please read more carefully, it was not ment as a scientific remark, but humouristic quote with regard to a part of your parent quote (conciousness appears composed of several tasks, and is NOT a single task). don't be so touchy...
IANA Material Science Physicist, but IIRC usual magnets are monoatomic arrays of atoms/ions with a free electron, which due to inter-spin hamiltonian do a phase-transition to unidirectional spin (so called Ising model).
except for the fact that here are pairs of different atoms with radical electrons, what is the difference from Ising model ?
why does this give higher free-electron (hence magnetic field) density than normal monoatomic magnets ?
I did not discuss fault or morals, just pragmatics.
pragmatically, billions of hungry people, many of them with goverments with (or soon to be with) nuclear weapons are a large military risk.
the overbreeding of the poor nations is not just a societal disaster for them, and an ecological menace to the world, it also leads to very bitter wars (like in africa), and as you americans noticed this 11,9 , homocidal maniacs hurt you as well.
A common indian women was asked "how many children will you have ?"
she said: "I've had 4 kids, 3 already died, I want to have about 10, and I expect 2 to survive"
this is a very rational probablistic view, not a stupid women at all.
the indians as a nation ARE stupid, since they allow the situation to reach this point, but the "common" people are usually not stupid when it concerns their own survival, or they wouldn't be so common.
and wether you like it or not, it IS your problem, since hungry people bite harder.
(note I don't say sending rice or whatever is a solution, I believe technological and political methods must be used jointly, with threat of force when needed, but in any case, it IS your problem)
" Yes, the technology to get to 10,000,000 Kelvin. Plasma physicists have been working on it for a long time."
actually getting there is not a large problem, containing the plasma in that temperature at high density for long enough time is (lookup the Lawson criterion).
(I'm sure the parent poster knows this, but it may confuse unaware readers)
and D-T fusion does produce both... but we look for fast (Mev) neutron production to verify fusion, since they're much easier to detect.
this test was what fail F&P as well, BTW.
animals ARE adapted to hirarchies; and test them
on
Do You Like Your Job?
·
· Score: 1
the term "pecking order" does not come from humans...
"Alpha Male" is a term from ape societies.
a company is usually just an adaptation of ancient structures, and guess what ? in animal societies there is also a constant testing of the leader's authority, or in other words, the animal "vasals" are constantly disatisfied: "no animal is comfortable in its place in society"
the best thing evolutionary seems to me to be able to work in hirarchies, but have some measure of discontent.
yes, but My question is this: how many technically-gifted people do you need to maintain a spacecraft ?
say that you have a very good gene base, and given bright parents' offspring's tenedency towards the norm , what is the percentage of useful people in the populace ? how many are needed ?
I don't know, but I would take 1..10% of the population as useful and 30-300 as highly-able maintainance crew needed as a rough estimate.
this gives 300..30000 as the size of the base crew.
even in usual space craft design you take conservative estimates, not to mention in design of a century-long project.
IMHO your article deals with the minimum needed to keep social equilibrium and reproducting society.
"And until such probes provide proof that there is an inhabitable world at the end of the journey"
no need, you can build colonies.
and also the spectrum of your star does not matter ; you just need the energy, and use lamps or some optical aparatus to convert it to a reasonable spectrum (efficiency is not very important here).
" They'll have become emotionally acclimated to living in a confined habitat surrounded by vacuum "
exactly why they'll be able to construct a civilization in space colonies there; a space colony is exactly the kind of ship you describe, just without the sail, and you have a lot of resources for growth.
the notion of setteling down on a planet is anthropomorphic.
one more thing: my guess is the people that will embark on such a mission will come initially from a space-colonies society here in the solar system.
a small society needs laws as well as a large one.
if the ship is to be say, the size of a small city, say 10^3.. 10^5 people (multi-generational teams cannot be too small...) then they will need laws and conflict-resolution mechanisms even more than here on earth ; every small violence and every madman is a colony-survival threat.
first, please lets not make this personal or impolite (regarding the "Umm... Dude.." title).
regarding cyclicity:
"All particles have antiparticles with all charges opposite is the essense of C-symmetry"
only if you accept QFT axioms; among them symmetry (C, P, T , whatever your lagrangian holds), locality and lorentz invariance (which , IIRC implies CPT )
the existance of anti-particles IN SOME FORM does not have to be inseperable from the above principles , i.e. there may be (I doubt anyone proved otherwize) other models (with no regard to experimental evidence) with some kinds of anti-particles without the theoretical base of QFT and above axioms.
this is what I mean by an explanation of some phenomenon:
there exists a model which is more "basic", i.e. applicable to and implies a wider class of phenomena then the "explained" observation, within which the phenomenon fits.
e.g. "all apples fall to the ground" is explained by Newton's model of gravity. It is not inseperable from newton's model or a different way of expressing it (hence this is not a cyclical argument).
wrong, see any elementary quantum field theory book, the reason is because charge is a result of your fields being complex, and your measured quantities being real (C-symmetry).
there are real-field (=> neutral) particles , they don't have anti-particles.
(actually C-symmetry may sometime be broken but thats another story.)
fusion or A.M. catalyzed fission ? the products of the fission reaction can be the only ejected mass, with incredible velocities, therefore giving high specific impulse, I do not understand how you can obtain the same S.I. with A.M. catalyzed fusion (or how exactly do you intend to use A.M. for fusion, for that matter)
"You have to have an extremely good vacuum, however"
no, that's what's surprizing about penning traps, you don't have to have a VERY strong vacuum, only that you will not have many exposed neucleons.
IIRC the thing that keeps the anti-protons and the protons in outside matter to anihilate are the orbiting electrons in the atoms. the vacuum is needed for the electromagnetic traps to keep the anti-protons from escaping.
BTW, why shouldn't you INJECT the trap with negatively charged ions (say Cl-)? these will balance your electrostatic charge. until you'll turn the matter to plasma (or inject it with protons) you will have practically no anihilations ?
1) what is the product, is it pheasible ? is it too trivial ? does a prototype even exist ?
2) what is the market for the products ? how vital is the product (especially when custumers are under economic stress)
3) how do the managerial staff strike you ? are they too non-technical ? are they too technical ? if so, do they intend to bring outside management ? what are mistakes of other start-ups they learned from ?
4) technical staff: do they have people which impress you ? who had previous publications ? who you'll learn from ? who you can work with ? (last one is hard to tell in interview... )
the article forgets development costs; development of large parallel applications cannot be done on a MUCH smaller one.
my guess is the best strategy is something like:
1) devellop a prototype on a tiny cluster
2) buy (or rent) a medium-size, medium-speed cluster and iron out the network-related and paralelism-related problems.
3) then look at moore's law and the hardware roadmaps, and decide when it is best to buy the super-computer for actually solving your large-scale problem (which is what parent-comment discusses).
Slashdot Mirror
"Posting pseudo science ... "
...
please read more carefully, it was not ment as a scientific remark, but humouristic quote with regard to a part of your parent quote (conciousness appears composed of several tasks, and is NOT a single task).
don't be so touchy
the difference between a living and a dead brain's power consumption is X watts (X>15).
there, I've said it, now I can derive all sorts of interesting conclusions about being brain-dead as an evolutionary advantage in the academy.
what kind of metric is the power of the concious Vs unconcious brain ?
IANA Material Science Physicist, but IIRC usual magnets are monoatomic arrays of atoms/ions with a free electron, which due to inter-spin hamiltonian do a phase-transition to unidirectional spin (so called Ising model).
except for the fact that here are pairs of different atoms with radical electrons, what is the difference from Ising model ?
why does this give higher free-electron (hence magnetic field) density than normal monoatomic magnets ?
what am I missing ?
you misunderstood what I specificly wrote.
I did not discuss fault or morals, just pragmatics.
pragmatically, billions of hungry people, many of them with goverments with (or soon to be with)
nuclear weapons are a large military risk.
the overbreeding of the poor nations is not just a societal disaster for them, and an ecological menace to the world, it also leads to very bitter wars (like in africa), and as you americans noticed this 11,9 , homocidal maniacs hurt you as well.
if it can kill you => it is your problem.
"A more likely case is it will be lifted by manual methods, piece by piece "
.
I'm not sure there's anything you can do by hand that will give a load that much delta-V
* income taxes - The government's motivation ... tax rate as high as possible without sparking a revolution ... Since there is no feedback loop ...
there is a feedcback loop, but it is a much longer-term one than for the other taxes.
the richest / most productive people will tend to migrate out of a highly-taxed society.
e.g. look at france.
A common indian women was asked "how many children will you have ?"
she said:
"I've had 4 kids, 3 already died, I want to have about 10, and I expect 2 to survive"
this is a very rational probablistic view, not a stupid women at all.
the indians as a nation ARE stupid, since they allow the situation to reach this point, but the "common" people are usually not stupid when it concerns their own survival, or they wouldn't be so common.
and wether you like it or not, it IS your problem, since hungry people bite harder.
(note I don't say sending rice or whatever is a solution, I believe technological and political methods must be used jointly, with threat of force when needed, but in any case, it IS your problem)
" Yes, the technology to get to 10,000,000 Kelvin. Plasma physicists have been working on it for a long time."
actually getting there is not a large problem, containing the plasma in that temperature at high density for long enough time is (lookup the Lawson criterion).
(I'm sure the parent poster knows this, but it may confuse unaware readers)
and D-T fusion does produce both ...
but we look for fast (Mev) neutron production to verify fusion, since they're much easier to detect.
this test was what fail F&P as well, BTW.
the term "pecking order" does not come from humans...
"Alpha Male" is a term from ape societies.
a company is usually just an adaptation of ancient structures, and guess what ? in animal societies there is also a constant testing of the leader's authority, or in other words, the animal "vasals" are constantly disatisfied:
"no animal is comfortable in its place in society"
the best thing evolutionary seems to me to be able to work in hirarchies, but have some measure of discontent.
yes, but My question is this: how many technically-gifted people do you need to maintain a spacecraft ?
say that you have a very good gene base, and given bright parents' offspring's tenedency towards the norm , what is the percentage of useful people in the populace ? how many are needed ?
I don't know, but I would take 1..10% of the population as useful and 30-300 as highly-able maintainance crew needed as a rough estimate.
this gives 300..30000 as the size of the base crew.
even in usual space craft design you take conservative estimates, not to mention in design of a century-long project.
IMHO your article deals with the minimum needed to keep social equilibrium and reproducting society.
you also need a technically able one.
"And until such probes provide proof that there is an inhabitable world at the end of the journey"
no need, you can build colonies.
and also the spectrum of your star does not matter ; you just need the energy, and use lamps or some optical aparatus to convert it to a reasonable spectrum (efficiency is not very important here).
" They'll have become emotionally acclimated to living in a confined habitat surrounded by vacuum "
exactly why they'll be able to construct a civilization in space colonies there; a space colony is exactly the kind of ship you describe, just without the sail, and you have a lot of resources for growth.
the notion of setteling down on a planet is anthropomorphic.
one more thing: my guess is the people that will embark on such a mission will come initially from a space-colonies society here in the solar system.
a small society needs laws as well as a large one.
.. 10^5 people (multi-generational teams cannot be too small ...) then they will need laws and conflict-resolution mechanisms even more than here on earth ; every small violence and every madman is a colony-survival threat.
if the ship is to be say, the size of a small city, say 10^3
the first thing you have to do is pay the rent,
feed your kids.
EVERYTHING comes after.
studying philosophy should come at a time when
survival is easy.
He just doesn't want to be killed in the rush.
;)
The problem with (initially) good TV series is the financial incentive not to shut up.
that sums up the X Files (since ~99) for me.
- they're equally important, the pencil and the eraser.
first, please lets not make this personal or impolite (regarding the "Umm... Dude.." title).
regarding cyclicity:
"All particles have antiparticles with all charges opposite is the essense of C-symmetry"
only if you accept QFT axioms; among them symmetry (C, P, T , whatever your lagrangian holds), locality and lorentz invariance (which , IIRC implies CPT )
the existance of anti-particles IN SOME FORM does not have to be inseperable from the above principles , i.e. there may be (I doubt anyone proved otherwize) other models (with no regard to experimental evidence) with some kinds of anti-particles without the theoretical base of QFT and above axioms.
this is what I mean by an explanation of some phenomenon:
there exists a model which is more "basic", i.e. applicable to and implies a wider class of phenomena then the "explained" observation, within which the phenomenon fits.
e.g. "all apples fall to the ground" is explained by Newton's model of gravity. It is not inseperable from newton's model or a different way of expressing it (hence this is not a cyclical argument).
correct me if I'm wrong
" ..We don't know why, they just do ..."
wrong, see any elementary quantum field theory book, the reason is because charge is a result of your fields being complex, and your measured quantities being real (C-symmetry).
there are real-field (=> neutral) particles , they don't have anti-particles.
(actually C-symmetry may sometime be broken but thats another story.)
" The idea is that we can use wind power, solar power, or crude oil generated power to make the antimatter here on Earth "
or use solar power to produce it in orbit around earth (easier and safer.)
"Using it as part of a fusion drive"
fusion or A.M. catalyzed fission ? the products of the fission reaction can be the only ejected mass, with incredible velocities, therefore giving high specific impulse, I do not understand how you can obtain the same S.I. with A.M. catalyzed fusion (or how exactly do you intend to use A.M. for fusion, for that matter)
"You have to have an extremely good vacuum, however"
no, that's what's surprizing about penning traps, you don't have to have a VERY strong vacuum, only that you will not have many exposed neucleons.
IIRC the thing that keeps the anti-protons and the protons in outside matter to anihilate are the orbiting electrons in the atoms. the vacuum is needed for the electromagnetic traps to keep the anti-protons from escaping.
BTW, why shouldn't you INJECT the trap with negatively charged ions (say Cl-)? these will balance your electrostatic charge. until you'll turn the matter to plasma (or inject it with protons) you will have practically no anihilations ?
in that order:
... )
1) what is the product, is it pheasible ? is it too trivial ? does a prototype even exist ?
2) what is the market for the products ? how vital is the product (especially when custumers are under economic stress)
3) how do the managerial staff strike you ? are they too non-technical ? are they too technical ? if so, do they intend to bring outside management ? what are mistakes of other start-ups they learned from ?
4) technical staff: do they have people which impress you ? who had previous publications ? who you'll learn from ? who you can work with ? (last one is hard to tell in interview
look here:
http://www.oonumerics.org
(not just blitz there)
the article forgets development costs; development of large parallel applications cannot be done on a MUCH smaller one.
my guess is the best strategy is something like:
1) devellop a prototype on a tiny cluster
2) buy (or rent) a medium-size, medium-speed cluster and iron out the network-related and paralelism-related problems.
3) then look at moore's law and the hardware roadmaps, and decide when it is best to buy the super-computer for actually solving your large-scale problem (which is what parent-comment discusses).