The steam engine converted chemical energy into thermal energy into kinetic energy.
Gas, coal, oil powerstations... they all convert "Heat" energy into electrical energy (much of which is then converted into light energy)- again like the steam engine of the last millenium, we had to use chemical energy to produce the heat.
The only difference here is that the heat is from the environment. If this could be scaled to take heat from a more room-like temperature... or even just be able to take heat from an engine, or a smoke stack, etc... this could be a great way of "generating" energy from heat. maybe.
The LED uses environmental "HEAT" as it's source. This is a big difference in that heat is usually a waste product when we convert energy from one format to another- it is not usually the source for energy.
Even with the combustion energy the number one source of inefficiency is energy lost as heat.
So far... only good enough for cooling a few molecules of beer.
The average man could outrun the first combustion-engine powered vehicles. The first modern computers took up entire rooms, were programmed with punchcards and were much less powerfull than the average 1990's cell phone.
We've got our foot in the door. What if we can improve on this the way we have with computers... and then put thousands of them in an array.
I presume it will hit an equilibrium where the heat it is turning into photons matches the same rate as heat in the surrounding area conduct with the LED to warm it up.
Thus- it will give off light just as quick as it can conduct heat from the surrounding environment.
And by the way- I know the energy gained is miniscule... but imagine what kind of cultural revolution it could inspire if we could convert heat energy into power efficiently.
All the air conditioning we apply- all the heat exchanges to cool down equipment- all the residual energy lost as heat in so many applications that we could potentially trap and turn into something usefull.
"Heat" is how energy is "lost" or "wasted" in most appliances.
Surely if this is true the "light" is not the big story.
If you can take "heat" and convert it into another form of energy that is HUUUUUUUGE NEWS- yes I know, steam engines, etc, but they require a large difference in temperature.
Imagine if your fridge/freezer- GENERATED power- by taking heat energy and converted it into electricity?
If I'm typical, (and I probaly am not) Amazon, et al, would get more money from me by LOWERING the price.
90% of the ebooks I "buy" are free- either from Amazon, or Gutenberg, or elsewhere. The other 10% I will only buy if they are cheap. If eBooks were in the $2.99/3.99 range (for books I wanted) - I wouldn't hesitate- and the vast majority of books I read would be eBooks.
Instead of making $7 profit on me once or twice a year- they could be getting $1 profit from me 20 or so times a year. Multiply me by a few hundred thousand and that profit margain goes up.
I don't know that I am typical though- in fact I probably am not- because I actually enjoy reading HG Wells, Oscar Wilde, etc- and I don't consider it too much a hassel to not be buying the latest-pop ficiton mega-release.
Well, the good news with everything being manufactured in the Far East is that wait a few hundred years and the Morlocks will be so far away they won't be able to eat the Eloi.
Bye Bye, my Raspberry Pi, I thought that I might buy you, but the warehouse was dry, those good old boys say just wait one more month, but you keep running into delays, yeah, you keep running into delays.
You can type on an iPad- just not as easily. But yes; Most people DO content creation- not all people program- but just about every desktop has Office (or an equivalent)- and that is content creation too.
There are some things a tablet is more usefull for- and somethings a desktop is more usefull for. If I had to pick one or the other- I'd pick a desktop. I don't feel the need for a tablet yet- but if I won one/was given one, etc- I'd be very happy.
I'd probably still use the desktop more- but a tablet could be fun.
If the FBI are to stand any chance at catching these people in the future they can't rely on manpower.
Seems like an awful lot of work went in to catching Hammond. Watching his traffic - having Sabu watch when his suspected profiles log on/off. Watching what MAC addresses connected to his wireless router, etc.
If there were 100 Hammonds- 100 Lulzsecs- could they catch them all. What if there were 1000? I don't know how many hacker groups they watch at once- most don't advertise themselves like Lulz did. Seems like it required a lot of effort to catch one man- could they afford to do that in 100 or 1000 concurrent investigations.
To stand a chance the FBI needs an F-Bot-I to do the watching/monitoring, etc. Otherwise- as this problem grows- they won't be able to track everyone at once.
It'll be like one cop trying to pull over speeders on the interstate during rush hour. You can catch one or two- but the vast majority will just slide right on through.
According to another article at the bottom- he made a couple of mistakes- one- he once logged into a chat directly without anonymising his IP. Two- he registerd a domain using his real name- and quickly changed it after noticing what he had done.
He was doxed by members of his own team- but looks like the FBI would have caught him anyway.
Define "Good Christian" - is that the self-proclaimed or those that other proclaim to be "Good"?
One of my teachers in school (a Biology teacher at that) in the US when I first moved over here wrote on a review that I am a "Good Christian Boy" - does that mean I need to be kicked out too?
/ Disclaimer- I've never been a Christian of any kind and was partially amused by the comment. (part of me was peeved that it was assumed that I was "Christian" because I was "Good".
The United State's CDC takes Zombie Apocalypse seriously. I'm just heeding the warning that my government is giving me. It's part of being a responsible citizen.
There has been talk of Iran dropping out of the treaty too. If I were Iran- I think at this point that is what I'd do. Even if they let inspectors in now- the West has gone too far believing Iran has nuke ambitions that they would just say "they're hidden well" if we didn't find anything.
No, but you could block signals within your building with MINIMAL interference beyond it.
Do you think Eric on the bus would cause any problems for Sue on the sidewalk talking to her beau? At absolute worst she would hear a slight bit of static.
The ability of these things to work dramatically tapers off with distance.
Slashdot Mirror
The steam engine converted chemical energy into thermal energy into kinetic energy.
Gas, coal, oil powerstations... they all convert "Heat" energy into electrical energy (much of which is then converted into light energy)- again like the steam engine of the last millenium, we had to use chemical energy to produce the heat.
The only difference here is that the heat is from the environment. If this could be scaled to take heat from a more room-like temperature... or even just be able to take heat from an engine, or a smoke stack, etc... this could be a great way of "generating" energy from heat. maybe.
Now how the hell do we make a trillion of these?
I see the gentleman from Foxconn in the corner of the room raising his hand.
The combustion engine is fed a fuel to do this.
The LED uses environmental "HEAT" as it's source. This is a big difference in that heat is usually a waste product when we convert energy from one format to another- it is not usually the source for energy.
Even with the combustion energy the number one source of inefficiency is energy lost as heat.
So far... only good enough for cooling a few molecules of beer.
The average man could outrun the first combustion-engine powered vehicles. The first modern computers took up entire rooms, were programmed with punchcards and were much less powerfull than the average 1990's cell phone.
We've got our foot in the door. What if we can improve on this the way we have with computers... and then put thousands of them in an array.
Even if we could only get 50% efficiency- we've got ourselves an expensive device that will produce FREE electricity.
I presume it will hit an equilibrium where the heat it is turning into photons matches the same rate as heat in the surrounding area conduct with the LED to warm it up.
Thus- it will give off light just as quick as it can conduct heat from the surrounding environment.
And by the way- I know the energy gained is miniscule... but imagine what kind of cultural revolution it could inspire if we could convert heat energy into power efficiently.
All the air conditioning we apply- all the heat exchanges to cool down equipment- all the residual energy lost as heat in so many applications that we could potentially trap and turn into something usefull.
"Heat" is how energy is "lost" or "wasted" in most appliances.
Surely if this is true the "light" is not the big story.
If you can take "heat" and convert it into another form of energy that is HUUUUUUUGE NEWS- yes I know, steam engines, etc, but they require a large difference in temperature.
Imagine if your fridge/freezer- GENERATED power- by taking heat energy and converted it into electricity?
If I'm typical, (and I probaly am not) Amazon, et al, would get more money from me by LOWERING the price.
90% of the ebooks I "buy" are free- either from Amazon, or Gutenberg, or elsewhere. The other 10% I will only buy if they are cheap. If eBooks were in the $2.99/3.99 range (for books I wanted) - I wouldn't hesitate- and the vast majority of books I read would be eBooks.
Instead of making $7 profit on me once or twice a year- they could be getting $1 profit from me 20 or so times a year. Multiply me by a few hundred thousand and that profit margain goes up.
I don't know that I am typical though- in fact I probably am not- because I actually enjoy reading HG Wells, Oscar Wilde, etc- and I don't consider it too much a hassel to not be buying the latest-pop ficiton mega-release.
Well, the good news with everything being manufactured in the Far East is that wait a few hundred years and the Morlocks will be so far away they won't be able to eat the Eloi.
Bye Bye, my Raspberry Pi,
I thought that I might buy you,
but the warehouse was dry,
those good old boys say just wait one more month,
but you keep running into delays,
yeah, you keep running into delays.
The mystery code isn't really much of a mystery- it's just how Duqu communicates with the sith lord.
I missed that product announcement.
(do I get one too)
You can type on an iPad- just not as easily. But yes; Most people DO content creation- not all people program- but just about every desktop has Office (or an equivalent)- and that is content creation too.
There are some things a tablet is more usefull for- and somethings a desktop is more usefull for. If I had to pick one or the other- I'd pick a desktop. I don't feel the need for a tablet yet- but if I won one/was given one, etc- I'd be very happy.
I'd probably still use the desktop more- but a tablet could be fun.
But I bet they feel more prestigious.
That's OK- I have two laps.
Andriod users.
If the FBI are to stand any chance at catching these people in the future they can't rely on manpower.
Seems like an awful lot of work went in to catching Hammond. Watching his traffic - having Sabu watch when his suspected profiles log on/off. Watching what MAC addresses connected to his wireless router, etc.
If there were 100 Hammonds- 100 Lulzsecs- could they catch them all. What if there were 1000? I don't know how many hacker groups they watch at once- most don't advertise themselves like Lulz did. Seems like it required a lot of effort to catch one man- could they afford to do that in 100 or 1000 concurrent investigations.
To stand a chance the FBI needs an F-Bot-I to do the watching/monitoring, etc. Otherwise- as this problem grows- they won't be able to track everyone at once.
It'll be like one cop trying to pull over speeders on the interstate during rush hour. You can catch one or two- but the vast majority will just slide right on through.
According to another article at the bottom- he made a couple of mistakes- one- he once logged into a chat directly without anonymising his IP. Two- he registerd a domain using his real name- and quickly changed it after noticing what he had done.
He was doxed by members of his own team- but looks like the FBI would have caught him anyway.
websites displaying fake antivirus scans
I didn't know McAfee had started targeting Web blogs now.
Define "Good Christian" - is that the self-proclaimed or those that other proclaim to be "Good"?
One of my teachers in school (a Biology teacher at that) in the US when I first moved over here wrote on a review that I am a "Good Christian Boy" - does that mean I need to be kicked out too?
/ Disclaimer- I've never been a Christian of any kind and was partially amused by the comment. (part of me was peeved that it was assumed that I was "Christian" because I was "Good".
The United State's CDC takes Zombie Apocalypse seriously. I'm just heeding the warning that my government is giving me. It's part of being a responsible citizen.
I'm not convinced.
What if this turns man into a race of zombies? We can't count on Will Smith always being around to save us.
There has been talk of Iran dropping out of the treaty too. If I were Iran- I think at this point that is what I'd do. Even if they let inspectors in now- the West has gone too far believing Iran has nuke ambitions that they would just say "they're hidden well" if we didn't find anything.
No, but you could block signals within your building with MINIMAL interference beyond it.
Do you think Eric on the bus would cause any problems for Sue on the sidewalk talking to her beau? At absolute worst she would hear a slight bit of static.
The ability of these things to work dramatically tapers off with distance.