That's not true in practice. The efficiency of the Brayton cycle may be lower for the same compression ratio, but higher compression ratios are achievable. This is the same reason Diesel engines are more efficient. Also, turbines tend to have lower thermal and mechanical losses.
Yup, it seems there's certainly some fairly good evidence to support race playing a significant role in death sentence rates.
I guess the question is now, how do we know when that disparity is fixed? Executions aren't such a common event that statistically significant data can be rapidly compiled (thankfully). And the overall statistics will be slow to change for the same reason. Since it seems you've looked into this more than I have, are there any studies that have looked at this while excluding convictions prior to different dates to see if a trend can be discerned? I would hope we've made some progress since the 70s on that.
Okay, and what are the total number of convictions for each of those specific types of crimes over the same time period? Those numbers need to be normalized to be comparable. That same page lists a much higher number of white victims than black ones, so it isn't clear whether the data supports your claim.
This site indicates that the rate of Black Defendant / White Victim homicides is ~3-4x of the reverse while the executions are >10x. That does seem to point to a racial bias in executions. Although, that covers all the way back to 1976 (and even earlier convictions). I wonder if those rates would tend to converge if we exclude older data?
As I understand it, Aereo geographically limits its service to the broadcast range of the transmission towers. Thus there is no programming made available to an Aereo customer that they couldn't legally receive by putting up their own antenna.
Oh, and a slinch is a lbf-s^2/in. A unit of mass related to the slug. At 1g one slinch weighs 386 lbf.
It's a silly unit which is only useful for doing engineering calculations in standard US units without carrying a bunch of conversion factors. It also, conveniently, sounds like the method of movement a slug would use.
The total efficiency is about 30% max for a normal naturally aspirated gas engine, but the thermal efficiency of the Otto cycle is about 60% for compression ratios of ~11. There are a lot of losses introduced in real systems. (entropy is a bitch)
And I'm really beginning to like the xkcd fora crowd. They have their quirks, but the signal to noise ratio is far better than any other community/discussion site I've participated in. Slashdot has some great contributors and highly intelligent/informative comments on just about every story as well if you can sift through the sea of generic replies to find them.
To be pedantic, ideally the efficiency of a gasoline/diesel engine can be above 50%, so 2x isn't possible:) But in real engines, 2x is certainly achievable. Ultimately I think the suitability is limited by cost. Those high efficiency systems tend to require more complex components that are more expensive to manufacture and the costs become prohibitively expensive as that complexity doesn't scale down with size. Though, improvements in manufacturing tech are certainly helping to lower costs across the board, which does open up new markets.
By the way, are you the same lgw as the one on the xkcd fora?
(You can make amazingly efficient turbine engines if you don't care about weight. Forget the terrible helicopter engines, think industrial power generation: multiple heat exchangers, possibly multiple expansion stages, cool, low-pressure exhaust with no waste. Scaled down to 50 HP I expect it would fit nicely in a car. And if it lets you save 80% of the battery weight it can be a good trade.)
Actually, helicopter engines wouldn't be "terrible" in a serial hybrid configuration. They're about as efficient as can be designed without adding a recuperator if they're run at a fixed speed and optimal load. The reason that helicopter engines are inefficient when shoehorned into ground vehicles is usually due to either running at variable speeds or needing to idle for long periods. Neither of those are an issue for a range extender.
Although, a helicopter propulsion engine is probably way too much power for the job (unless you want a serial hybrid with >800 HP). What would probably work best is to redesign a small business jet or helicopter APU (auxiliary power unit) to incorporate a recuperator to improve efficiency and reduce exhaust gas temperature. There are already several models in the proper size class and they could easily be packaged at a weight on the order of one passenger + some luggage.
After some searching, it looks like this company is already producing something along those lines: Capstone
Yeah, there's certainly some difficulties in implementing the concept and the most feasible way I've thought of to make it happen is if all (or nearly all) of the states just ratified the necessary amendments without calling a conventional convention. It may not technically be constitutional (what has recently?), but it would be effective if the states acted collectively to cut off funding or possibly just threatened to do so.
Of course, there's lots of ways that could go wrong too. There are simply too many people with money/power that have a vested interest in keeping the status quo that any structural changes to the system will be immensely difficult.
I was just trying to find the most effective and least impossible way to solve the fundamental structural issues our government. Unfortunately, history suggests that such changes are unlikely without an armed revolt.
Yup, the 17th would need to be repealed and a new amendment ratified in order for it to work. Unfortunately, we'd probably need to have a constitutional convention to make that happen.
Yes, at least temporarily. Everything that we've already committed to is law and would have to be funded, but future decisions about spending would be made with consideration of state funding in mind. Besides, it would make the structure of the government a lot more logical. Why have two houses of legislature at all if the job description of both is to bring home as much of the federal budget as possible?
With the states funding the feds, the House (representing the people as a whole) originating bills and the Senate (representing the states) accepting/rejecting them by weighing the costs against the benefits makes much more sense to me.
Hopefully the courts will strike this whole thing down.
All of the IRS? I agree.
I think funding for the federal government should come out of the states' treasuries instead. That way federal spending decisions will be weighed against the lost opportunity to fund state programs.
Going around road debris isn't always the best decision, so I wouldn't necessarily assume the driver is being careless. Running over something which may do some damage to your vehicle may be a much better alternative compared to hitting the vehicle in the next lane or swerving into oncoming traffic. Both of which would risk harming others.
Still, any vehicle with relatively low ground clearance is going to have trouble in this sort of scenario and the most anyone could claim is that the Model S is more prone to damaging expensive components. If that wasn't addressed, there could have been some liability issues in the sense that Tesla drivers may have a financial incentive to make a less safe decision in these sorts of scenarios. I think this, along with keeping the perception as the "safest car on the road" and general goodwill made it worthwhile to implement these design changes even though occupant safety was never really a serious concern.
This has really been a non-story from the start. Tesla had a minor design issue on a first generation vehicle and have consistently done the right thing for their customers as well the rest of the driving public in every decision they've made along the way. If only the same thing could be said for GM and their ignition switch problem.
If it were Teslas being tipped, I think the NFL and/or the military would be the ones investigating. Those things weigh over two tons and have a very low CG, making them nearly impossible to roll over without some heavy duty lifting apparatus.
What are these open positions? I'm going to make a wild guess that your looking to replace some talented and experienced Engineers who are reaching the end of their career. If so, the problem with filling those spots has less to do with the number of quality STEM graduates and more to do with changing demographics and some short sighted business practices which have become standard.
Engineering is a highly diverse field with innumerable different specializations and combinations of requisite experience. In the early days, the only way to get people with these skills was to train them alongside those at the forefront of their field, a.k.a. apprenticeship. Then came university engineering degree programs. At first they made a lot of sense, giving students with an interest in a field a basic understanding of the principles. That way they could be much more quickly and easily trained by a company. The problem was that this worked a little too well and ever more specialized programs proliferated and were filled as the trend toward an increasingly educated populace grew. Then during the post-WW2 population boom there were enough candidates in the workforce that companies found they could hire for almost any position directly, without having the overhead of the lower level apprentice engineers. This is when the idea that engineering was fungible began. Once that was taken for granted, companies began enacting policies based on short term profits instead of long term growth with the idea that they could just hire more or better engineers as they're needed. And this worked well until the entire industry instituted the same practices. By then population growth was slowing, so the pool of "qualified" (read: already trained) candidates shrank.
Now we are facing a problem of having an aging workforce with irreplaceable skill sets developed over decades and businesses are unwilling to train young Engineers for fear they will be poached by the competition. It's a typical game theory conundrum. The first company to start trying to grow their workforce internally will be out-competed by the rest, but if none do it we all lose.
Absolutely, memorization can be a very useful tool and tasks that exercise memory skills should be part of school curricula. It's just that it shouldn't be taught instead of the fundamental concepts of a subject, which is what I think happens when timed multiplication tests are given too soon.
So the 100 problem task is used to find those who did not finish because they did not have time because they did not understand the concepts.
You're assuming that the speed at which the problems are solved is positively correlated with fundamental understanding of the concepts. For problems like multiplication, this isn't really the case. Someone who memorizes the "times tables" may have a less complete understanding of the concept but finish quicker.
This is the flaw in timed math assignments with a large number of problems. It penalizes taking time to think about the problems and come up with the correct answer in favor of rote memorization. And worst of all is these tests are given before the students have had the time to fully learn the subject and recognize the patterns that would make memorization easier.
Don't most states grant access to the HOV lane for alternative fuel vehicles? I know mine does. I see at least a couple of Teslas and Leafs (Leaves?) with AFV plates pass me on my way to work every day.
That sounds great as long as it's functioning properly. What happens when someone gets into an accident and busts the phosphor coated lens? Do the headlights turn on full brightness to ensure you can see clearly or turn off to prevent the exposed laser light from blinding oncoming traffic?
Not that I'm against improved technology, but lasers do have a few potential failure modes that are much more dangerous than incandescent or LED lights.
No no no, not the unemployed. They have the ability to take swift action to protect themselves. Instead, we should pay pregnant women who would otherwise get an abortion to carry to term and donate the fetus' organs to those who need transplants. And you wouldn't have all of the issues trying to find a compatible recipient close by at the right time. The organs will be able to be stored for years in their host until they're needed.
You make the mistake of assuming that because he studied the constitution that he admires or at least respects the values and motivations that it codifies. Wouldn't someone looking to find a way to bring it down do the same? Or he may have no direct interest at all and just thought it a good thing to have on the resume as an aspiring politician.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not true in practice. The efficiency of the Brayton cycle may be lower for the same compression ratio, but higher compression ratios are achievable. This is the same reason Diesel engines are more efficient. Also, turbines tend to have lower thermal and mechanical losses.
Yup, it seems there's certainly some fairly good evidence to support race playing a significant role in death sentence rates.
I guess the question is now, how do we know when that disparity is fixed? Executions aren't such a common event that statistically significant data can be rapidly compiled (thankfully). And the overall statistics will be slow to change for the same reason. Since it seems you've looked into this more than I have, are there any studies that have looked at this while excluding convictions prior to different dates to see if a trend can be discerned? I would hope we've made some progress since the 70s on that.
Okay, and what are the total number of convictions for each of those specific types of crimes over the same time period? Those numbers need to be normalized to be comparable. That same page lists a much higher number of white victims than black ones, so it isn't clear whether the data supports your claim.
This site indicates that the rate of Black Defendant / White Victim homicides is ~3-4x of the reverse while the executions are >10x. That does seem to point to a racial bias in executions. Although, that covers all the way back to 1976 (and even earlier convictions). I wonder if those rates would tend to converge if we exclude older data?
As I understand it, Aereo geographically limits its service to the broadcast range of the transmission towers. Thus there is no programming made available to an Aereo customer that they couldn't legally receive by putting up their own antenna.
Oh, and a slinch is a lbf-s^2/in. A unit of mass related to the slug. At 1g one slinch weighs 386 lbf.
It's a silly unit which is only useful for doing engineering calculations in standard US units without carrying a bunch of conversion factors. It also, conveniently, sounds like the method of movement a slug would use.
The total efficiency is about 30% max for a normal naturally aspirated gas engine, but the thermal efficiency of the Otto cycle is about 60% for compression ratios of ~11. There are a lot of losses introduced in real systems. (entropy is a bitch)
And I'm really beginning to like the xkcd fora crowd. They have their quirks, but the signal to noise ratio is far better than any other community/discussion site I've participated in. Slashdot has some great contributors and highly intelligent/informative comments on just about every story as well if you can sift through the sea of generic replies to find them.
To be pedantic, ideally the efficiency of a gasoline/diesel engine can be above 50%, so 2x isn't possible :) But in real engines, 2x is certainly achievable. Ultimately I think the suitability is limited by cost. Those high efficiency systems tend to require more complex components that are more expensive to manufacture and the costs become prohibitively expensive as that complexity doesn't scale down with size. Though, improvements in manufacturing tech are certainly helping to lower costs across the board, which does open up new markets.
By the way, are you the same lgw as the one on the xkcd fora?
(You can make amazingly efficient turbine engines if you don't care about weight. Forget the terrible helicopter engines, think industrial power generation: multiple heat exchangers, possibly multiple expansion stages, cool, low-pressure exhaust with no waste. Scaled down to 50 HP I expect it would fit nicely in a car. And if it lets you save 80% of the battery weight it can be a good trade.)
Actually, helicopter engines wouldn't be "terrible" in a serial hybrid configuration. They're about as efficient as can be designed without adding a recuperator if they're run at a fixed speed and optimal load. The reason that helicopter engines are inefficient when shoehorned into ground vehicles is usually due to either running at variable speeds or needing to idle for long periods. Neither of those are an issue for a range extender.
Although, a helicopter propulsion engine is probably way too much power for the job (unless you want a serial hybrid with >800 HP). What would probably work best is to redesign a small business jet or helicopter APU (auxiliary power unit) to incorporate a recuperator to improve efficiency and reduce exhaust gas temperature. There are already several models in the proper size class and they could easily be packaged at a weight on the order of one passenger + some luggage.
After some searching, it looks like this company is already producing something along those lines: Capstone
Yeah, there's certainly some difficulties in implementing the concept and the most feasible way I've thought of to make it happen is if all (or nearly all) of the states just ratified the necessary amendments without calling a conventional convention. It may not technically be constitutional (what has recently?), but it would be effective if the states acted collectively to cut off funding or possibly just threatened to do so.
Of course, there's lots of ways that could go wrong too. There are simply too many people with money/power that have a vested interest in keeping the status quo that any structural changes to the system will be immensely difficult.
I was just trying to find the most effective and least impossible way to solve the fundamental structural issues our government. Unfortunately, history suggests that such changes are unlikely without an armed revolt.
Yup, the 17th would need to be repealed and a new amendment ratified in order for it to work. Unfortunately, we'd probably need to have a constitutional convention to make that happen.
Yes, at least temporarily. Everything that we've already committed to is law and would have to be funded, but future decisions about spending would be made with consideration of state funding in mind. Besides, it would make the structure of the government a lot more logical. Why have two houses of legislature at all if the job description of both is to bring home as much of the federal budget as possible?
With the states funding the feds, the House (representing the people as a whole) originating bills and the Senate (representing the states) accepting/rejecting them by weighing the costs against the benefits makes much more sense to me.
Hopefully the courts will strike this whole thing down.
All of the IRS? I agree.
I think funding for the federal government should come out of the states' treasuries instead. That way federal spending decisions will be weighed against the lost opportunity to fund state programs.
Going around road debris isn't always the best decision, so I wouldn't necessarily assume the driver is being careless. Running over something which may do some damage to your vehicle may be a much better alternative compared to hitting the vehicle in the next lane or swerving into oncoming traffic. Both of which would risk harming others.
Still, any vehicle with relatively low ground clearance is going to have trouble in this sort of scenario and the most anyone could claim is that the Model S is more prone to damaging expensive components. If that wasn't addressed, there could have been some liability issues in the sense that Tesla drivers may have a financial incentive to make a less safe decision in these sorts of scenarios. I think this, along with keeping the perception as the "safest car on the road" and general goodwill made it worthwhile to implement these design changes even though occupant safety was never really a serious concern.
This has really been a non-story from the start. Tesla had a minor design issue on a first generation vehicle and have consistently done the right thing for their customers as well the rest of the driving public in every decision they've made along the way. If only the same thing could be said for GM and their ignition switch problem.
Interestingly, a Smart Fortwo and a large steer are about the same size and weight.
If it were Teslas being tipped, I think the NFL and/or the military would be the ones investigating. Those things weigh over two tons and have a very low CG, making them nearly impossible to roll over without some heavy duty lifting apparatus.
That's probably still quite a bit better than having an internal combustion engine with all sorts of parts hot enough to ignite that same grass.
Well, this is what happens when the "flywheel" is in the engine of a plane:
A380 rotor burst
Ask Slashdot: Fastest, Cheapest Path To a Bachelor's Degree?
Yes, it seems like a free education can be had just by posting the right ask slashdot questions.
What are these open positions? I'm going to make a wild guess that your looking to replace some talented and experienced Engineers who are reaching the end of their career. If so, the problem with filling those spots has less to do with the number of quality STEM graduates and more to do with changing demographics and some short sighted business practices which have become standard.
Engineering is a highly diverse field with innumerable different specializations and combinations of requisite experience. In the early days, the only way to get people with these skills was to train them alongside those at the forefront of their field, a.k.a. apprenticeship. Then came university engineering degree programs. At first they made a lot of sense, giving students with an interest in a field a basic understanding of the principles. That way they could be much more quickly and easily trained by a company. The problem was that this worked a little too well and ever more specialized programs proliferated and were filled as the trend toward an increasingly educated populace grew. Then during the post-WW2 population boom there were enough candidates in the workforce that companies found they could hire for almost any position directly, without having the overhead of the lower level apprentice engineers. This is when the idea that engineering was fungible began. Once that was taken for granted, companies began enacting policies based on short term profits instead of long term growth with the idea that they could just hire more or better engineers as they're needed. And this worked well until the entire industry instituted the same practices. By then population growth was slowing, so the pool of "qualified" (read: already trained) candidates shrank.
Now we are facing a problem of having an aging workforce with irreplaceable skill sets developed over decades and businesses are unwilling to train young Engineers for fear they will be poached by the competition. It's a typical game theory conundrum. The first company to start trying to grow their workforce internally will be out-competed by the rest, but if none do it we all lose.
Absolutely, memorization can be a very useful tool and tasks that exercise memory skills should be part of school curricula. It's just that it shouldn't be taught instead of the fundamental concepts of a subject, which is what I think happens when timed multiplication tests are given too soon.
So the 100 problem task is used to find those who did not finish because they did not have time because they did not understand the concepts.
You're assuming that the speed at which the problems are solved is positively correlated with fundamental understanding of the concepts. For problems like multiplication, this isn't really the case. Someone who memorizes the "times tables" may have a less complete understanding of the concept but finish quicker.
This is the flaw in timed math assignments with a large number of problems. It penalizes taking time to think about the problems and come up with the correct answer in favor of rote memorization. And worst of all is these tests are given before the students have had the time to fully learn the subject and recognize the patterns that would make memorization easier.
Don't most states grant access to the HOV lane for alternative fuel vehicles? I know mine does. I see at least a couple of Teslas and Leafs (Leaves?) with AFV plates pass me on my way to work every day.
That sounds great as long as it's functioning properly. What happens when someone gets into an accident and busts the phosphor coated lens? Do the headlights turn on full brightness to ensure you can see clearly or turn off to prevent the exposed laser light from blinding oncoming traffic?
Not that I'm against improved technology, but lasers do have a few potential failure modes that are much more dangerous than incandescent or LED lights.
No no no, not the unemployed. They have the ability to take swift action to protect themselves. Instead, we should pay pregnant women who would otherwise get an abortion to carry to term and donate the fetus' organs to those who need transplants. And you wouldn't have all of the issues trying to find a compatible recipient close by at the right time. The organs will be able to be stored for years in their host until they're needed.
Reference for the sarcasm impaired
You make the mistake of assuming that because he studied the constitution that he admires or at least respects the values and motivations that it codifies. Wouldn't someone looking to find a way to bring it down do the same? Or he may have no direct interest at all and just thought it a good thing to have on the resume as an aspiring politician.