You need to read what you're replying to. You're talking about minimizing losses from having to run on increased power (climb) by engine braking on direct injection engine. This will not actually save you fuel when driving on even terrain, as energy consumption from accelerating is significantly higher then energy savings when engine braking.
Same applies to electric and regenerative braking. This is simply because efficiency is always 100% alone, without adding any other factors in.
Corrected for more accuracy in the follow up. The meaning is that it de facto correct, even if not de jure. If you want to get money out of insurance company in Russia, you have to have perpetrator who hit you caught. That will rarely happen on your witness statement alone and police are generally unwilling and uncaring to start questioning others.
So you instead present them with dashcam video of perpetrator closing the loopholes and essentially forcing the insurance company to pay.
Having a lasting effect would be highly inadvisable. This is about suppressing one of the natural defense mechanisms of the body against certain type of toxin. The goal is not to actually disable this defense mechanism permanently, but to cause significant discomfort for the period of alcoholic trying to kick his habit. It's essentially an extra psychological factor that introduces "alcohol makes me sick" illusion to help combat the psychological aspect of dependency. After that, defense mechanism should restore itself ASAP.
This is why critics are worried that addiction would move to another subject in these cases. Because this basically makes one addiction feel terrible, but addicts psychological make-up, one that enabled the addiction in the first place remains untreated. I suspect this vaccine will be mainly used in treatments which also provide counseling to help combat the psychological aspect of addiction.
This is about two things: dilution in stomach before it enters the bloodstream, slowing the absorption through stomach until it enters intestines and in blood and volume, less room in stomach for alcohol before stomach starts to tell your brain it's full and you should cut down on consumption.
Same thing is recommended for those on diet. When you are dieting and feel hungry, don't eat. Instead, drink water until you fill your stomach. The feeling of fullness removes (most of the) desire to eat.
In Russia, insurance company will pay nothing if you claim someone hit you, but he runs and police doesn't catch him due to lack of evidence. Sure, you can get insurance without dashcam, but if you want to actually get paid by your insurance company when something happens, you either have dashcam or a very airtight case. Else you're SOL.
This is very different from EU, where in most countries insurance will pay for your losses if something like this happens even without police finding the perpetrator.
Temperature differential in the area during few days is highly to extremely unlikely to account for MASSIVE differential in range. Read the CNN report, compare numbers. Understand how mind numbingly stupid you sound with that claim.
As far as possible. It's highly unlikely that weather alone would account for the massive differential between what CNN got and what Broder got. Read the CNN's article and compare their numbers to Broder's. You'd have to probably warm stuff up to tropical levels on the same route to get the discrepancy meaningful enough to account for Broder's account.
According to RIA novosti news agency: 950 people wounded to some degree. Of these: 524 needed medical assistance 34 adults and 12 children hospitalized 2 people had to be put in intensive care
Most damage apparently came from shards of shattered glass wounding people.
Other set of figures is from federal government and that one specifies: 571 wounded to some degree 758 asked for medical assistance
It's also stated that they already found remains of one of the pieces in a local lake where meteorite punched through the ice and left shards on the site.
This car appears to have "reserve power" in the same way that cars have a "reserve tank". I.e. even after your fuel meter shows you're completely dry, your car should still be good for 50-70km at optimal fuel consumption speed on the highway (at least every car I've driven so far was).
Law is not the issue though. Issue is him claiming to have to slow down to conserve battery. Essentially lying. Speed is in direct relation to range here.
Do it on your own gasoline car. Follow this principle:
1. Clutch to the floor, gear in first. 2. Clutch up, accelerator pedal into the floor until you hit yellow line on tahometer 3. Hard brake, clutch to the floor.
Come back and tell us how you burned tens of kilometers worth of fuel in that one kilometer of testing.
As noted by many, those words raised a LOT of red flags. Basic lessons in physics would suggest to anyone that perpetual motion does not exist. That means slowing down and speeding up isn't going to magically charge the battery. So either reporter is lying or exceptionally stupid.
Considering that he reports on cars and has done so for a while, one would assume that he is familiar enough with physics not to be exceptionally stupid.
The idea is on a shaky ground. It's basically a corporate pharma interest (huge lobby) vs public interest.
Corporate pharma argues that to discover the exact gene, they need significant research, just like with medicine. This is true, though research requires much less then new medicine producing research. They also argue that it's an invention rather then discovery for the same reason why discovering certain molecules leads to new medicines. Molecules that existed in nature for ages, that can be transformed into some form of treatment therefore is patentable.
The obvious counter arguments are plentiful, but they lack the powerful lobby behind them, and current trend is "weak government representing people, strong corporate lobby representing potential profits". Results can be seen in the ruling on top of the page.
Slashdot Mirror
And slashdot formatting strips less then symbol. Argh. The message is supposed to read "less then 100%"
You need to read what you're replying to. You're talking about minimizing losses from having to run on increased power (climb) by engine braking on direct injection engine. This will not actually save you fuel when driving on even terrain, as energy consumption from accelerating is significantly higher then energy savings when engine braking.
Same applies to electric and regenerative braking. This is simply because efficiency is always 100% alone, without adding any other factors in.
Corrected for more accuracy in the follow up. The meaning is that it de facto correct, even if not de jure. If you want to get money out of insurance company in Russia, you have to have perpetrator who hit you caught. That will rarely happen on your witness statement alone and police are generally unwilling and uncaring to start questioning others.
So you instead present them with dashcam video of perpetrator closing the loopholes and essentially forcing the insurance company to pay.
Having a lasting effect would be highly inadvisable. This is about suppressing one of the natural defense mechanisms of the body against certain type of toxin. The goal is not to actually disable this defense mechanism permanently, but to cause significant discomfort for the period of alcoholic trying to kick his habit. It's essentially an extra psychological factor that introduces "alcohol makes me sick" illusion to help combat the psychological aspect of dependency. After that, defense mechanism should restore itself ASAP.
This is why critics are worried that addiction would move to another subject in these cases. Because this basically makes one addiction feel terrible, but addicts psychological make-up, one that enabled the addiction in the first place remains untreated. I suspect this vaccine will be mainly used in treatments which also provide counseling to help combat the psychological aspect of addiction.
This is about two things: dilution in stomach before it enters the bloodstream, slowing the absorption through stomach until it enters intestines and in blood and volume, less room in stomach for alcohol before stomach starts to tell your brain it's full and you should cut down on consumption.
Same thing is recommended for those on diet. When you are dieting and feel hungry, don't eat. Instead, drink water until you fill your stomach. The feeling of fullness removes (most of the) desire to eat.
In Russia, insurance company will pay nothing if you claim someone hit you, but he runs and police doesn't catch him due to lack of evidence. Sure, you can get insurance without dashcam, but if you want to actually get paid by your insurance company when something happens, you either have dashcam or a very airtight case. Else you're SOL.
This is very different from EU, where in most countries insurance will pay for your losses if something like this happens even without police finding the perpetrator.
Yes perpetual motion does exist and those who dare to claim it doesn't are clearly low on facts and full of insults.
Carry on.
Except that we have that EXACT issue in the post I answered to. Granted his sanity is questionable.
... This has to be the most braindead AC I've seen in a while. Mr Broder, is that you?
Temperature differential in the area during few days is highly to extremely unlikely to account for MASSIVE differential in range. Read the CNN report, compare numbers. Understand how mind numbingly stupid you sound with that claim.
You do realize that BBC won the court case because it argued that "top gear reviews are not actual reviews but scripted comedy skits" successfully?
As far as possible. It's highly unlikely that weather alone would account for the massive differential between what CNN got and what Broder got. Read the CNN's article and compare their numbers to Broder's. You'd have to probably warm stuff up to tropical levels on the same route to get the discrepancy meaningful enough to account for Broder's account.
Update on lenta.ru 30 minutes ago:
http://lenta.ru/news/2013/02/15/muchmore/
According to RIA novosti news agency:
950 people wounded to some degree. Of these:
524 needed medical assistance
34 adults and 12 children hospitalized
2 people had to be put in intensive care
Most damage apparently came from shards of shattered glass wounding people.
Other set of figures is from federal government and that one specifies:
571 wounded to some degree
758 asked for medical assistance
It's also stated that they already found remains of one of the pieces in a local lake where meteorite punched through the ice and left shards on the site.
Actually dashcams are a requirement of insurance companies to insure a car.
Capacity stays the same. Capability of discharging this capacity however decreases.
You just quoted a lie there. Logs clearly show that he never drove that slowly.
This car appears to have "reserve power" in the same way that cars have a "reserve tank". I.e. even after your fuel meter shows you're completely dry, your car should still be good for 50-70km at optimal fuel consumption speed on the highway (at least every car I've driven so far was).
Most people forget that "gas alleys" were staple of early ICE automobile age. You can still see their remains in big cities.
Law is not the issue though. Issue is him claiming to have to slow down to conserve battery. Essentially lying. Speed is in direct relation to range here.
Calling you ignorant. Most modern cars have traction control that will not let you spin your tyres at 80mph without traction.
Not only that, he actually claimed in the story that "he was freezing in his winter jacket" to juice his story up.
Do it on your own gasoline car. Follow this principle:
1. Clutch to the floor, gear in first.
2. Clutch up, accelerator pedal into the floor until you hit yellow line on tahometer
3. Hard brake, clutch to the floor.
Come back and tell us how you burned tens of kilometers worth of fuel in that one kilometer of testing.
As noted by many, those words raised a LOT of red flags. Basic lessons in physics would suggest to anyone that perpetual motion does not exist. That means slowing down and speeding up isn't going to magically charge the battery. So either reporter is lying or exceptionally stupid.
Considering that he reports on cars and has done so for a while, one would assume that he is familiar enough with physics not to be exceptionally stupid.
The idea is on a shaky ground. It's basically a corporate pharma interest (huge lobby) vs public interest.
Corporate pharma argues that to discover the exact gene, they need significant research, just like with medicine. This is true, though research requires much less then new medicine producing research. They also argue that it's an invention rather then discovery for the same reason why discovering certain molecules leads to new medicines. Molecules that existed in nature for ages, that can be transformed into some form of treatment therefore is patentable.
The obvious counter arguments are plentiful, but they lack the powerful lobby behind them, and current trend is "weak government representing people, strong corporate lobby representing potential profits". Results can be seen in the ruling on top of the page.
If you're talking about BBC's Top Gear, then question is "what is this review you're talking about?"