Memory effect is exactly what happens if you recharge those old NiMH batteries before they were empty. Modern phones have Li chemistry batteries. They behave quite different: discharge them till empty and they die. Your usual behavior should be to charge them before they are half empty if you want them to last. Emptying them to 5% (when the phone tells you the battery is empty and will shut down) can be done once in a while, sure, but for battery life it should not be the default way of working. Treat a NiMH the way you should treat a Li-ion and it dies soon. Treat a Li-ion the way you should treat a NiMH and it dies soon.
Logitech is a decent company. You don't get that level of support everywhere. And Windows installer going TU is going to be difficult to fix in any case. It doesn't happen often and reinstalling Windows seems like a good solution to fix a part of the Windows OS. Since it doesn't happen often I can't imagine there being a decent business case for making a separate windows installer installer beyond re-installing the OS. There will always be edge cases. Now for why Windows STILL does not make separate data and OS partitions by default is beyond me. On occasion you need to re-install the OS. It's not what you want but it happens. Thus the default should be that re-installing the OS does not clean out the family pictures. Even though these should be on multiple backups.
It doesn't need to stay in place. In fact in TFA the tech is used in a racetrack for model cars. The rectifiers are there so the polarity of the input of each dot can switch without the output changing. If you make the alternating strips pad big enough it will be able to handle a lot of shifting around during driving. If you place it into a tray so the phone bumps into the edge of the tray before loosing contact with the pad then you've got the major problems solved unless you drive so aggressively everything has to be bolted in place anyway or you have an accident. The tech is simple, yes, but I see that as an advantage.
The major losses are not in the DC-AC conversion nor in the AC-DC conversion. Both are usually done with high efficiency. The losses are in bridging the 1 mm air gap between the transmitting coil and the receiving coil and the presence of any other conducting material nearby. You see when the Qi charger (or whatever tech) transmits it's power over that gap some of it leaks out through the side. That leaking field starts to induce current in whatever conducting material it encounters. Those are your losses and they scale up with something like the third or fourth power of the distance between the emitting and the receiving coils.
By the way, the recieving end of OpenDots treats the power as AC, as it feeds it through a similar rectifier, in order to correct for polarity changes. These losses are not removed. The are not a simple percentile loss however. On high power installations (like car charger) this rectifier would not be a simple Shotkey diode rectifier. It would be a sensing circuit with mosfets to switch the connections. Those are more expensive and have make no sense in low power applications but for the charging of a car using a mosfet rectifier makes sense. You see, even Shotkey diodes have a 0.2V voltage drop over them. With a 40A charging current this means 8 W is continuously turned into heat by the diodes. The mosfet rectifier needs some power to work but that is in the order of 0.1 W, depending on the number of contact points.
The main bullshit is in the reason they listed that, not in the tech. This is not a wireless charging solution, it "merely" has a few of the advantages of wireless charging and does not have some of the disadvantages like efficiency and triggering the EM radiation allergy tinfoil hatters.
It merely eliminates the need for precise orientation when plugging in. Therefore it should be relatively easy to use it to charge a car automatically, with a charging pad under the car (with automatically retracting protection cover) and a self-raising charging pad on or in the floor of your parking spot. Park your car and walk away. The charging pads connect and the car will be charged. If the GPS in the car detects that the car should be in a charging spot while it does not detect a charger send an SMS to the owner so they can plug in the cable and/or fix the reason it doesn't work.
Usually parts break off from concrete when there was a small crack to begin, then either one of the next cases happens: 1. water enters the hole-> freezes (expands) -> crack gets bigger -> more water enters -> freezes-> crack gets bigger -> etc -> part breaks off. 2. Dirt and water enters the crack -> plant grows in crack -> roots crack the concrete further -> part breaks off.
This self healing concrete prevents both scenarios as it heals the initial small crack, preventing water and dirt from entering. It stops the crack in it's early stages.
TFA has pictures. The cracks are very visible, they have a different color. Open cracks are almost always structural weak points as water, dirt and plants get in them, further cracking the concrete and rusting the reinforcement (which, incidentally, cracks the concrete). If cracks form to make the reinforcing take a normal load then there should have been (more) pre-tension on the reinforcing. It is a clear cut case of bad building practice. If the and all similar bad building practices have been removed then there are still loads the concrete was not designed for. For example an unusually strong storm or mechanical damage (a truck crashing into the bridge). These events are not frequent and can only to some extent be accounted for. The cracks formed by these could be healed by this self healing concrete.
Those "cracks" (technically they are expansion joints) are not made by mechanically cracking hardened concrete. They are made before pouring, by placing spacers that are poured in. Therefore the process should not crack the outer shell of the "healing agent" capsules. Thus the bacteria will not fix the expansion joints.
Shot from a shotgun and epoxy. Mix well and insert. Let harden for about 24 hours. Epoxy gains relatively high strength when cured at body temperature.
(warning: this is even less wise than the self-castration solution)
"No cut out speed" is bullshit. "Will survive all earth storms since recorded history" is more logical, although I wouldn't guess it would pass that bar. Supersonic storms will kill it.
They require more cleaning than I am willing to do and for those 5 cups of coffee a week I drink at home they are quite expensive. Dunno about Keurig but Nespresso is easy and cheap for my use case.
Granted, I was a bit semantic. You overstated things and I called you upon it. If you want to cal that semantics I can't nor do I want to stop you.
It is physics defying because the current theories do not allow for the drive to work. If it does that means our current theory of physics is wrong, which is not a major problem because we know our current understanding is not complete. It is however, very interesting. If it works. The theory of how the EM drive works is simply wrong, relativistic effects don't allow you to ignore conservation of momentum.
They exist because most people need that feeling of belonging. Belonging to mankind doesn't seem to be enough. Belonging to a group is what people want. Now why there are silly things like handshakes and mandatory dress colors is beyond me.
Filtered for a. better than "can be assumed to be a hoax" b. "really reactionless" Woodward: I wouldn't call it plausible because many experiments have failed to produce thrust and the thrust produced is in the range of measurement error. EM and Cannae drive: EM is the drive we are talking about. Cannae is similar. So in fact we have 2 similar methods. One of them is what this discussion about so it doesn't count. The other is similar to that one. My conclusion: the word "several" is pulled out of your ass.
And, yes, devices that do not generate thrust are still a reactionless drive: they are reactionless and they move.
A tennis ball in a car is reactionless and moves. That doesn't make it a drive. By definition if it doesn't produce trust it is not a drive in the sense of an engine. However I shall comment on the devices mentioned: The Alcubierre drive is very far beyond our current technology and is not really an engine as the EM drive is. It is more of a way to help an engine cheat the laws of physics. I say this because the Alcubierre drive doesn't move you from A to B. It makes the distance from A to B shorter so a normal engine (be it rocket, orion or reactionless) can get there in a reasonable amount of time.
"Swimming in spacetime" is not a drive because it's not a device. It is an interesting theory and if proven correct it may eventually be possible to build a drive based on it but for now it's not a drive.
The devices on that wiki page are: Dean drive: We can safely assume it's a hoax because he doesn't want anyone verifying the experiment. Gyroscopic Inertial Thruster (GIT): Verified a hoax. Quasi-reactionless methods: Not reactionless. EmDrive: That'd be the device this whole fuss is about. Micronewton electromagnetic thruster: A small ion drive. Not reactionless at all. Woodward effect: Many experiments have failed to produce thrust. If it worked it would be cool but for now it seems like the experiments that have produced thrust are measurement errors. I'd love to be wrong on this of course. Cannae drive: Similar to EM drive. If the EM drive works the Cannae will be tested with similar rigor. Devices that do not generate thrust: Not relevant in the topic of reactionless drives.
I find it interesting that people assume that invention often follows science. The only devices I can think of where that was the case are the laser and semiconductor tech. Granted those are important in the modern day and age, but most things we use were invented in primitive form, next the theory behind the working was discovered, next the device was massively improved based on the theory, next the theory was improved based on anomalies in the improved device, repeat.
That can be easily shorted to "It is a good rule not to do anything overmuch" because overmuch is like that. If an experiment is verified sufficiently and independently we can assume it is correct. If the theories do not agree then the theories are wrong. See gravity. We don't know how it works but we have sufficiently and independently proved that it works. Even sir Eddington would not doubt the existence of gravity because we don't know how it works. Ergo, once and if the EM drive effects are confirmed by a dozen labs around the world and at least two experiments in deep space I would be really confident that the current theory is wrong. As it stands now there is reason to begin to think of what could be wrong with the theory in the case that the EM drive experiment is verified sufficiently. Just to get a head start, you know. However claiming that the current physical theories are bollocks is jumping the gun at this point. As usual the wisest path is across the middle ground.
Slashdot Mirror
You didn't read the full question, did you?
Memory effect is exactly what happens if you recharge those old NiMH batteries before they were empty.
Modern phones have Li chemistry batteries. They behave quite different: discharge them till empty and they die. Your usual behavior should be to charge them before they are half empty if you want them to last. Emptying them to 5% (when the phone tells you the battery is empty and will shut down) can be done once in a while, sure, but for battery life it should not be the default way of working.
Treat a NiMH the way you should treat a Li-ion and it dies soon. Treat a Li-ion the way you should treat a NiMH and it dies soon.
Logitech is a decent company. You don't get that level of support everywhere.
And Windows installer going TU is going to be difficult to fix in any case. It doesn't happen often and reinstalling Windows seems like a good solution to fix a part of the Windows OS. Since it doesn't happen often I can't imagine there being a decent business case for making a separate windows installer installer beyond re-installing the OS. There will always be edge cases.
Now for why Windows STILL does not make separate data and OS partitions by default is beyond me. On occasion you need to re-install the OS. It's not what you want but it happens. Thus the default should be that re-installing the OS does not clean out the family pictures. Even though these should be on multiple backups.
It doesn't need to stay in place. In fact in TFA the tech is used in a racetrack for model cars. The rectifiers are there so the polarity of the input of each dot can switch without the output changing. If you make the alternating strips pad big enough it will be able to handle a lot of shifting around during driving. If you place it into a tray so the phone bumps into the edge of the tray before loosing contact with the pad then you've got the major problems solved unless you drive so aggressively everything has to be bolted in place anyway or you have an accident.
The tech is simple, yes, but I see that as an advantage.
The major losses are not in the DC-AC conversion nor in the AC-DC conversion. Both are usually done with high efficiency. The losses are in bridging the 1 mm air gap between the transmitting coil and the receiving coil and the presence of any other conducting material nearby. You see when the Qi charger (or whatever tech) transmits it's power over that gap some of it leaks out through the side. That leaking field starts to induce current in whatever conducting material it encounters. Those are your losses and they scale up with something like the third or fourth power of the distance between the emitting and the receiving coils.
By the way, the recieving end of OpenDots treats the power as AC, as it feeds it through a similar rectifier, in order to correct for polarity changes. These losses are not removed.
The are not a simple percentile loss however. On high power installations (like car charger) this rectifier would not be a simple Shotkey diode rectifier. It would be a sensing circuit with mosfets to switch the connections. Those are more expensive and have make no sense in low power applications but for the charging of a car using a mosfet rectifier makes sense.
You see, even Shotkey diodes have a 0.2V voltage drop over them. With a 40A charging current this means 8 W is continuously turned into heat by the diodes. The mosfet rectifier needs some power to work but that is in the order of 0.1 W, depending on the number of contact points.
The main bullshit is in the reason they listed that, not in the tech. This is not a wireless charging solution, it "merely" has a few of the advantages of wireless charging and does not have some of the disadvantages like efficiency and triggering the EM radiation allergy tinfoil hatters.
It merely eliminates the need for precise orientation when plugging in. Therefore it should be relatively easy to use it to charge a car automatically, with a charging pad under the car (with automatically retracting protection cover) and a self-raising charging pad on or in the floor of your parking spot. Park your car and walk away. The charging pads connect and the car will be charged. If the GPS in the car detects that the car should be in a charging spot while it does not detect a charger send an SMS to the owner so they can plug in the cable and/or fix the reason it doesn't work.
Indeed, they should not mock our sun for it's small solar flares. It's a medical problem and we do not want it to fix it.
Usually parts break off from concrete when there was a small crack to begin, then either one of the next cases happens:
1. water enters the hole-> freezes (expands) -> crack gets bigger -> more water enters -> freezes-> crack gets bigger -> etc -> part breaks off.
2. Dirt and water enters the crack -> plant grows in crack -> roots crack the concrete further -> part breaks off.
This self healing concrete prevents both scenarios as it heals the initial small crack, preventing water and dirt from entering. It stops the crack in it's early stages.
TFA has pictures. The cracks are very visible, they have a different color.
Open cracks are almost always structural weak points as water, dirt and plants get in them, further cracking the concrete and rusting the reinforcement (which, incidentally, cracks the concrete). If cracks form to make the reinforcing take a normal load then there should have been (more) pre-tension on the reinforcing. It is a clear cut case of bad building practice.
If the and all similar bad building practices have been removed then there are still loads the concrete was not designed for. For example an unusually strong storm or mechanical damage (a truck crashing into the bridge). These events are not frequent and can only to some extent be accounted for. The cracks formed by these could be healed by this self healing concrete.
Those "cracks" (technically they are expansion joints) are not made by mechanically cracking hardened concrete. They are made before pouring, by placing spacers that are poured in. Therefore the process should not crack the outer shell of the "healing agent" capsules. Thus the bacteria will not fix the expansion joints.
More likely one of those vibrating eggs.
Shot from a shotgun and epoxy. Mix well and insert. Let harden for about 24 hours. Epoxy gains relatively high strength when cured at body temperature.
(warning: this is even less wise than the self-castration solution)
"No cut out speed" is bullshit. "Will survive all earth storms since recorded history" is more logical, although I wouldn't guess it would pass that bar. Supersonic storms will kill it.
On the contrary: beating is usually a reciprocal motion.
No. First you filter for similar weather and road conditions. Self driving cars may only have been deployed in optimum conditions.
They require more cleaning than I am willing to do and for those 5 cups of coffee a week I drink at home they are quite expensive.
Dunno about Keurig but Nespresso is easy and cheap for my use case.
Granted, I was a bit semantic. You overstated things and I called you upon it. If you want to cal that semantics I can't nor do I want to stop you.
It is physics defying because the current theories do not allow for the drive to work. If it does that means our current theory of physics is wrong, which is not a major problem because we know our current understanding is not complete.
It is however, very interesting. If it works.
The theory of how the EM drive works is simply wrong, relativistic effects don't allow you to ignore conservation of momentum.
They exist because most people need that feeling of belonging. Belonging to mankind doesn't seem to be enough. Belonging to a group is what people want.
Now why there are silly things like handshakes and mandatory dress colors is beyond me.
several plausible proposals
Filtered for
a. better than "can be assumed to be a hoax"
b. "really reactionless"
Woodward: I wouldn't call it plausible because many experiments have failed to produce thrust and the thrust produced is in the range of measurement error.
EM and Cannae drive: EM is the drive we are talking about. Cannae is similar.
So in fact we have 2 similar methods. One of them is what this discussion about so it doesn't count. The other is similar to that one.
My conclusion: the word "several" is pulled out of your ass.
And, yes, devices that do not generate thrust are still a reactionless drive: they are reactionless and they move.
A tennis ball in a car is reactionless and moves. That doesn't make it a drive. By definition if it doesn't produce trust it is not a drive in the sense of an engine.
However I shall comment on the devices mentioned:
The Alcubierre drive is very far beyond our current technology and is not really an engine as the EM drive is. It is more of a way to help an engine cheat the laws of physics.
I say this because the Alcubierre drive doesn't move you from A to B. It makes the distance from A to B shorter so a normal engine (be it rocket, orion or reactionless) can get there in a reasonable amount of time.
"Swimming in spacetime" is not a drive because it's not a device. It is an interesting theory and if proven correct it may eventually be possible to build a drive based on it but for now it's not a drive.
My VCR works fine. It always blinks neatly how many times I have used it since plugging it in.
Technically the user voluntarily uses Windows. So any data send by Windows is send voluntarily. Please note that informed consent is not used.
The devices on that wiki page are:
Dean drive: We can safely assume it's a hoax because he doesn't want anyone verifying the experiment.
Gyroscopic Inertial Thruster (GIT): Verified a hoax.
Quasi-reactionless methods: Not reactionless.
EmDrive: That'd be the device this whole fuss is about.
Micronewton electromagnetic thruster: A small ion drive. Not reactionless at all.
Woodward effect: Many experiments have failed to produce thrust. If it worked it would be cool but for now it seems like the experiments that have produced thrust are measurement errors. I'd love to be wrong on this of course.
Cannae drive: Similar to EM drive. If the EM drive works the Cannae will be tested with similar rigor.
Devices that do not generate thrust: Not relevant in the topic of reactionless drives.
Einstein was wrong- the Universe *isn't* comprehensible.
Every time humanity comes close to explaining the universe the universe is replaced seamlessly with something more silly.
I find it interesting that people assume that invention often follows science. The only devices I can think of where that was the case are the laser and semiconductor tech.
Granted those are important in the modern day and age, but most things we use were invented in primitive form, next the theory behind the working was discovered, next the device was massively improved based on the theory, next the theory was improved based on anomalies in the improved device, repeat.
That can be easily shorted to "It is a good rule not to do anything overmuch" because overmuch is like that.
If an experiment is verified sufficiently and independently we can assume it is correct. If the theories do not agree then the theories are wrong.
See gravity. We don't know how it works but we have sufficiently and independently proved that it works. Even sir Eddington would not doubt the existence of gravity because we don't know how it works.
Ergo, once and if the EM drive effects are confirmed by a dozen labs around the world and at least two experiments in deep space I would be really confident that the current theory is wrong.
As it stands now there is reason to begin to think of what could be wrong with the theory in the case that the EM drive experiment is verified sufficiently. Just to get a head start, you know.
However claiming that the current physical theories are bollocks is jumping the gun at this point.
As usual the wisest path is across the middle ground.