The raw material might be worth very little, but I bet processed ore would be worth quite a bit.
Raw material or processed ore wouldn't be worth the bother on Earth.
At the top of the gravity well, on the other hand, it could be worth quite a lot, potentially. It's easier to reach Earth orbit from 16 Psyche than from the Earth, looks like. Takes longer, of course, but less deltaV.
And that ignores high Isp options that are available to 16 Psyche that aren't available from the ground....
Risks of war?? Obama was, I think, the first two-term President who was at war fior every day of his two terms.
Note that Johnson was also at war every day of his Presidency, but he didn't have two complete terms. And it's possible that Roosevelt was at war more days total than Obama, but he had three and change terms to work with....
Note that Manning was NOT pardoned. His (her?) sentence was commuted. So, he/she still has a criminal record, can't exercise his/her full rights as a citizen (RKBA is gone, for instance, in spite of firearms being completely irrelevant to his crime).
A sentence commutation just means he/she gets out of jail sooner. Not at all the same as a pardon.
Back in the tycoon days you had basically unfettered capitalism. Because of that, big tycoons were able to set their way even to buy government
Umm, it's NOT "unfettered capitalism" if you can buy governments. The act of buying special privileges from the government is pretty much the opposite of "unfettered capitalism".
Do remember that the kind of government you can buy monopolies and such from is strong enough that capitalism is pretty much automatically fettered by the government. So what you're describing as "unfettered capitalism" is actually "corrupt government" pointing fingers away from themselves....
That's because heavy duty vehicles in the EU have much stricter regulations than cars, and so even if they meet lab tests, cars end up producing much more nitrogen oxides (NOx) when driven on actual roads.
I Know commenting on the headline is fashionable, but not even getting to the second sentence is a bit extreme even for/.
On the plus side, those of us who are missing certain key internal organs (spleen, gall bladder, and pancreas, in my case) would be delighted to have an artificial organ or three to replace the pills and/or injections we have to take multiple times a day just to stay alive....
66000 tons of CO2 @ ~1kg-CO2 per KW-hr electricity means that this plant is either a 7.5 MW plant, or a very large fraction of the CO2 is dumped to atmosphere like any other power plant.
A quick google tells me that that power plant is actually five units totaling 1050 MW. Assuming one unit has the converter installed, that translates to 5% of the CO2 sequestered, and 95% still escaping to atmosphere (assuming I can add at this hour of the morning, while the coffee is still in the pot and not in me).
Which makes this worse than natural gas power plants (which are not good enough to actually stop AGW or anything, they just slow down the onset), much less nuclear, solar, wind, tide....
It should be noted that we're not in a real hurry about getting an asteroid into Earth orbit. So ion drives (Isp a holy hell of a lot higher than 450 - we've already built them in the Isp 5000 range) would be fine for the purpose. Alternately, an Orion model would work - pop a few (dozen) small nukes off next to the rock...
All that aside, this is just an example of the sort of thing that Presidents do to build a "legacy" - if we pay any attention to it, and in a hundred years we deflect a rock, it's all due to the foresight of Mr. Obama. If we ignore it (as we probably should at this point. Maybe in 20-50 years we should start thinking slightly more seriously about the subject), and a rock smacks us, people can point and say "if only we had listened to Mr. Obama!!! He would have saved us!!!!"
and if there is an accident your on your own even more so with the GOP healthcare plan. You where in an taxi cash why should we have to pay out you need to sue the taxi co.
you're
were
a
cab
Plus a couple of missing periods.
Yes, I know you wanted to contradict someone, but that doesn't really work well when you come across as illiterate....
The solution is to actually ENFORCE the rules, not discard them.
True enough, if the rules serve some useful purpose (other than serving as an excuse to ticket people). If, however, it's safer driving at 110 mph (175 km/hr) than at 65 mph (110 km/hr), then perhaps the rules should be discarded in favour of the safer (but higher) speeds.
And, FWIW, yes, I also live in a place where driving the speed limit will get you killed, since most traffic is going considerably over the speed limit most of the time. Actually driving the speed limit here would be dangerous as all hell....
As a matter of definition, a US citizen or person can only commit treason by giving aid or comfort to an enemy at a time of war declared by Congress.
Umm, no.
Article 3: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
Note that the phrase "declared war" isn't included. Note that "adhering to their Enemies" IS included, and doesn't imply a state of war....
Now, now. Japan *need* to be able to launch a "communications satellite" at very short notice from a mobile platform.
Or a recon satellite. Seriously, recon sats are one of the few types of satellite that you really need to be able to launch on short notice. Sometimes REALLY short notice....
At present, no, not near Earth's gravity well, at least. The added mass of the cavity thrusters would probably increase gravitational force more than the tiny force they produce.
Unless you're talking takeoff from the ground, the extra mass of the cavity thrusters is meaningless. Because you're pushing in the direction of motion to reach a higher orbit (or against it, if you want a lower orbit).
The only question to be answered about "multiple EM drives" (assuming they work at all, of course) is "do we gain enough thrust to make it worth the bother?" Answer is "probably", unless the EM drive unit outmasses the satellite it's attached to (or the satellite + multiple EM drives is massive enough that your launch vehicle can't get it up there....)
From my limited KSP playing experience, the biggest drawback for solid fuel propulsion is the inability to throttle back (or shut down) the rocket.
I have seen a growing number of non-booster stages that use solid rocket fuel systems. Has this problem been solved?
Well, yes and no. A solid-fuel rocket cannot be throttled. But a hybrid system (solid fuel plus liquid oxidizer) can be throttled and/or shutdown, by throttling the flow of oxidizer.
It's got some of the advantages of solid fuel, and some of the advantages of liquid fuel.
Unfortunately, it's also got some of the disadvantages of both solid and liquid fuel, which is why not much effort has really been put into it much past proof-of-concept....
Good rule of thumb: if you can't spell a word, you should avoid trying to use it in writing - it makes you look like someone trying to qualify for the B-Ark....
Once FB statrs censoring "news", they are opening themselves up for legal liability for anything they let by.
Because it's hard to argue "it's not our fault! It was one of our customers that posted that libelous comment about ***whomever***!" when you're making it your business to censor anything and everything that might get some pol upset.
Safe Harbor provision?? Doesn't apply once you start censoring things. Yeah, this'll work so well. For the lawyers, at least. It'll get them LOTS of new business....
Slashdot Mirror
Raw material or processed ore wouldn't be worth the bother on Earth.
At the top of the gravity well, on the other hand, it could be worth quite a lot, potentially. It's easier to reach Earth orbit from 16 Psyche than from the Earth, looks like. Takes longer, of course, but less deltaV.
And that ignores high Isp options that are available to 16 Psyche that aren't available from the ground....
Risks of war?? Obama was, I think, the first two-term President who was at war fior every day of his two terms.
Note that Johnson was also at war every day of his Presidency, but he didn't have two complete terms. And it's possible that Roosevelt was at war more days total than Obama, but he had three and change terms to work with....
Yes, one of those things is that people could learn to spell in primary school.
Or does it really cost all that much to make a piece of art that is assembled from a variety of different forms?
Well, and what about MY pretty happ? That's what I want to know.
Or...perhaps you can't spell "they're"? Never mind....
Nonsense!
Assange promised to turn himself in if Manning were PARDONED. Manning was not pardoned, Manning's sentence was commuted. Not the same thing at all.
Which leaves Assange under no commitment to turn himself in.
HE committed a crime. SHE is getting her sentence commuted.
If the sex change had happened before the crime, I wouldn't be using he/she at all. If it had not happened before the commutation, likewise....
Note that Manning was NOT pardoned. His (her?) sentence was commuted. So, he/she still has a criminal record, can't exercise his/her full rights as a citizen (RKBA is gone, for instance, in spite of firearms being completely irrelevant to his crime).
A sentence commutation just means he/she gets out of jail sooner. Not at all the same as a pardon.
Umm, it's NOT "unfettered capitalism" if you can buy governments. The act of buying special privileges from the government is pretty much the opposite of "unfettered capitalism".
Do remember that the kind of government you can buy monopolies and such from is strong enough that capitalism is pretty much automatically fettered by the government. So what you're describing as "unfettered capitalism" is actually "corrupt government" pointing fingers away from themselves....
So, if most everyone is unemployed, just where are the CEO and MBAs selling what the company makes?
Okay. 655671 days.
Note that the above number is precise, but not necessarily accurate. There IS a difference....
Second sentence of summary:
I Know commenting on the headline is fashionable, but not even getting to the second sentence is a bit extreme even for /.
On the plus side, those of us who are missing certain key internal organs (spleen, gall bladder, and pancreas, in my case) would be delighted to have an artificial organ or three to replace the pills and/or injections we have to take multiple times a day just to stay alive....
66000 tons of CO2 @ ~1kg-CO2 per KW-hr electricity means that this plant is either a 7.5 MW plant, or a very large fraction of the CO2 is dumped to atmosphere like any other power plant.
A quick google tells me that that power plant is actually five units totaling 1050 MW. Assuming one unit has the converter installed, that translates to 5% of the CO2 sequestered, and 95% still escaping to atmosphere (assuming I can add at this hour of the morning, while the coffee is still in the pot and not in me).
Which makes this worse than natural gas power plants (which are not good enough to actually stop AGW or anything, they just slow down the onset), much less nuclear, solar, wind, tide....
It should be noted that we're not in a real hurry about getting an asteroid into Earth orbit. So ion drives (Isp a holy hell of a lot higher than 450 - we've already built them in the Isp 5000 range) would be fine for the purpose. Alternately, an Orion model would work - pop a few (dozen) small nukes off next to the rock...
All that aside, this is just an example of the sort of thing that Presidents do to build a "legacy" - if we pay any attention to it, and in a hundred years we deflect a rock, it's all due to the foresight of Mr. Obama. If we ignore it (as we probably should at this point. Maybe in 20-50 years we should start thinking slightly more seriously about the subject), and a rock smacks us, people can point and say "if only we had listened to Mr. Obama!!! He would have saved us!!!!"
you're
were
a
cab
Plus a couple of missing periods.
Yes, I know you wanted to contradict someone, but that doesn't really work well when you come across as illiterate....
And the rest of us thank you for removing your genes from the genepool.
True enough, if the rules serve some useful purpose (other than serving as an excuse to ticket people). If, however, it's safer driving at 110 mph (175 km/hr) than at 65 mph (110 km/hr), then perhaps the rules should be discarded in favour of the safer (but higher) speeds.
And, FWIW, yes, I also live in a place where driving the speed limit will get you killed, since most traffic is going considerably over the speed limit most of the time. Actually driving the speed limit here would be dangerous as all hell....
Umm, no.
Article 3: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
Note that the phrase "declared war" isn't included. Note that "adhering to their Enemies" IS included, and doesn't imply a state of war....
Or a recon satellite. Seriously, recon sats are one of the few types of satellite that you really need to be able to launch on short notice. Sometimes REALLY short notice....
Unless you're talking takeoff from the ground, the extra mass of the cavity thrusters is meaningless. Because you're pushing in the direction of motion to reach a higher orbit (or against it, if you want a lower orbit).
The only question to be answered about "multiple EM drives" (assuming they work at all, of course) is "do we gain enough thrust to make it worth the bother?" Answer is "probably", unless the EM drive unit outmasses the satellite it's attached to (or the satellite + multiple EM drives is massive enough that your launch vehicle can't get it up there....)
Well, yes and no. A solid-fuel rocket cannot be throttled. But a hybrid system (solid fuel plus liquid oxidizer) can be throttled and/or shutdown, by throttling the flow of oxidizer.
It's got some of the advantages of solid fuel, and some of the advantages of liquid fuel.
Unfortunately, it's also got some of the disadvantages of both solid and liquid fuel, which is why not much effort has really been put into it much past proof-of-concept....
"Your purpose is not to die for your country. Your purpose is to make the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
If you think that making war is all about being "fair", you're doing it wrong....
Voila.
Good rule of thumb: if you can't spell a word, you should avoid trying to use it in writing - it makes you look like someone trying to qualify for the B-Ark....
Not actually any evidence they "directly altered" the outcome of an election.
Or is there some evidence they monkeyed with voting machines? If so, which ones did they monkey with?
But if you're just talking PR, well, lots of people do PR to influence elections in the USA. Including the Democrats and Republicans.....
Once FB statrs censoring "news", they are opening themselves up for legal liability for anything they let by.
Because it's hard to argue "it's not our fault! It was one of our customers that posted that libelous comment about ***whomever***!" when you're making it your business to censor anything and everything that might get some pol upset.
Safe Harbor provision?? Doesn't apply once you start censoring things. Yeah, this'll work so well. For the lawyers, at least. It'll get them LOTS of new business....