energy neutron reaction cross sections. However thats not so hard to get. The real reason it works is that you can detect things way down in the ppb or even ppt range.
If thats enough to really determine something is another matter entirely. In other words, it could match more than one source.
The sea level rise predicted in on the order of cm over 100 of years--hardly a planet drowning event. Many places won't even notice the difference. You have been watching too many bad Keven Costner movies.
Only someone that is ignorant of science and the history of science would even claim such a thing.
Pretty much most of science was settled (many scientists believed that) at the turn of the 20th century except for a few pesky little details (black body radiation and photoelectric effect). Guess how that turned out.
It's funny because that's how religion works, but not how science works.
You clearly have not done much science, much less tried to publish something "unpopular". Scientific merit has much less to with acceptance that you think.
I studied geophysics, astrophysics and laser physics. Now i work on biological systems. This is completely normal in all areas of science. Guess how many universitys even *have* a "climatology" course, and guess when the few that have it, started teaching it? (2000 IIRC).
So what is a true climatologist? What is a true Scotsman?
The results were about the same as rest. "inconclusive" or rather no detectable signal. The navy has put money behind some pretty crazy things in the past, so I don't think they even need to be duped.
If you want a *creditable* fusion dark horse. I would recommend MTF from General Electric. And a very outside bet the Focus Fusion.
Almost all of them are power point slides (I didn't really ask for a list of citations.. i asked for one that backed up your claim of several stds above the noise). Theres a few that are not. But its not promising. Its the normal note the heat but ignore the physics --ie extra heat==fusion so we don't need to see neutrons or gammas (about 100x easer to detect at and detectable energy excess level). The few I read (One was the 101 of how to detected a neutron) seem to take it as a given that neutrons have not been clearly detected.
Buying into aneutronic fusion of DD is just pink unicorns. As in you have more credibility claiming the discovery of pink unicorns. There is just too much data and too much accuracy with the standard model to disregard well *predicted* well *known* and *measured* branching ratios with DD fusion (about 50-50 with DD-> T+p or DD-> He3+n less than.01% IIRC is DD-> he4+gamma). Also you can't have DD->He4 without some other particle (ie the gammas) to preserve all the relevant quantum numbers.
Sure it would be nice if true. Yet after all this time without any obvious signal is a pretty clear data point. There is no data to support it.
other than to refute that "no one can get any decent signal above the noise"...several "standard deviations" above the noise level.
Having read just about every paper/report on the subject I could/can find, including non-peer reviewed stuff (even some stuff from the zero point energy dudes). I would really like to see a citation on that.
Cold fusion as reported is clearly not real. Either 2 things must be true. That the energy came from D+D->He3+p+T+n in which case the neutron radiation would have killed them both. Or that D+D->He4 +gamma , just about everything in the standard model is completely wrong, observed data from particle physics is wrong, observed data from nuclear testing is wrong, and they would both be dead from gamma radiation.
They claimed that the power was 1 watt. A number so high that detecting the reaction is totally trivial.. for example if you are in the room for a few hours, you die without a decent piece of shielding.
The current experiments show some interesting facts too. No one can get any decent signal above the noise, while home built fusors totally destroy cold fusion with easily detectable reaction rates (on the order of 10^6 reaction per second IIRC). Hell even diode tube neutron sources destroy them for reaction rate.
Apple crapola stories are not peer reviewed either... Perhaps its on/. because others find it interesting moron. You didn't have to read it let along post unconstructive dribble.
Slashdot Mirror
You can live in Hiroshima. There is a memorial building that was at about ground zero that survived (atomic bomb dome). It was also one of the few concrete structures in the city. Consider that it was about a 40kT bomb. We don't have much nukes that small anymore.
And the SF crew carried radiation detectors that were "ticking" frequently enough to indicate...
Background levels of radiation have a radiation detector "ticking" frequently, just a little under once a second. In a concrete building it can be higher. A high altitude city it can be 2-3 times again. In an airliner at 40000 feet its even higher still.
Modern "synth" doesn't synth at all. They get gigabytes of prerecording and use that. The Vienna Philimonica orchestra has one of the biggest sets specially recorded.
Yea right. Artists. True Artists will still create art. Just as GP was tring to point out. Some of it will in fact be good too.
Let me guess: Your world view is that it is turtles all the way down?
don't knock the turtles!
Trace levels of different heavy elements is what they look for. You need a database of what the different power plants are spitting out, and what the enrichment is putting out, if any. Different fueling schedules, temperatures and different fuel make up will produce different ratios of things with respect to Pu. There would be some variation just in a single plant too as the neutron spectrum is not completely homogeneous. From that you can estimate what is in an enriched bomb material, and what will be left after the fact. You do however need a good set of high energy neutron reaction cross sections. However thats not so hard to get. The real reason it works is that you can detect things way down in the ppb or even ppt range.
If thats enough to really determine something is another matter entirely. In other words, it could match more than one source.
What could possibly go wrong.
How about a big sunshade..... freeze that friken earth... or lots of Iron for the plankton, algae blooms for the win..The list goes on.
They all have one thing in common. They are really really stupid things to try.
Fear of hubris is for barbarians. We're better than that now.
Yea Right.
The sea level rise predicted in on the order of cm over 100 of years--hardly a planet drowning event. Many places won't even notice the difference. You have been watching too many bad Keven Costner movies.
Idiot bankers cost about that much too.
So what you are saying is that you don't need to do anything because someone else will fit it?
Ironically I am a FOO scientist. But i studied BAR. Its common in science to do the FOO BAR thing.
The science of all this is pretty settled by now.
Only someone that is ignorant of science and the history of science would even claim such a thing.
Pretty much most of science was settled (many scientists believed that) at the turn of the 20th century except for a few pesky little details (black body radiation and photoelectric effect). Guess how that turned out.
So how much fossil fuels is your life style dependent on? Probably quite a lot. Its not other people that need to fix things first.
It's funny because that's how religion works, but not how science works.
You clearly have not done much science, much less tried to publish something "unpopular". Scientific merit has much less to with acceptance that you think.
I studied geophysics, astrophysics and laser physics. Now i work on biological systems. This is completely normal in all areas of science. Guess how many universitys even *have* a "climatology" course, and guess when the few that have it, started teaching it? (2000 IIRC).
So what is a true climatologist? What is a true Scotsman?
The results were about the same as rest. "inconclusive" or rather no detectable signal. The navy has put money behind some pretty crazy things in the past, so I don't think they even need to be duped.
If you want a *creditable* fusion dark horse. I would recommend MTF from General Electric. And a very outside bet the Focus Fusion.
Oh. Sorry, didn't get the sarcasm from your previous post. Yes, i agree completely. Pirate bay etc are making money of others copyright.
Almost all of them are power point slides (I didn't really ask for a list of citations.. i asked for one that backed up your claim of several stds above the noise). Theres a few that are not. But its not promising. Its the normal note the heat but ignore the physics --ie extra heat==fusion so we don't need to see neutrons or gammas (about 100x easer to detect at and detectable energy excess level). The few I read (One was the 101 of how to detected a neutron) seem to take it as a given that neutrons have not been clearly detected.
.01% IIRC is DD-> he4+gamma). Also you can't have DD->He4 without some other particle (ie the gammas) to preserve all the relevant quantum numbers.
Buying into aneutronic fusion of DD is just pink unicorns. As in you have more credibility claiming the discovery of pink unicorns. There is just too much data and too much accuracy with the standard model to disregard well *predicted* well *known* and *measured* branching ratios with DD fusion (about 50-50 with DD-> T+p or DD-> He3+n less than
Sure it would be nice if true. Yet after all this time without any obvious signal is a pretty clear data point. There is no data to support it.
If its a money making site (gross not net) its commercial. Its pretty simple really.
What part of commercial use can't you understand. The site is *commercial*. Therefore using images on it, is commercial use of the said images.
Whether they make money of it from their commercial use of the images is their problem.
other than to refute that "no one can get any decent signal above the noise"...several "standard deviations" above the noise level.
Having read just about every paper/report on the subject I could/can find, including non-peer reviewed stuff (even some stuff from the zero point energy dudes). I would really like to see a citation on that.
Guess where all (well most) serious physics publications start?
Peer review is not as magical as you think it is.
And as someone who peer reviews... why do i waste my time reading these papers that are only on ArXiv?
Cold fusion as reported is clearly not real. Either 2 things must be true. That the energy came from D+D->He3+p+T+n in which case the neutron radiation would have killed them both. Or that D+D->He4 +gamma , just about everything in the standard model is completely wrong, observed data from particle physics is wrong, observed data from nuclear testing is wrong, and they would both be dead from gamma radiation.
They claimed that the power was 1 watt. A number so high that detecting the reaction is totally trivial.. for example if you are in the room for a few hours, you die without a decent piece of shielding.
The current experiments show some interesting facts too. No one can get any decent signal above the noise, while home built fusors totally destroy cold fusion with easily detectable reaction rates (on the order of 10^6 reaction per second IIRC). Hell even diode tube neutron sources destroy them for reaction rate.
Apple crapola stories are not peer reviewed either... Perhaps its on /. because others find it interesting moron. You didn't have to read it let along post unconstructive dribble.