Are you saying she should have? I thought it was all about the "woman's right to choose" with the abortion crowd.
Seriously. Choosing to have a child with Down's Syndrome is brave and not something any pro-choice advocate should have a problem with. They might suspect that she was pressured into it by her community/party/husband/church, but that'd be a concern, not a reason to condemn the decision.
No. The problem pro-choice women will have with Palin isn't that she chose not to abort a baby with Down's. The problem they will have is that she would like to deny them the opportunity to choose in the same situation.
For the parent: I'm getting a sense of whooshiness from your comment. Not a strong sense but just a definite tingle.
Yeah, see, the joke was he was typing a bunch of exclamation marks in the typical joking fashion of the kiddie pounding on the 1 key including even typing out 'eleventy', and see i chose to act like the leading 1s were just un-shifted exclamation marks, so 9/11 becomes 9/, and now I had to explain it so nm.
I don't want creationism taught in a science class
Then you're talking about something different than what other people are talking about. There are people out there, people in power, who want to teach creationism as science -- some using the paper-thin disguise of Intelligent Design, some not even bothering with that -- and that's who most of us are trying to keep at arms length.
Uh, I doubt many Hillary supporters are going to vote for someone so strongly pro-life. Just a guess, but I think it's safe. There will be some loss, but not much.
Frankly I don't see this pick as shoring up the McCain ticket much except in terms of solidifying his base.
That's not what the Constitution says. Besides, I learned about different belief systems back in public high school in my world history class. You can't ignore religion and the Constitution doesn't require that it be ignored.
Yeah, history class, not science class. You want to teach different theologies in history class? Be my guest. I loved learning about all the Abrahamic religions in my high school world history class.
You want to teach that in science class? Screw you, you're not teaching your religion as though it's science.
I have recently attended a talk given by Belcher and one of the major struggles they have faced is that they cannot make the cathode using the same strategies they used to formulate the anode, so I foresee this battery still to be far off in the future.
Maybe, it sounds like they're making progress. It's actually the cathode that they claim to have prototypes of (the anode and electrolyte apparently being more complete). It isn't clear if the "full working battery" they are talking about is using one of those prototypes or a stand-in cathode.
With regards to being "mega-efficient", notice how no numbers are mentioned in either article. Belcher in her talk has stated that these new batteries are about a 10-20% improvement in charge capacity from current Li-Ion batteries. Even then, they are still facing problems with maintaining charge capacity over many charge-discharge cycles, which drops off faster than current rechargeables.
Yeah, I have no idea if these will actually represent any significant improvement in batteries by itself. It's actually the manufacturing technique that seems like it is the most exciting.
Also - calling them virus batteries is quite the misnomer. The charge carriers are actually long DNA strands with high affinity to certain metal oxides.
Sure, the viruses are just part of their method of creating the devices. It sounds cooler so I'll run with it.:)
When mentioning Diebold, it is always crucial to mention that they now call themselves Premier Election Systems, in an attempt to make people forget that they are "that" company.... you know, the one with broken and insecure voting machines.
But that doesn't make any sense! Our consultant from Accenture assures us that Premier Election Systems has a terrific and unblemished reputation, and has nothing to do with the disgrace that was Diebold's voting machine division!
"Prototypes" mean something specific to us too.. and it isn't "2 out of 3 critical components, not even integrated yet".
Actually, it can, because they can be prototypes of the components. Two of which have been integrated. And they've made full, working batteries, just not using their cathode technology yet.
Why don't you just RTFA instead of continuing to poo-poo their accomplishment based on a single word taken out of context, the first one you latched onto not even existing in the article? Right, right, I must be new here.
"A much-buzzed-about paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences earlier this month details the team's success in creating two of the three parts of a working battery--the positively charged anode and the electrolyte. But team leader Angela Belcher told PM Wednesday that the team has been seriously working on cathode technology for the past year, creating several complete prototypes. "
"The cathode material has been a little more difficult, but we have several different candidates, and we have made full, working batteries."
They've actually built things, that work, though the 3rd component the cathode is still apparently a work in progress. The summary says "models", which of course means something specific to/.ers, but that isn't the reality reflected in the articles.
For one, your lego battery wouldn't even work in theory. An actual scientific model is supposed to represent what would work as well as possible.
For two, they aren't just using a model. They've actual built components of this.
" A much-buzzed-about paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences earlier this month details the team's success in creating two of the three parts of a working battery--the positively charged anode and the electrolyte. But team leader Angela Belcher told PM Wednesday that the team has been seriously working on cathode technology for the past year, creating several complete prototypes. "
" The M13 viruses used by the team can't reproduce by themselves and are only capable of infecting bacteria. At just 880 nanometers long--500 times smaller than a grain of salt--the bugs allow researchers to work at room temperatures and pressures with molecular precision, using and wasting fewer hazardous materials in the process. Now that they've demonstrated the construction of such tiny electronic components is possible, the challenge facing researchers is how to make them practical."
As in the virus "inside part" is actually done. They've also got the anode construction done. They're working on the cathode.
This is a practical engineering project at this point. This is news. Who knows if it will end up "practical", but nevertheless it is real whether you rtfa or not.
Like the good folks at iRacing, I also feel that iShitting should not be called a simple MMO. I have devised my own clever acronym that captures all that iShitting is: MMSGBMBMSOPF (Massively Multishitter Stinky Gigantic Brown Messy Bowel Movement Simulated Online Production Facility).
Hey, that's neat, it's an acronym and an onomatopoeia.
Come on. Oh we are too good to be called a game, but come play it. Give me a break.
Yeah, it may be a publicity stunt, but I don't know if it's a well thought-out one. Is the number of people who want something even more extreme than present racing sims really that large? How many of those are going to readily say "Why yes I -am- an elitist, thank you for marketing to me"?
I read the headline and translated it as "New Racing Simulation Distances Itself From Money".
I've not replaced it with a reluctance or an impedance, I've simply followed what the OP was talking about - that you could deliver twice the power by doubling the voltage without changing the gauge of the lines.
But the transmission line does have an impedance. And Vrms = Irms*Z. You don't necessarily have to change the gauge of the lines, but if you're running against the current limit of the wire, then you will.
Now the load impedance would have to reduce to achieve this.
That seems fairly unrealistic. I had assumed that they were talking about only upping the voltage on the transmission line to provide more power to the same end-point grid, i.e. the same appliances et al that make up the load.
I think where you're getting confused is you're thinking of W= V^2/R, therefore a square relationship between the power and the wattage. However this isn't what we're talking about because in that equation/circuit I is also increasing it's just that the equation has been solved to remove I from the equation.
Yes, I is increasing because of Ohm's Law. P = V^2/R = I^2*R = V*I, they're all the same. That's in a purely resistive DC circuit. In an AC circuit it is similar, you're just dealing with rms values and a complex impedance.
The other poster explained why this isn't as bad, which is that the transmission line itself is only a portion of the total circuit. Nevertheless, voltage and current are related, and you can't just crank the voltage up arbitrarily without worrying about the current capacity of your wires.
Last I heard watts was volts times amps, so yes it does work that way.
Only if volts and amps are independent, which they aren't, even in an AC transmission line. Just because you've replaced a constant resistance with a frequency and phase dependent impedance doesn't change that.
No, it doesn't. You can't up the voltage without increasing the current with the same resistance. Or in the case of an AC circuit, the impedance which is still a characteristic of the wire at a given frequency. Ohm's Law, you may have heard of it? If you double the average voltage without changing anything else, you double the average current.
It is not an unfortunate and unnecessary mistake on the part of power transmission engineers that high voltage power lines are larger than the power cord to your desk lamp, okay?
For some applications, like extremely high voltage and long distance transmission lines, yes it can be better.
For shorter distances, like distributing power through your house and the local neighborhoods, AC works better. The limiting factors of AC power are capacitance and phase alignment of the forward and return paths, and only become problems at high voltages and long distances. Otherwise the linear voltage decrease over distance due to resistance makes DC worse. Also DC transformers are more expensive, so you don't want to have to put one on every street corner. So there's an economic reason why DC works better over long distances and not so much for local delivery.
I think that for the problem they were trying to solve, Edison was still wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you saying she should have? I thought it was all about the "woman's right to choose" with the abortion crowd.
Seriously. Choosing to have a child with Down's Syndrome is brave and not something any pro-choice advocate should have a problem with. They might suspect that she was pressured into it by her community/party/husband/church, but that'd be a concern, not a reason to condemn the decision.
No. The problem pro-choice women will have with Palin isn't that she chose not to abort a baby with Down's. The problem they will have is that she would like to deny them the opportunity to choose in the same situation.
For the parent: I'm getting a sense of whooshiness from your comment. Not a strong sense but just a definite tingle.
Yeah, see, the joke was he was typing a bunch of exclamation marks in the typical joking fashion of the kiddie pounding on the 1 key including even typing out 'eleventy', and see i chose to act like the leading 1s were just un-shifted exclamation marks, so 9/11 becomes 9/, and now I had to explain it so nm.
Or it might go corkscrewing off towards the nearest building and everyone will be all "9/11!!!eleventy!!!"
"9/"? Why would people be yelling "9/" for?
I don't want creationism taught in a science class
Then you're talking about something different than what other people are talking about. There are people out there, people in power, who want to teach creationism as science -- some using the paper-thin disguise of Intelligent Design, some not even bothering with that -- and that's who most of us are trying to keep at arms length.
Uh, I doubt many Hillary supporters are going to vote for someone so strongly pro-life. Just a guess, but I think it's safe. There will be some loss, but not much.
Frankly I don't see this pick as shoring up the McCain ticket much except in terms of solidifying his base.
That's not what the Constitution says. Besides, I learned about different belief systems back in public high school in my world history class. You can't ignore religion and the Constitution doesn't require that it be ignored.
Yeah, history class, not science class. You want to teach different theologies in history class? Be my guest. I loved learning about all the Abrahamic religions in my high school world history class.
You want to teach that in science class? Screw you, you're not teaching your religion as though it's science.
Yes, that's what we in the humor biz call "the joke".
I have recently attended a talk given by Belcher and one of the major struggles they have faced is that they cannot make the cathode using the same strategies they used to formulate the anode, so I foresee this battery still to be far off in the future.
Maybe, it sounds like they're making progress. It's actually the cathode that they claim to have prototypes of (the anode and electrolyte apparently being more complete). It isn't clear if the "full working battery" they are talking about is using one of those prototypes or a stand-in cathode.
With regards to being "mega-efficient", notice how no numbers are mentioned in either article. Belcher in her talk has stated that these new batteries are about a 10-20% improvement in charge capacity from current Li-Ion batteries. Even then, they are still facing problems with maintaining charge capacity over many charge-discharge cycles, which drops off faster than current rechargeables.
Yeah, I have no idea if these will actually represent any significant improvement in batteries by itself. It's actually the manufacturing technique that seems like it is the most exciting.
Also - calling them virus batteries is quite the misnomer. The charge carriers are actually long DNA strands with high affinity to certain metal oxides.
Sure, the viruses are just part of their method of creating the devices. It sounds cooler so I'll run with it. :)
When mentioning Diebold, it is always crucial to mention that they now call themselves Premier Election Systems, in an attempt to make people forget that they are "that" company.... you know, the one with broken and insecure voting machines.
But that doesn't make any sense! Our consultant from Accenture assures us that Premier Election Systems has a terrific and unblemished reputation, and has nothing to do with the disgrace that was Diebold's voting machine division!
"Prototypes" mean something specific to us too.. and it isn't "2 out of 3 critical components, not even integrated yet".
Actually, it can, because they can be prototypes of the components. Two of which have been integrated. And they've made full, working batteries, just not using their cathode technology yet.
Why don't you just RTFA instead of continuing to poo-poo their accomplishment based on a single word taken out of context, the first one you latched onto not even existing in the article? Right, right, I must be new here.
"A much-buzzed-about paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences earlier this month details the team's success in creating two of the three parts of a working battery--the positively charged anode and the electrolyte. But team leader Angela Belcher told PM Wednesday that the team has been seriously working on cathode technology for the past year, creating several complete prototypes. "
"The cathode material has been a little more difficult, but we have several different candidates, and we have made full, working batteries."
They've actually built things, that work, though the 3rd component the cathode is still apparently a work in progress. The summary says "models", which of course means something specific to /.ers, but that isn't the reality reflected in the articles.
No.
For one, your lego battery wouldn't even work in theory. An actual scientific model is supposed to represent what would work as well as possible.
For two, they aren't just using a model. They've actual built components of this.
"
A much-buzzed-about paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences earlier this month details the team's success in creating two of the three parts of a working battery--the positively charged anode and the electrolyte. But team leader Angela Belcher told PM Wednesday that the team has been seriously working on cathode technology for the past year, creating several complete prototypes. "
"
The M13 viruses used by the team can't reproduce by themselves and are only capable of infecting bacteria. At just 880 nanometers long--500 times smaller than a grain of salt--the bugs allow researchers to work at room temperatures and pressures with molecular precision, using and wasting fewer hazardous materials in the process. Now that they've demonstrated the construction of such tiny electronic components is possible, the challenge facing researchers is how to make them practical."
As in the virus "inside part" is actually done. They've also got the anode construction done. They're working on the cathode.
This is a practical engineering project at this point. This is news. Who knows if it will end up "practical", but nevertheless it is real whether you rtfa or not.
Like the good folks at iRacing, I also feel that iShitting should not be called a simple MMO. I have devised my own clever acronym that captures all that iShitting is: MMSGBMBMSOPF (Massively Multishitter Stinky Gigantic Brown Messy Bowel Movement Simulated Online Production Facility).
Hey, that's neat, it's an acronym and an onomatopoeia.
Come on. Oh we are too good to be called a game, but come play it. Give me a break.
Yeah, it may be a publicity stunt, but I don't know if it's a well thought-out one. Is the number of people who want something even more extreme than present racing sims really that large? How many of those are going to readily say "Why yes I -am- an elitist, thank you for marketing to me"?
I read the headline and translated it as "New Racing Simulation Distances Itself From Money".
The part about Dave Matthew's Band not being named after a real person was supposed to be the "tell" that let you know I was being silly. :)
I've not replaced it with a reluctance or an impedance, I've simply followed what the OP was talking about - that you could deliver twice the power by doubling the voltage without changing the gauge of the lines.
But the transmission line does have an impedance. And Vrms = Irms*Z. You don't necessarily have to change the gauge of the lines, but if you're running against the current limit of the wire, then you will.
Now the load impedance would have to reduce to achieve this.
That seems fairly unrealistic. I had assumed that they were talking about only upping the voltage on the transmission line to provide more power to the same end-point grid, i.e. the same appliances et al that make up the load.
I think where you're getting confused is you're thinking of W= V^2/R, therefore a square relationship between the power and the wattage. However this isn't what we're talking about because in that equation/circuit I is also increasing it's just that the equation has been solved to remove I from the equation.
Yes, I is increasing because of Ohm's Law. P = V^2/R = I^2*R = V*I, they're all the same. That's in a purely resistive DC circuit. In an AC circuit it is similar, you're just dealing with rms values and a complex impedance.
The other poster explained why this isn't as bad, which is that the transmission line itself is only a portion of the total circuit. Nevertheless, voltage and current are related, and you can't just crank the voltage up arbitrarily without worrying about the current capacity of your wires.
But you had intent to deceive, you constructed a series of statements to knowingly give an impression that was not true.
Uh yeah that was his point. He was truthful, in that everything he said was true, but not honest.
Last I heard watts was volts times amps, so yes it does work that way.
Only if volts and amps are independent, which they aren't, even in an AC transmission line. Just because you've replaced a constant resistance with a frequency and phase dependent impedance doesn't change that.
That's a myth propagated by the liberal media.
No, it doesn't. You can't up the voltage without increasing the current with the same resistance. Or in the case of an AC circuit, the impedance which is still a characteristic of the wire at a given frequency. Ohm's Law, you may have heard of it? If you double the average voltage without changing anything else, you double the average current.
It is not an unfortunate and unnecessary mistake on the part of power transmission engineers that high voltage power lines are larger than the power cord to your desk lamp, okay?
For some applications, like extremely high voltage and long distance transmission lines, yes it can be better.
For shorter distances, like distributing power through your house and the local neighborhoods, AC works better. The limiting factors of AC power are capacitance and phase alignment of the forward and return paths, and only become problems at high voltages and long distances. Otherwise the linear voltage decrease over distance due to resistance makes DC worse. Also DC transformers are more expensive, so you don't want to have to put one on every street corner. So there's an economic reason why DC works better over long distances and not so much for local delivery.
I think that for the problem they were trying to solve, Edison was still wrong.
Double the voltage => double the power, but at the same *current*. The wire size can be the same.
Electricity does not work that way!
NEXT-GAME sucks and so do people who play it. Everyone who has a brain plays OBSCURE-GAME, it's so much better.
Nonsense. None of those people exist. Especially not Dave Matthews; he exists less than the others do. What were you thinking?
Thanks, but I can't go. My Future Passport was revoked, so I'm stuck in the past.