The problem is not only the source, but the energy density. To reduce the power, you would have to keep the density, or even increase it (because of bigger surface losses, as you said. But that opens a new problem: How to you get that much microwave energy into that small (i.e. smaller than wavelenght) reaction volume?
Well, you didnt read my post. Or should have read it better.
These arent new. The principle has existed for 20 years now. The main problem simply is that it doesnt scale down. If you would try to make a 5000 lumen version (the ones suitable for illuminating a normal-sized room), my guess would be that you would end up using 80W or more. It simply doesnt scale well.
Great to illuminate office floors with light conductors, or cinema projectors. Bad for home-lighting.
Thats why they compare to HID (which have the same main problems (10W hids are not much higher than 50lm/W, while 100W ones can get >100), with the benefit of a much better spectrum (HID makes leds seem like sunlight).
A few points, inspired by those "insightful" comments i read till up to now a) Temperature=!heat=!"OMG IT WILL KILL US!!!". You dont really want to know the "temperature" of the electron beam in your old style TV... (yeah, i know its not in thermodynamical equilibrium, and thus temperature is not defined, thus the "") b) This is nothing really new. It is based on the same principle like the old sulfure-plasma lamps in the early 90s. c) It doesnt scale down well. It needs its power provided by microwaves, which is not efficiently possible in the lower power range. d) Yeah, it uses 250W. But provides as much light as a 1500W halogen thrower. Wake up, moms basement (which you are most familiar with) isnt the world, there are plenty of things you would like to have 10ks of lumens for. e) Reinforced from d: Yeah, a 250W bulb can be energy efficent. Because it puts out a fucking lot light, numbnut. f) Doesnt compare at all with leds: Leds have low surface brightness, are effiecent and dont scale UP well. This things have a very high surface brightness, are efficient and dont scape DOWN well. Apple, meet orange. g) A better comparison would be vs HID: there they are supperior (longer lifetime, less dangerous, not much more complex driver (HIDs need a high-voltage ballast, too).
You forget the bigger problem convering wear and tear: The substrate those pins write bits onto. In nanoscale, material fatique and stuff is pretty much nonexistent, but i would be interested in seeing a millipede system that can even reach MLC-Flash levels of write cycles...
The pesimists use the same data than the optimists, with different interpredation: Richer people have less kids.
Just the optimists think everybody will get rich in the future, while the pesimists think that the dropping in resource availability will cause countries to tumble down to a pre-developed state at some time (including those nice 7.x children per woman rates we can still see in some african countries).
No, its not ironic. Counterexample: If you were just a woman trying to meet a male friend in a bar, you could be jailed in one of americas "best friends" countries. In another one, they want to enfore the sharia more strictly (because the current one isnt enough).
Because _nobody_ would have known in advance that decoding 25mbit+ of 1920x1080 h264 (a task that redlines even dual core desktop cpus) could be a battery consuming activity.
He is just a typical american idiot who believes everything he reads in the internets without checking for fakt relations.
Usage of nazi symbols is forbidden in toys. Video games are characterized as toys. Nazi flags are nazi symbols. This 3 pieves of information should explain all details of what the OP seems to think to know.
Because when this story was there a week or two ago, 90% of the comments were stupid jokes.
This is a really interesting part of surface science, which in itself is more important than people give it credit for. The force to move that atom meassured _directly_ is something new, that will also allow more educated guess on the dynamics of self-assembling layers.
To illustrate a point: All those nice pictures like shoing "IBM" in atoms are usually done on a nice surface (Pt-111), and cooled down to helium temperatures. At room temperatures, those atoms just around on a timescale faster than you can meassure a picture. This is also (or even more) the case when creating thin layers on a substrate, where there are lots of different ways for layers to grow (some substrate material combination first grow "islands", others form a single layer, and islands later, others grow layer by layer). This is hard to detect in situ (a LEED picture only shows that much...). So anything we know about those forces helps understanding this behaviour.
And yeah, about practical applications: Everything from solar cells (organic ones have _very thin_ layers in their CIGGSE sandwitch) to lithography (dielectric mirrors for EUV-lithography is a hot topic)
The density distribution is VERY non-linear. Small dense core, BIG thin shell. So the density at earth orbit may not be a lot lower than 0.25g/m^3. Lets say it would be 0.15g. Thats still more than the athmosphere density of earth in the height that columbia disintegrated. The earth is a lot faster than columbia. Plus that part of the sun at that time will be a lot hotter than earth athmosphere.
Whether it is part of the sun or not wont matter:).
Also, compare it to the density of interstellar space: Its at least 7 orders of magnitude higher. So its reasonable to dismiss those 3 orders of magnitude it is missing to the density of a "real" star.
I do? A single buisness class flight Europe->West Coast and back can buy you 3 macbook airs. The total additional cost economy->buiness amounts to about $250-300 per hour you are in the plane. For that money, i can endure it. A good laptop, otoh, will be in use for many hundred hours. At that point, the price can really be worth it.
This scenario was presented in the anime/manga planetes.
And its no horror story. Its entirely feasible. Fos something like this to happen. Well, it may not be that hours to first fatal hit but days/weeks, but the end results would be pretty much the same.
(Although a cleanup might be possible, it would be extremely expensive. At least a lot more expensive than putting those satellites up there in the first place)
Well, i am a physicist, and i have used the several synchrotrons for research.
While FELs are able to create light pulses billion times more brilliant, they are not brighter. In fact, for most experiments, this creates more problems than solutions: - XPS is near impossible because of the high charge density of the ionisation cloud (acceleration after emission warps the whole spectra) - tomography suffers from the destructive pulse behaviour (few application outside molecular tomography have simple enough systems that can be used with a single pulse) - energy range is very limited: X-ray FELs barely scatch was usually defined as "soft" x-rays. On synchrotrons, you can easitly get into the high keV range (even at a small one, like the als). - for many application you need brightness, not brilliance (XES/RIXS comes to mind): While FELS have a higher peak flux (during those short pulses), the total photons/s is not higher (or even lower) than on a undulator beamline. - Also, because of nonlinear effects depending on the flux density, the SASE principle used in all modern X-ray FELS is less than perfect: There is no way to determin the pulse strenghts of the micropulses in the the macrobunch: you either get a muddy integration, or you need electronics the discern those ns seperated pulses. -Also, an FEL is basically a single user application, while the ALS has a douzend insertion devices plus the dipol beamlines in parallel use.
While i _like_ the FEL principle (its simple and elegant), the way stuff like "billion times brighter" is thrown around is more than just missleading.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is not only the source, but the energy density.
To reduce the power, you would have to keep the density, or even increase it (because of bigger surface losses, as you said.
But that opens a new problem: How to you get that much microwave energy into that small (i.e. smaller than wavelenght) reaction volume?
Well, you didnt read my post. Or should have read it better.
These arent new. The principle has existed for 20 years now.
The main problem simply is that it doesnt scale down. If you would try to make a 5000 lumen version (the ones suitable for illuminating a normal-sized room), my guess would be that you would end up using 80W or more. It simply doesnt scale well.
Great to illuminate office floors with light conductors, or cinema projectors.
Bad for home-lighting.
Thats why they compare to HID (which have the same main problems (10W hids are not much higher than 50lm/W, while 100W ones can get >100), with the benefit of a much better spectrum (HID makes leds seem like sunlight).
A few points, inspired by those "insightful" comments i read till up to now
a) Temperature=!heat=!"OMG IT WILL KILL US!!!". You dont really want to know the "temperature" of the electron beam in your old style TV... (yeah, i know its not in thermodynamical equilibrium, and thus temperature is not defined, thus the "")
b) This is nothing really new. It is based on the same principle like the old sulfure-plasma lamps in the early 90s.
c) It doesnt scale down well. It needs its power provided by microwaves, which is not efficiently possible in the lower power range.
d) Yeah, it uses 250W. But provides as much light as a 1500W halogen thrower. Wake up, moms basement (which you are most familiar with) isnt the world, there are plenty of things you would like to have 10ks of lumens for.
e) Reinforced from d: Yeah, a 250W bulb can be energy efficent. Because it puts out a fucking lot light, numbnut.
f) Doesnt compare at all with leds: Leds have low surface brightness, are effiecent and dont scale UP well. This things have a very high surface brightness, are efficient and dont scape DOWN well. Apple, meet orange.
g) A better comparison would be vs HID: there they are supperior (longer lifetime, less dangerous, not much more complex driver (HIDs need a high-voltage ballast, too).
As a fellow european, i have to put in a word:
You are dumb, and your original post a petty complained.
Go away.
You forget the bigger problem convering wear and tear: The substrate those pins write bits onto.
In nanoscale, material fatique and stuff is pretty much nonexistent, but i would be interested in seeing a millipede system that can even reach MLC-Flash levels of write cycles...
Quad CPU Opteron boards supporting 64 DIMMs arent unheard of.
Sun had released a 8-socket board with 128 DIMMS (and claims future 4DB Dimm support -> 512 Gbyte RAM).
Thats bull, really.
The pesimists use the same data than the optimists, with different interpredation:
Richer people have less kids.
Just the optimists think everybody will get rich in the future, while the pesimists think that the dropping in resource availability will cause countries to tumble down to a pre-developed state at some time (including those nice 7.x children per woman rates we can still see in some african countries).
No, its not ironic.
Counterexample:
If you were just a woman trying to meet a male friend in a bar, you could be jailed in one of americas "best friends" countries.
In another one, they want to enfore the sharia more strictly (because the current one isnt enough).
No problems with anybody there...
Calculate it down:
This would be equivalent to 125mW per Gbit ethernet port.
IIRC, current implementations are a factor of 10-30 above that value.
You mean like the chinese cisco shit cisco sells to everybody?
If yes, then, yeah, it does.
Sorry if you have an ocular deficite, but thats still no reason to fuck with other people.
What he did relates to "phreaking" like burning down a server rack relates to "hacking".
There is a word for that kind of people. Its "sociopaths". Dont believe me? Look it up.
Because _nobody_ would have known in advance that decoding 25mbit+ of 1920x1080 h264 (a task that redlines even dual core desktop cpus) could be a battery consuming activity.
He aint correct, you typical american idiot.
(if your weren't one, you would spot the difference between the facts and what he (or you) thinks)
He is just a typical american idiot who believes everything he reads in the internets without checking for fakt relations.
Usage of nazi symbols is forbidden in toys. Video games are characterized as toys. Nazi flags are nazi symbols.
This 3 pieves of information should explain all details of what the OP seems to think to know.
Because when this story was there a week or two ago, 90% of the comments were stupid jokes.
This is a really interesting part of surface science, which in itself is more important than people give it credit for.
The force to move that atom meassured _directly_ is something new, that will also allow more educated guess on the dynamics of self-assembling layers.
To illustrate a point: All those nice pictures like shoing "IBM" in atoms are usually done on a nice surface (Pt-111), and cooled down to helium temperatures. At room temperatures, those atoms just around on a timescale faster than you can meassure a picture.
This is also (or even more) the case when creating thin layers on a substrate, where there are lots of different ways for layers to grow (some substrate material combination first grow "islands", others form a single layer, and islands later, others grow layer by layer). This is hard to detect in situ (a LEED picture only shows that much...). So anything we know about those forces helps understanding this behaviour.
And yeah, about practical applications: Everything from solar cells (organic ones have _very thin_ layers in their CIGGSE sandwitch) to lithography (dielectric mirrors for EUV-lithography is a hot topic)
The density distribution is VERY non-linear. Small dense core, BIG thin shell.
:).
So the density at earth orbit may not be a lot lower than 0.25g/m^3.
Lets say it would be 0.15g.
Thats still more than the athmosphere density of earth in the height that columbia disintegrated.
The earth is a lot faster than columbia. Plus that part of the sun at that time will be a lot hotter than earth athmosphere.
Whether it is part of the sun or not wont matter
Also, compare it to the density of interstellar space: Its at least 7 orders of magnitude higher. So its reasonable to dismiss those 3 orders of magnitude it is missing to the density of a "real" star.
Oh, so you manage to spend more than everybody else even _without_ fancy new bombers.
See how that doesnt help your argument one bit.
You surely doent have NiMh in your laptop.
And i have yet to see an USV thats not running on sealed lead acid.
I do?
A single buisness class flight Europe->West Coast and back can buy you 3 macbook airs.
The total additional cost economy->buiness amounts to about $250-300 per hour you are in the plane. For that money, i can endure it. A good laptop, otoh, will be in use for many hundred hours. At that point, the price can really be worth it.
This scenario was presented in the anime/manga planetes.
And its no horror story. Its entirely feasible. Fos something like this to happen. Well, it may not be that hours to first fatal hit but days/weeks, but the end results would be pretty much the same.
(Although a cleanup might be possible, it would be extremely expensive. At least a lot more expensive than putting those satellites up there in the first place)
Sorry, but make that 5% a months, and you might touch the truth.
More like a "dont look into LED with remaining eye!"
My grandfather also still makes basket from willow wickers.
They are more durable than plastic ones, repairable, and look nices.
He is still obsolete in doing so.
(and i dont get those "more features" part. Are you talking about your bugs?)
Well, i am a physicist, and i have used the several synchrotrons for research.
While FELs are able to create light pulses billion times more brilliant, they are not brighter.
In fact, for most experiments, this creates more problems than solutions:
- XPS is near impossible because of the high charge density of the ionisation cloud (acceleration after emission warps the whole spectra)
- tomography suffers from the destructive pulse behaviour (few application outside molecular tomography have simple enough systems that can be used with a single pulse)
- energy range is very limited: X-ray FELs barely scatch was usually defined as "soft" x-rays. On synchrotrons, you can easitly get into the high keV range (even at a small one, like the als).
- for many application you need brightness, not brilliance (XES/RIXS comes to mind): While FELS have a higher peak flux (during those short pulses), the total photons/s is not higher (or even lower) than on a undulator beamline.
- Also, because of nonlinear effects depending on the flux density, the SASE principle used in all modern X-ray FELS is less than perfect: There is no way to determin the pulse strenghts of the micropulses in the the macrobunch: you either get a muddy integration, or you need electronics the discern those ns seperated pulses.
-Also, an FEL is basically a single user application, while the ALS has a douzend insertion devices plus the dipol beamlines in parallel use.
While i _like_ the FEL principle (its simple and elegant), the way stuff like "billion times brighter" is thrown around is more than just missleading.
But the ALS is more useful.
AND the dont have a fucking tree as a mascot.