There is a little NASA stuff on Open Channel Foundation. The ones I looked at are indeed restricted to US citizens... but the license says it's for private non-commercial use.
Incidentally, if you remember NASA's old distribution system, COSMIC, Open Channel does have some COSMIC softare available. But I see that same "private use" license there.
COSMIC (1966-1998, R.I.P.) policy included:
Unless the program is copyrighted, licensed, patented or otherwise protected, users within the U.S. may freely duplicate programs, and/or may incorporate portions of NASA-developed codes into commercial products for use within the United States. Restrictions with regard to international distribution of NASA products and derivative products apply to some programs. Consult with COSMIC on a program by program basis for details. Users are also permitted to commercialize their own versions of licensed and copyrighted codes. Again, COSMIC can provide details on the terms and conditions.
The load on the server also caused the hiker to have to wait for two hours at the Michigan border for his GPS-signed Microsoft Passport to be processed. He was then able to enter Michigan without having to go through Customs.
Having Beagle operational would complicate things. Right now it is perfect, one rover working on each side of the planet. They can drill and dig rocks until they meet in the middle, with two clumps of rubble which used to be Mars drifting away...
Do you have any idea of how slow the data transmission rate is through the neutrino beam under Wisconsin to Minnesota? There is plenty of time to write a plugin before enough data will be ready for any display.
A processor chip could be created which has onboard RAM, using the same technology as onboard cache.
Indeed, there are such chips. I don't know the maximum amount of RAM presently available. You might find them by searching for "System On Chip", perhaps along with the name of an embedded operating system.
Such system on chip devices are at least able to be used on tiny boards. With RAM and peripheral interfaces built in, they often need only connection to proper sockets.
You're talking about a sandbox. Microsoft chose to not use sandbox technology...well, actually they chose to have their engineers apply their usual methods to a sandbox. And a sandbox is not the default environment. The default is their fault.
There are no real quantum physicists here.
What universe are you in? In mine, the cosmic background radiation temperature is about 2.7 K, and at this time coordinate the fine structure constant is 1/alpha = 137.03599958 plus or minus 0.00000052.
You just described the plan. The test area is a part of the ocean which is low on iron, thus phytoplankton (tiny ocean plants) can not grow well there. By adding iron, many of those tiny plants will grow. (It has been suggested that during an ice age, the dry air causes more iron-containing dust to reach oceans thus the ice causes more cooling due to carbon dioxide being removed)
What is wrong with this plan? That is what is being studied. We don't know if the plan will work nor in what ways it can fail.
Yes indeed. The USA custom of building with wood does sequester carbon within walls. Demolition debris then tends to be buried in a landfill. Landfills are covered with a clay cap, which slows or stops decomposition. History researchers have been extracting legible newspapers from landfills.
And, yes, those crop forests grown by paper mills do produce a lot of paper products. Some ends up sequestered in landfills. Some is incinerated (and trapped ash is sequestered). Some is composted and some carbon trapped in soil which feeds plants (more carbon fixing).
Of course, if methods such as thermal depolymerization become popular, then paper and anything else with carbon in it can get converted to fuel or plastics. Fuel would release carbon back to the atmosphere (unless that exhaust is being fed into a depolymerization plant so the carbon dioxide is recombined with hydrogen and oxygen to produce more fuel and plastic).
And plastics are just a soft rock which decomposes quite slowly, so buried plastic can be considered as another sequestration method.
You're worried if the FeSO4 level might be toxic to zooplankton or fish? In this situation that might be good. More dead zooplankton and fish are more dead things to sink to the ocean bottom, and fewer predators to consume the phytoplankton. If the phytoplankton grow until they die of crowding and sink, that is also OK.
I don't know if phytoplankton require iron when not growing, or if mature phytoplankton can exist indefinitely with the iron locked within their system. Do they leak iron and eventually die? Probably do eventually die of iron deficiency, as iron is part of an ATP pathway thus any cells torn away may carry some iron away.
Uh.. If you're trying to drop carbon on the ocean bottom you don't think dropping hydrocarbons would help? It just won't affect the plants which are the intended goal of the project.
And the carbon emissions of SUVs are limited by their high price and the higher cost of fueling a low-MPG SUV (15-20 city MPG SUV, 20-30 city MPG sedan [Should the 40 city MPG Ford Escape SUV be included or not? Show your work.]).
Uh... The Himalayas caused global cooling which reduced temperatures from the time of the dinosaurs to our present chilled condition. You think the Himalayas are carbonate, but actually they are silicate. Silicate weathering is removing a huge amount of carbon dioxide from the air. If ya seal them mountains y'all will warm up. If you want to cool the planet more, nuke the hills and fracture a lot more rock.
Yes, that's right. Usually when something decomposes it is being eaten, mostly by creatures which breathe and exhale carbon dioxide. Lack of oxygen requires other metabolic pathways.
In this fertilizing situation the question then becomes how much of the bodies and waste of those creatures will reach the ocean bottom.
The first stage here is the phytoplankton, the plants which are intended to be nourished by the iron fertilizer. If all those plants sink to the bottom then all their carbon is trapped with them. They may be eaten by a creature which emits carbon dioxide or methane, and some of those creatures will sink. Some will be eaten by other creatures, some of which will sink.
In the food chain, some of the carbon will be used to grow each predator's body. Some will be released as carbon dioxide. Some will be released as waste. Some waste will sink. Some of the bodies will sink. Thus some carbon will be trapped on the ocean bottom, although how much is the issue being studied.
I'm not aware of a metabolism in animals which might use carbon dioxide which is dissolved in ocean water. I suppose the acidic water is constantly trying to react with the bodies of fish, and will react with exposed bones -- but exposed bone implies a horn or a very dead fish which will sink before much acid can be used up. And without study, I weakly think that such a reaction with bone calcium merely produces a carbonate solid which will be sinking to the bottom.
If you've ever had a compost heap, you'd know that methane is what tends to be generated by rotting, and that a lot of carbon remains in the resulting black compost. (yes, methane also contains carbon)
...and burning will be reduced if the oxygen level is indeed reduced.
Perhaps you confused carbon dioxide from fermentation with rotting. Drink beer and save the world!
However, I did say "some". Feel free to select from the various estimates. The planet does what it does whether we understand it or not.
As the Nature article mentions, smaller experiments have been done. The major question is whether animals might eat all the additional plants. Although if there are then more animals, more of their bones will also be falling to the ocean bottom eventually.
Ways to work around such problems include pulsing the growth. Feed one area enough to increase plant growth, but little enough that the iron will run out soon so that temporary ecology will collapse and more dead things will sink to the ocean bottom.
Well, according to some carbon budget calculations we'll run out of carbon in a few hundred thousand years. Without carbon dioxide in the air, all plants will die. Followed shortly by oxygen-using life forms. I hate when that happens.
Of course, this is a very short time in geologic time scales. Seems unlikely that it would happen now for the first time. This suggests something wrong in such a carbon budget, such as a missing carbon source or overestimated sink. The ocean bottom is one large sink for which values have been hard to calculate...and avoid the common method of "we know the budget must be in balance, so by subtracting the values for all the other sinks, the remainder is obviously the amount of carbon deposited on the ocean floor."
The ocean bottom already has much more carbon than we might add to it. That carbon is recycled through volcanoes and methane/oil deposits when an ocean plate is subducted and melts.
Look up "carbon budget" to find estimates of where the planet's carbon goes. However, that is also a Kyoto Protocol phrase so you'll have to add planet-related phrases to reduce noise.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the crater was named after the Bonneville Salt Flats, because they anticipated being able to achieve these tremendous speeds.
Two models, the original compact and the new science utility vehicle.
Incidentally, if you remember NASA's old distribution system, COSMIC, Open Channel does have some COSMIC softare available. But I see that same "private use" license there.
COSMIC (1966-1998, R.I.P.) policy included:
And when rust is flaking off your car, you'll know that wasn't one of the decorative rust streaks.
The load on the server also caused the hiker to have to wait for two hours at the Michigan border for his GPS-signed Microsoft Passport to be processed. He was then able to enter Michigan without having to go through Customs.
Having Beagle operational would complicate things. Right now it is perfect, one rover working on each side of the planet. They can drill and dig rocks until they meet in the middle, with two clumps of rubble which used to be Mars drifting away...
There is a miniscule chance of Gulf Stream changes, and it is the Rocky Mountains which keep England warm.
Do you have any idea of how slow the data transmission rate is through the neutrino beam under Wisconsin to Minnesota? There is plenty of time to write a plugin before enough data will be ready for any display.
Trinity: "Most guys can't."
A processor chip could be created which has onboard RAM, using the same technology as onboard cache.
Indeed, there are such chips. I don't know the maximum amount of RAM presently available. You might find them by searching for "System On Chip", perhaps along with the name of an embedded operating system.
Such system on chip devices are at least able to be used on tiny boards. With RAM and peripheral interfaces built in, they often need only connection to proper sockets.
You're talking about a sandbox. Microsoft chose to not use sandbox technology...well, actually they chose to have their engineers apply their usual methods to a sandbox. And a sandbox is not the default environment. The default is their fault.
There are no real quantum physicists here.
What universe are you in? In mine, the cosmic background radiation temperature is about 2.7 K, and at this time coordinate the fine structure constant is 1/alpha = 137.03599958 plus or minus 0.00000052.
What is wrong with this plan? That is what is being studied. We don't know if the plan will work nor in what ways it can fail.
And, yes, those crop forests grown by paper mills do produce a lot of paper products. Some ends up sequestered in landfills. Some is incinerated (and trapped ash is sequestered). Some is composted and some carbon trapped in soil which feeds plants (more carbon fixing).
Of course, if methods such as thermal depolymerization become popular, then paper and anything else with carbon in it can get converted to fuel or plastics. Fuel would release carbon back to the atmosphere (unless that exhaust is being fed into a depolymerization plant so the carbon dioxide is recombined with hydrogen and oxygen to produce more fuel and plastic).
And plastics are just a soft rock which decomposes quite slowly, so buried plastic can be considered as another sequestration method.
I don't know if phytoplankton require iron when not growing, or if mature phytoplankton can exist indefinitely with the iron locked within their system. Do they leak iron and eventually die? Probably do eventually die of iron deficiency, as iron is part of an ATP pathway thus any cells torn away may carry some iron away.
It just won't affect the plants which are the intended goal of the project.
And the carbon emissions of SUVs are limited by their high price and the higher cost of fueling a low-MPG SUV (15-20 city MPG SUV, 20-30 city MPG sedan [Should the 40 city MPG Ford Escape SUV be included or not? Show your work.]).
Uh... The Himalayas caused global cooling which reduced temperatures from the time of the dinosaurs to our present chilled condition. You think the Himalayas are carbonate, but actually they are silicate. Silicate weathering is removing a huge amount of carbon dioxide from the air. If ya seal them mountains y'all will warm up. If you want to cool the planet more, nuke the hills and fracture a lot more rock.
Hmm... I hadn't stumbled on the KEGG database earlier when looking at metabolic pathways. The pretty photosynthesis image is linked to a carbon fixation pathway clickable diagram of metabolic pathways, and carbon fixation pathway, based on genetic sequences. Fascinating.
In this fertilizing situation the question then becomes how much of the bodies and waste of those creatures will reach the ocean bottom.
The first stage here is the phytoplankton, the plants which are intended to be nourished by the iron fertilizer. If all those plants sink to the bottom then all their carbon is trapped with them. They may be eaten by a creature which emits carbon dioxide or methane, and some of those creatures will sink. Some will be eaten by other creatures, some of which will sink.
In the food chain, some of the carbon will be used to grow each predator's body. Some will be released as carbon dioxide. Some will be released as waste. Some waste will sink. Some of the bodies will sink. Thus some carbon will be trapped on the ocean bottom, although how much is the issue being studied.
I'm not aware of a metabolism in animals which might use carbon dioxide which is dissolved in ocean water. I suppose the acidic water is constantly trying to react with the bodies of fish, and will react with exposed bones -- but exposed bone implies a horn or a very dead fish which will sink before much acid can be used up. And without study, I weakly think that such a reaction with bone calcium merely produces a carbonate solid which will be sinking to the bottom.
Perhaps you confused carbon dioxide from fermentation with rotting.
Drink beer and save the world!
However, I did say "some". Feel free to select from the various estimates. The planet does what it does whether we understand it or not.
"Welcome to WalMart. You must have a Microsoft Passport in order to shop here."
Yes, iron fertilization actually is an idea about 20 years old. "with half a shipload of iron ...I could give you an ice age"
As the Nature article mentions, smaller experiments have been done. The major question is whether animals might eat all the additional plants. Although if there are then more animals, more of their bones will also be falling to the ocean bottom eventually.
Ways to work around such problems include pulsing the growth. Feed one area enough to increase plant growth, but little enough that the iron will run out soon so that temporary ecology will collapse and more dead things will sink to the ocean bottom.
Of course, this is a very short time in geologic time scales. Seems unlikely that it would happen now for the first time. This suggests something wrong in such a carbon budget, such as a missing carbon source or overestimated sink. The ocean bottom is one large sink for which values have been hard to calculate...and avoid the common method of "we know the budget must be in balance, so by subtracting the values for all the other sinks, the remainder is obviously the amount of carbon deposited on the ocean floor."
Look up "carbon budget" to find estimates of where the planet's carbon goes. However, that is also a Kyoto Protocol phrase so you'll have to add planet-related phrases to reduce noise.
Darn, Amazon does not allow Reviews of Politicians which we've bought.
Because we are pink on a green planet?