It's just "toyota-san," not "Mr. Toyota-san." Saying "Mr. Toyota-san" is like saying "Mr. Mr. Toyota." Of course, we might have a lot to learn from Toyota-san, so we might want to call him/her/it Toyota-sensee.
Arigato,
Nihongo no grammer nazi
P.S. this is intended as a joke and not designed to offend.
This attitude is really, really annoying to those of us who do not want children, do not have them, and do not want things to be child safe. What we need is a child-free community. I don't mean "no one under 18 can be here". I mean "you do not have a right to have a child. you cannot demand anything laws, products, rules, or actions as a result of your choice to have a child." I would move to this community in a day. So would a lot of people who are tired of the continuous whining about safety, media violence, and all the other bullshit. Were just tired of being expected to raise everyone else's kids.
Cool. What if we put a neutron moderator in between the beam generator and the target, to slow down the neutrons. I'm not sure what effect this might have on neutron absorption. Is there any place I could find those tables on the web? How would the neutrons recross the starting target - there running along a line, so I don't think they would come back to the starting point. Liquid is a good idea. We want them well mixed. Keep in mind that lead/bismuth was the first system I found that had an alpha decay loop. Others might work better.
squandered resources, environmental destruction, and increased global competition
Same thing that eastern cultures do. It's a good thing. Resources are unlimited, so who cares if they are squandered? The environment wants to kill us, so I'm glad it's being destroyed (soon we won't need it). Competition makes people better. This is not a joke.
Here's how to restore real democracy world wide. First, we need to create a web-based lobbying organisation to lobby for our views. What we need are lobbyists world wide who will actually go in a bribe the senators and congress people like the corporate ones. Not meaningless PACs that send in worthless petitions. We need a system where all of us could contribute say, $30, and that hires the lobbyists. That's the carrot. Now for the stick. There are scandals everywhere in politics. There are likely scandals "in waiting" hidden in the politics. So, we tell the senators "if you don't do what we want, we will bring up X during the campaign." There's nothing they can do about it, because if they sue us, we just launch the scandal, and their career is over. Now, what if they try to make the lobbyist organisation illegal? The bribe/scandal machine goes into overdrive to defend itself. This is not the best form of democracy on the planet, but it works.
Second, we must destroy the music and media companies. They are a big threat to freedom world-wide (organised religion and moralism is in front). We need some kind of advertising based model for media delivery, over the internet. Think about if there was a website where you could play any song you wanted - like pandora or whatever. You could submit your music and it would get voted based on "views". Once it hit a certain number of views, we would create a CD of your music and sell that in stores or wherever. Young people (who buy music), often hate corps like Monsanto or whatever they see as bad. So lets use all those stories about teenagers sued by the RIAA to create a negative PR campaign, so the Obama voter types will hate the RIAA go for the service as an alternative.
I'm really really glad they are just texting and writing myspace pages. People have always been like that, they just talked in bars or whatever. I'm just glad their talking instead of vandalising my car and my workplace.
1. 4H+ + 4e- + less than 6 MeV energy/neutron -> 4n
2. Pb 207 + 4n -> Bi 211
3. Bi 211 -> He + Pb 207 + 24 MeV
Net reaction:
4H+ + 4e- -> He
Hess's law applies to nuclear reactions just as much as chemical reactions. The question is whether we can find a low enough energy for the neutron beam (need 6 MeV per neutron).
I wish I had the math needed to calculate it all out and run the simulators.
What do you think about "macroscopically catalysed fusion" here:
1. Hospital neutron beam generator creates neutrons from protons
2. Neutron beam hits lead atoms
3. Lead atoms build up into unstable isotopes
4. Unstable isotopes undergo decay, emitting helium atoms and regenerating the lead
5. Energy is generated
That's basically what I meant. I just was showing a possible to calculate the effects, understand them, and design a fusion catalyst.
Toyota Prii have bumperstickers that says "hybrid - gasoline/electric". It would be a lot of fun to drive an SUV with a bumper sticker says "hybrid - nuclear/electric". You would also have about a million MPG if my math is correct.
I agreed with much of this post but "Bush got a free pass from the media"???
I kind of made a mistake in my previous post when I said "media". I should have said "TV" (although, that is the primary information source for many swing voters). There was some Bush bashing in the media. But look at all the swiftboating, etc. against Kerry. It's really tough to perform an unbiased study of the bias. The real reason is said Obama got a free pass on TV was because I was a Clinton supporter in the last election, and the constant calls of racism, attack after attack, etc. I just could not even stand to go near the TV when it was on. (I went into the other room and read a scientific paper). Compared to what Hillary Clinton got hit with, Bush and Obama got a free pass.
It now turns out that the "anti-war" movement was really just against Bush.
The anti-war movement showed me a real split in the democratic party. There are two wings of the democratic party: the urban hippie/yuppie types (Obama voters), and the lower class folks (if your local plumber is a democrat - he's likely one of these folks). I was supposed to be in the Obama voters, but saw through the facade and went for Clinton - I was not old enough to vote, but I campaigned. The problem is that Wall Street needs a candidate who will say - support the bailout (from each according to his ability, to each according to his lack thereof). This election, they knew that people were so fed up with the Bush situation that the republicans were screwed. So they bought a democrat - Obama. The yuppies still haven't figured out that Obama = Bush, so they aren't running the anti-war protests anymore.
I'm sick to death of our hypocritical politicians, Democrat and Republican alike...Look for the biggest "throw the bums out" election results in American history this November...
Could not agree more. The only problem I have is who the bums will be replaced with after they are thrown out. I agree about government spending hypocrisy. There are two respectable positions: lower taxes + lower services or higher taxes + higher services. You can agree or disagree with either one, but at least they don't violate the laws of physics. Many people want something for nothing and vote accordingly, so were stuck with a deficit. Bill Clinton actually reduced the deficit - thanks for campaigning for him.
I wish we could take some heavy duty quantum chromodynamics simulators, and apply them to the problem. If cold fusion is possible, I think it essentially quantum tunnelling through the potential barrier that prevents hydrogen atoms from fusing. Catalysts assist the tunnelling. We could start by figuring out what potential fields would help the atoms fuse, and then work backwards to design a material set-up that would apply the same effect.
It might reduce our oil use. Efficiency would reduce the amount of energy used per unit of economic activity. This would reduce the price of economic activity, so more economic activity would occur. The result would be that more would happen for the same amount of energy, which would be good.
FWIW, I knew W was full of crap with that whole "hydrogen economy" nonsense back around 2005.
Not all was lost. In the effort, we (rather inefficiently) learned several things:
1. Hydrogen is a really, really bad fuel for cars.
2. Hydrogen can be produced very efficiently from water and sunlight with out solar panels.
3. Every approach that showed promise for hydrogen actually showed that something else was better (Borohydride).
4. There are many approaches that lead to the benefits of hydrogen (instant refuel, high energy density by weight, etc) without all the hassle.
5. Zinc, boron, and aluminium are all really good fuels for cars.
The problem with the program was that it focused on hydrogen. If it had included aluminium, we would be driving aluminium fuel cell cars right now. The good news is that we learned how to make cheap hydrogen from water. We know that hydrogen + CO2 = gasoline, so we are on the way to a real program for get rid of oil.
I campaigned for Bill Clinton in '92 as I was so disgusted with Bush the Elder. Still am. God save us from another Bush.
Amen. The problem is that Obama is a left-wing George Bush. Both were Wall Street candidates, backed by the banksters to help them steal more money from the common person. Did you find it odd that both Obama and Bush got a free pass from the media? That is because the media supports the Wall Street candidate (they are owned by Wall Street).
In World War II, the U.S. national speed limit was 35 mph...price of gasoline fairly steady.
Just as long as alternative fuels are exempt from it (including synthetic gasoline).
I think another show-stopper is going to be making all the little nanowires cheaply and efficiently. It's not the cost of the silicon, it's the purification and manufacturing process - we just increased that here.
Remember folks - if PV material is more expensive by area than plastic, CPV is better.
If you want to reduce the total CO2 emissions you have three options:
-Replace oil and coal in some of its uses (e.g. solar charged electric cars)
-Use solar energy to synthesize oil from CO2 and water
-Capture CO2
With conservation, you could get more work from the same CO2. You could not reduce the amount of CO2, because the world would demand more work (lower price).
Let's reduce the production by 10% and reduce the importation of the rich countries by 20%.
Let's instead reduce production by %100, and increase fuel synthesis to the level of oil production.
As the price would go up, you will be happy to use less.
That is very true. I am advocating that the next round of "green" technology have cost-effectiveness built-in. For example, we need to use cheap, low purity materials in photovoltaic cells. Keep in mind that mass production has made the PV cells get about 100 times over the course of the technology.
Slashdot Mirror
kyuteSetebbeJiobs-san, Ohayoo Gozaimasu.
It's just "toyota-san," not "Mr. Toyota-san." Saying "Mr. Toyota-san" is like saying "Mr. Mr. Toyota." Of course, we might have a lot to learn from Toyota-san, so we might want to call him/her/it Toyota-sensee.
Arigato,
Nihongo no grammer nazi
P.S. this is intended as a joke and not designed to offend.
As a parent I applaud the effort.
This attitude is really, really annoying to those of us who do not want children, do not have them, and do not want things to be child safe. What we need is a child-free community. I don't mean "no one under 18 can be here". I mean "you do not have a right to have a child. you cannot demand anything laws, products, rules, or actions as a result of your choice to have a child." I would move to this community in a day. So would a lot of people who are tired of the continuous whining about safety, media violence, and all the other bullshit. Were just tired of being expected to raise everyone else's kids.
Ouch. That seems like a problem. I wonder if anything other than lead/bismuth could go through a build up -> alpha decay process.
Cool. What if we put a neutron moderator in between the beam generator and the target, to slow down the neutrons. I'm not sure what effect this might have on neutron absorption. Is there any place I could find those tables on the web? How would the neutrons recross the starting target - there running along a line, so I don't think they would come back to the starting point. Liquid is a good idea. We want them well mixed. Keep in mind that lead/bismuth was the first system I found that had an alpha decay loop. Others might work better.
beam generator-----proton->neutron----water---lead/bismuth
Why isn't it? There's no hope of anything else. Words are simply ignored. This approach is like Judo, use the attackers strength against them.
Here's a paper talking about proton beam -> neutron beam conversion. The input proton beams are lower than 2.5 MeV! I wonder what the proton-to-neutron conversion rate is. If it's greater than %50, we have a winner.
That might work, but I think most neutron beam generators hit a target (beryllium?) with protons. The target "converts" them into a neutron beam.
The google borg cubes (gborg gcubes?) will have dynamic google ads up and down their sides showing ads relevant to whatever race they're assimilating.
squandered resources, environmental destruction, and increased global competition
Same thing that eastern cultures do. It's a good thing. Resources are unlimited, so who cares if they are squandered? The environment wants to kill us, so I'm glad it's being destroyed (soon we won't need it). Competition makes people better. This is not a joke.
Actually the christ-heads would have to explain to her current kid that his mother died because of them. Feel the love of the Christian faith!
Here's how to restore real democracy world wide. First, we need to create a web-based lobbying organisation to lobby for our views. What we need are lobbyists world wide who will actually go in a bribe the senators and congress people like the corporate ones. Not meaningless PACs that send in worthless petitions. We need a system where all of us could contribute say, $30, and that hires the lobbyists. That's the carrot. Now for the stick. There are scandals everywhere in politics. There are likely scandals "in waiting" hidden in the politics. So, we tell the senators "if you don't do what we want, we will bring up X during the campaign." There's nothing they can do about it, because if they sue us, we just launch the scandal, and their career is over. Now, what if they try to make the lobbyist organisation illegal? The bribe/scandal machine goes into overdrive to defend itself. This is not the best form of democracy on the planet, but it works.
Second, we must destroy the music and media companies. They are a big threat to freedom world-wide (organised religion and moralism is in front). We need some kind of advertising based model for media delivery, over the internet. Think about if there was a website where you could play any song you wanted - like pandora or whatever. You could submit your music and it would get voted based on "views". Once it hit a certain number of views, we would create a CD of your music and sell that in stores or wherever. Young people (who buy music), often hate corps like Monsanto or whatever they see as bad. So lets use all those stories about teenagers sued by the RIAA to create a negative PR campaign, so the Obama voter types will hate the RIAA go for the service as an alternative.
I'm really really glad they are just texting and writing myspace pages. People have always been like that, they just talked in bars or whatever. I'm just glad their talking instead of vandalising my car and my workplace.
Why won't it?
1. 4H+ + 4e- + less than 6 MeV energy/neutron -> 4n
2. Pb 207 + 4n -> Bi 211
3. Bi 211 -> He + Pb 207 + 24 MeV
Net reaction:
4H+ + 4e- -> He
Hess's law applies to nuclear reactions just as much as chemical reactions. The question is whether we can find a low enough energy for the neutron beam (need 6 MeV per neutron).
I wish I had the math needed to calculate it all out and run the simulators.
What do you think about "macroscopically catalysed fusion" here:
1. Hospital neutron beam generator creates neutrons from protons
2. Neutron beam hits lead atoms
3. Lead atoms build up into unstable isotopes
4. Unstable isotopes undergo decay, emitting helium atoms and regenerating the lead
5. Energy is generated
... is that it is very challenging to study political hot topics without bias.
That's basically what I meant. I just was showing a possible to calculate the effects, understand them, and design a fusion catalyst.
Toyota Prii have bumperstickers that says "hybrid - gasoline/electric". It would be a lot of fun to drive an SUV with a bumper sticker says "hybrid - nuclear/electric". You would also have about a million MPG if my math is correct.
I agreed with much of this post but "Bush got a free pass from the media"???
I kind of made a mistake in my previous post when I said "media". I should have said "TV" (although, that is the primary information source for many swing voters). There was some Bush bashing in the media. But look at all the swiftboating, etc. against Kerry. It's really tough to perform an unbiased study of the bias. The real reason is said Obama got a free pass on TV was because I was a Clinton supporter in the last election, and the constant calls of racism, attack after attack, etc. I just could not even stand to go near the TV when it was on. (I went into the other room and read a scientific paper). Compared to what Hillary Clinton got hit with, Bush and Obama got a free pass.
It now turns out that the "anti-war" movement was really just against Bush.
The anti-war movement showed me a real split in the democratic party. There are two wings of the democratic party: the urban hippie/yuppie types (Obama voters), and the lower class folks (if your local plumber is a democrat - he's likely one of these folks). I was supposed to be in the Obama voters, but saw through the facade and went for Clinton - I was not old enough to vote, but I campaigned. The problem is that Wall Street needs a candidate who will say - support the bailout (from each according to his ability, to each according to his lack thereof). This election, they knew that people were so fed up with the Bush situation that the republicans were screwed. So they bought a democrat - Obama. The yuppies still haven't figured out that Obama = Bush, so they aren't running the anti-war protests anymore.
I'm sick to death of our hypocritical politicians, Democrat and Republican alike...Look for the biggest "throw the bums out" election results in American history this November...
Could not agree more. The only problem I have is who the bums will be replaced with after they are thrown out. I agree about government spending hypocrisy. There are two respectable positions: lower taxes + lower services or higher taxes + higher services. You can agree or disagree with either one, but at least they don't violate the laws of physics. Many people want something for nothing and vote accordingly, so were stuck with a deficit. Bill Clinton actually reduced the deficit - thanks for campaigning for him.
I wish we could take some heavy duty quantum chromodynamics simulators, and apply them to the problem. If cold fusion is possible, I think it essentially quantum tunnelling through the potential barrier that prevents hydrogen atoms from fusing. Catalysts assist the tunnelling. We could start by figuring out what potential fields would help the atoms fuse, and then work backwards to design a material set-up that would apply the same effect.
Let me know when I can buy a cold fusion generator.
we could be practicing more energy efficiency.
It might reduce our oil use. Efficiency would reduce the amount of energy used per unit of economic activity. This would reduce the price of economic activity, so more economic activity would occur. The result would be that more would happen for the same amount of energy, which would be good.
FWIW, I knew W was full of crap with that whole "hydrogen economy" nonsense back around 2005.
Not all was lost. In the effort, we (rather inefficiently) learned several things:
1. Hydrogen is a really, really bad fuel for cars.
2. Hydrogen can be produced very efficiently from water and sunlight with out solar panels.
3. Every approach that showed promise for hydrogen actually showed that something else was better (Borohydride).
4. There are many approaches that lead to the benefits of hydrogen (instant refuel, high energy density by weight, etc) without all the hassle.
5. Zinc, boron, and aluminium are all really good fuels for cars.
The problem with the program was that it focused on hydrogen. If it had included aluminium, we would be driving aluminium fuel cell cars right now. The good news is that we learned how to make cheap hydrogen from water. We know that hydrogen + CO2 = gasoline, so we are on the way to a real program for get rid of oil.
I campaigned for Bill Clinton in '92 as I was so disgusted with Bush the Elder. Still am. God save us from another Bush.
Amen. The problem is that Obama is a left-wing George Bush. Both were Wall Street candidates, backed by the banksters to help them steal more money from the common person. Did you find it odd that both Obama and Bush got a free pass from the media? That is because the media supports the Wall Street candidate (they are owned by Wall Street).
In World War II, the U.S. national speed limit was 35 mph...price of gasoline fairly steady.
Just as long as alternative fuels are exempt from it (including synthetic gasoline).
A mirror is the holy grail. One cheap solar panel + one mirror + tracking equipment = one expensive solar panel.
I think another show-stopper is going to be making all the little nanowires cheaply and efficiently. It's not the cost of the silicon, it's the purification and manufacturing process - we just increased that here.
Remember folks - if PV material is more expensive by area than plastic, CPV is better.
-Replace oil and coal in some of its uses (e.g. solar charged electric cars)
-Use solar energy to synthesize oil from CO2 and water
-Capture CO2
With conservation, you could get more work from the same CO2. You could not reduce the amount of CO2, because the world would demand more work (lower price).
Let's reduce the production by 10% and reduce the importation of the rich countries by 20%.
Let's instead reduce production by %100, and increase fuel synthesis to the level of oil production.
As the price would go up, you will be happy to use less.
As prices go down, I will be happy to use more.
That's what I basically said. It will make us (or use) richer, but will not reduce energy use. That is why I pointed to the paradox.
That is very true. I am advocating that the next round of "green" technology have cost-effectiveness built-in. For example, we need to use cheap, low purity materials in photovoltaic cells. Keep in mind that mass production has made the PV cells get about 100 times over the course of the technology.