It's just the catalyst that's simple and cheap. The ammonia itself is probably not significantly cheaper than gasoline. And if it were possible to lower overall transportation cost, almost everybody would be better off, so the idea that "no one will ever allow this" is crap.
Not really a big surprise given their big brain size. It's virtually impossible to get enough calories on a daily basis on a diet of raw foods. Cooking food makes the nutrients much more accessible for the digestive system.
Here is a TED talk about this subject:
https://www.ted.com/talks/suza...
The word 'genius' should be reserved for a rare occasion where a person shows extraordinary insight and brilliance, not the smartest person of a random group of 50.
The CO2 that is exhaled by humans was recently captured from the atmosphere by plants. It's a short term cycle, with no net effect on CO2 concentration.
What happens when part of the field gets paved about 70 years ago?
What you'll see is a step change in the temperature data compared to the temperature data from surrounding stations. Once you identify such as step change, you add a correction.
For the last century, you can compare the data to modern temperature records to get an idea of the accuracy. For older data, you can compare the different measurements to each other. Note that in addition to ice cores and tree rings, there are dozens of other temperature proxies.
There has been shown a good correlation between temperature anomalies up to 1500 km apart, so 40 km is perfectly fine. But why take my word for it ? The temperature records for all the stations are on-line, so feel free to do your own statistical analysis if you don't believe it.
Problem for your clean argument is that it seems that the data has been modified in such a way that increases the global warming trend, by increasing the bias of the data upwards as it gets newer.
If the evil overlords controlled the data, and they wanted to show a rise, why did they allow the so called "warming pause" ?
1) CO2 has been gently swinging between 200-300 ppm for at least a million years, and all of a sudden it jumped to 400 ppm since we started the industrial revolution.
2) At the same time, oxygen levels have decreased slightly, enough to explain O2+C -> CO2
3) Carbon dating the CO2 shows it is based on old carbon, so it's not coming from the biosphere
4) Total fossil fuel use is more than enough to explain the rise in CO2
5) Ocean acidity has increased, showing that oceans are absorbing CO2 rather than releasing it.
6) CO2 graph shows a smooth rising slope, consistent with human CO2 production, but not consistent with volcanic activity.
Everything points to human origin. If you have a better way to explain where the CO2 is coming from, while at the same time explaining where all the CO2 went that was produced by fossil fuel use, let us have it.
When the tether intersects the planet's magnetic field, it generates a current, and thereby converts some of the orbiting body's kinetic energy to electrical energy.
Even if you could somehow make a satellite to extract energy, it would cause a drag on the satellite. So all you're doing is converting the satellite's momentum (that took precious rocket fuel to create) back into energy.
I didn't redefine anything. You said we couldn't easily calculate total human waste heat, but we can. If you wanted to verify the calculations yourself, all you need is the total consumption of coal, natural gas, crude oil, and uranium, and multiply each by the energy content. A fairly simple task, especially because the consumption numbers are tracked quite accurately.
My point exactly. What is a simple task on an modern Intel becomes nearly impossible on the GA144. We've already tried the idea of combining large numbers of simple processors, and it has failed every single time. If NxM simple cores together can't beat a modern Intel processor for a range of useful tasks, there's not much point in developing it.
Maybe you don't want to do that, but good floating point performance is a requirement for a lot of useful tasks. Also, many real world tasks need access to large amounts of memory, and often that memory needs to be available to multiple nodes. The GA144 fails there too, since it has a pitiful amount of memory. Except for a small handful of niche applications that happen to match the GA144's capabilities, it's a useless device.
Slashdot Mirror
Because why ?
You only need 1 gram of palladium to make a fuel cell that can deliver tens of kW ? That's impressive. Do you have a link to the technology ?
It's just the catalyst that's simple and cheap. The ammonia itself is probably not significantly cheaper than gasoline. And if it were possible to lower overall transportation cost, almost everybody would be better off, so the idea that "no one will ever allow this" is crap.
Combustion engines have very low efficiency. Electric motors have very efficiency, and also make for a much simpler and lighter car.
If someone was discriminated against unjustly, it's still not a national tragedy. However, the individual could take the company to court.
Not really a big surprise given their big brain size. It's virtually impossible to get enough calories on a daily basis on a diet of raw foods. Cooking food makes the nutrients much more accessible for the digestive system. Here is a TED talk about this subject: https://www.ted.com/talks/suza...
The word 'genius' should be reserved for a rare occasion where a person shows extraordinary insight and brilliance, not the smartest person of a random group of 50.
Yes I know. And then I block the advertisers.
Great, so can we see what their approach to these issues might be?
Yes, of course. That's why they publish scientific papers.
The CO2 that is exhaled by humans was recently captured from the atmosphere by plants. It's a short term cycle, with no net effect on CO2 concentration.
What happens when part of the field gets paved about 70 years ago?
What you'll see is a step change in the temperature data compared to the temperature data from surrounding stations. Once you identify such as step change, you add a correction.
For the last century, you can compare the data to modern temperature records to get an idea of the accuracy. For older data, you can compare the different measurements to each other. Note that in addition to ice cores and tree rings, there are dozens of other temperature proxies.
There has been shown a good correlation between temperature anomalies up to 1500 km apart, so 40 km is perfectly fine. But why take my word for it ? The temperature records for all the stations are on-line, so feel free to do your own statistical analysis if you don't believe it.
So, when deniers love to bring up the fact that "the earth has been warmer before" this is also beyond ludicrous ?
Problem for your clean argument is that it seems that the data has been modified in such a way that increases the global warming trend, by increasing the bias of the data upwards as it gets newer.
If the evil overlords controlled the data, and they wanted to show a rise, why did they allow the so called "warming pause" ?
1) CO2 has been gently swinging between 200-300 ppm for at least a million years, and all of a sudden it jumped to 400 ppm since we started the industrial revolution.
2) At the same time, oxygen levels have decreased slightly, enough to explain O2+C -> CO2
3) Carbon dating the CO2 shows it is based on old carbon, so it's not coming from the biosphere
4) Total fossil fuel use is more than enough to explain the rise in CO2
5) Ocean acidity has increased, showing that oceans are absorbing CO2 rather than releasing it.
6) CO2 graph shows a smooth rising slope, consistent with human CO2 production, but not consistent with volcanic activity.
Everything points to human origin. If you have a better way to explain where the CO2 is coming from, while at the same time explaining where all the CO2 went that was produced by fossil fuel use, let us have it.
If it was a great idea, people would still be doing it.
When the tether intersects the planet's magnetic field, it generates a current, and thereby converts some of the orbiting body's kinetic energy to electrical energy.
Even if you could somehow make a satellite to extract energy, it would cause a drag on the satellite. So all you're doing is converting the satellite's momentum (that took precious rocket fuel to create) back into energy.
I didn't redefine anything. You said we couldn't easily calculate total human waste heat, but we can. If you wanted to verify the calculations yourself, all you need is the total consumption of coal, natural gas, crude oil, and uranium, and multiply each by the energy content. A fairly simple task, especially because the consumption numbers are tracked quite accurately.
Giant market fail, because it was not a great idea after all.
My point exactly. What is a simple task on an modern Intel becomes nearly impossible on the GA144. We've already tried the idea of combining large numbers of simple processors, and it has failed every single time. If NxM simple cores together can't beat a modern Intel processor for a range of useful tasks, there's not much point in developing it.
Maybe you don't want to do that, but good floating point performance is a requirement for a lot of useful tasks. Also, many real world tasks need access to large amounts of memory, and often that memory needs to be available to multiple nodes. The GA144 fails there too, since it has a pitiful amount of memory. Except for a small handful of niche applications that happen to match the GA144's capabilities, it's a useless device.
A "new programming language" isn't a magical solution to make a non-parallel algorithm work well on a multi processor architecture.
Try doing a 100x100 double precision matrix inversion on one of those chips, and you'll stop yawning pretty quickly.