Well, it has been perfect for me... Tungsten Carbide is what they use to make cutting tools for lathes and mills. It is totally scratch resistant and will keep its mirror finish even if you scrape it back and forth on concrete. It was particularly appropriate (geeky) for me because I used lots of tungsten in my Ph.D. research on cyclotron ion sources.
You can buy tungsten carbide rings at Walmart for like $40.:)
I guess that would make a physics processor the nail gun. Or something... I would think of it more like switching from the flat-head bit to the phillips bit. Same tool, with a fun new attachment.:)
(sorry, I have fixed the formatting in the previous post)
> how close does this reaction come to break-even?
Lets see... we put about 10 watts of power in and got something less than 10,000 neutrons/second out. At 2.5 MeV per neutron, that is about 4e-9 Watts out.
So, not close.
> Does it look like the apparatus could be modified > to pass this point (i.e. is the limitation based > on physics or engineering)?"
There is no physics limitation that I know of - it looks like a (hard) engineering question.
> how close does this reaction come to break-even?
Lets see... we put about 10 watts of power in and got something less than 10,000 neutrons/second out. At 2.5 MeV per neutron, that is about 4e-9 Watts out.
So, not close.
> Does it look like the apparatus could be modified
> to pass this point (i.e. is the limitation based
> on physics or engineering)?"
There is no physics limitation that I know of - it looks like a (hard) engineering question.
Respectfully,
Ted Forringer
Well, I am that "other scientist." It is nice to see good press for bubble fusion reach slashdot (no, I didn't submit it.)
First, I agree with the previous posters that this is not "cold fusion." The centers of the collapsing bubbles are very hot. Apparently hot enough to cause fusion.
The research I published was based on experiments conducted at Purdue University using a setup provided by Dr. Taleyarkhan. All equipment calibration, measurements, and data analysis were preformed by me and my students. We had full access to the equipment and we were very careful to make sure that there was nothing to contaminate our data.
People who have read the actual paper (Transactions of the American Nuclear Society, vol 95, p 736) would agree that the results published leave no room for doubt that the neutrons are caused by the collapsing bubbles in a deuterated fluid - the appropriate control experiments were performed - the statistics are significant.
The controversy comes because several well respected and talented physicists have not been able to reproduce Dr. Taleyarkhan's results in their own labs. This has led several people (including an editor from Nature Magazine) to conclude that Dr. Taleyarkhan must be faking his data.
I cannot explain why it has been so hard to reproduce the results in another lab except to say that null results are pretty easy to get in any sensitive experiment and it originally took Dr. Taleyarkhan several years to perfect his methods.
I suspect that all that is needed is a little more time and we will hear about several labs who have confirmed this work completely independently. Of course we are working on that very thing here at LeTourneau University.
Even if it takes some time to reproduce the results at another lab, having independent researchers come to Purdue and reproduce the experiments should be a big step in moving past the controversy.
Respectfully, Dr. Ted Forringer Assistant Professor of Physics LeTourneau University
I work for a university. The heath plan through the university cost over $800 a month for my wife and three kids. It works out to over $10,000 a year. Even then there were non-negilgable out of pocket expenses (co-pays, deductibles etc.) Who spends that on health care?
We dropped the plan and picked up the "saver 2000" plan from Unicare. It costs us $450 per three month period, or less than $2000 per year. It is a very stripped down plan - basically $2000 deductible and $5000 out of pocket maximum per year. You see - even in the worst possible year, it saves me money. One downside is that we go to the doctor less b/c each visit cost us our own money.
More bad news is that they do not cover maternity at all. No prenadal visits, no laybor and delivery. These alone can be upwards of $15,000 per kid. We used a mid-wife and home birth for our last two kids (and the one on the way) which only cost $2000 per kid. Statistics show home births are safer anyway.
My guess is that there is no cheap way to get heath care in a society where everyone expects to get the latest and greatest (expensive) care when they become terminally ill and people expect huge payouts when doctors make mistakes. The system just costs too much.
Any state that doesn't give all of its votes to the winner is short changing its residents. All splitting the vote does is make that state's vote count less in the overall election. That means the president should campain less in that state and be less concerned with that state's needs.
Please pay attention when you RTFA. The bill would require ALL THREE conditions to be met to make a product illigal to sell to minors - i.e. if it is violent but has scientifiic merrit, it would be OK to sell. If it is violent and has NO other merit (artistic, scientific etc.) then it would be illigal to sell. Get it? By this criteria chess and checkers are in good shape.
In many parts of the US you can get waste veggitable oil for free. Methonol cost about $3 a gallon at race tracks (used to be less, but katrina...). And lye is cheap at soap making shops. Based on the formula for biodiesel (that works almost every time w/o titration):
3 gallons of waste oil (free)
0.75 gallons of methanol ($2.25)
3.5 ounces of lye (~$0.25)
Total cost: $2.50 for 3 gallons of biodiesel. This equates to $0.22 per liter.
I tried to mod the parent up, but I want to add some more links for running your diesel car on pure used vegitable oil (so my mod points don't work on this thread). This is VERY economical and earth friendly. I speak from experience that running bio-diesel or SVO (straight vegitable oil) is a great choice. Follow the "best kit" link for a kit that will work great in your VW TDI and get 50+ mpg on a bio-friendly free fuel!
I use dio-diesel in my old VW rabbit pickup and get over 60 miles per dollar. For a $600 investment in a SVO kit, the fuel becomes free... I am saving up.
There are several
severalgroups who have publishedrulebooks. The end of game scoring is very strange, and each rulebook has a different system, so players of this game are advised to carefully determine which, if any, are correct.
Sorry, electric != enviro-friendly. It can be, but not always.
How about almost always. I own an electrc car (pure electric) and use it to communte dayly. Yes, the electric power is provided by the local oil burning power plant, BUT (and this is important) the power plant is MUCH more efficient than an internal combustion engine, and has MUCH beter filtering of its "exaust." Any electric car will be significantly cleaner than its internal combustion brother.
I know this is off topic (also my first post) but, if you are using g77 for scientific work, I suggest you switch to to Intel's fortran compiler for linux. It is faster and is missing some of the bugs of g77. It is also free for educational/non-profit work.
I made the switch when doing work for my Ph.D. thesis (nuclear physics).
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it has been perfect for me ... Tungsten Carbide is what they use to make cutting tools for lathes and mills. It is totally scratch resistant and will keep its mirror finish even if you scrape it back and forth on concrete. It was particularly appropriate (geeky) for me because I used lots of tungsten in my Ph.D. research on cyclotron ion sources.
You can buy tungsten carbide rings at Walmart for like $40. :)
(sorry, I have fixed the formatting in the previous post)
... we put about 10 watts of power in and got something less than 10,000 neutrons/second out. At 2.5 MeV per neutron, that is about 4e-9 Watts out.
> how close does this reaction come to break-even?
Lets see
So, not close.
> Does it look like the apparatus could be modified
> to pass this point (i.e. is the limitation based > on physics or engineering)?"
There is no physics limitation that I know of - it looks like a (hard) engineering question.
Respectfully,
Ted Forringer
> how close does this reaction come to break-even? Lets see ... we put about 10 watts of power in and got something less than 10,000 neutrons/second out. At 2.5 MeV per neutron, that is about 4e-9 Watts out.
So, not close.
> Does it look like the apparatus could be modified
> to pass this point (i.e. is the limitation based
> on physics or engineering)?"
There is no physics limitation that I know of - it looks like a (hard) engineering question.
Respectfully,
Ted Forringer
Well, I am that "other scientist." It is nice to see good press for bubble fusion reach slashdot (no, I didn't submit it.)
First, I agree with the previous posters that this is not "cold fusion." The centers of the collapsing bubbles are very hot. Apparently hot enough to cause fusion.
The research I published was based on experiments conducted at Purdue University using a setup provided by Dr. Taleyarkhan. All equipment calibration, measurements, and data analysis were preformed by me and my students. We had full access to the equipment and we were very careful to make sure that there was nothing to contaminate our data.
People who have read the actual paper (Transactions of the American Nuclear Society, vol 95, p 736) would agree that the results published leave no room for doubt that the neutrons are caused by the collapsing bubbles in a deuterated fluid - the appropriate control experiments were performed - the statistics are significant.
The controversy comes because several well respected and talented physicists have not been able to reproduce Dr. Taleyarkhan's results in their own labs. This has led several people (including an editor from Nature Magazine) to conclude that Dr. Taleyarkhan must be faking his data.
I cannot explain why it has been so hard to reproduce the results in another lab except to say that null results are pretty easy to get in any sensitive experiment and it originally took Dr. Taleyarkhan several years to perfect his methods.
I suspect that all that is needed is a little more time and we will hear about several labs who have confirmed this work completely independently. Of course we are working on that very thing here at LeTourneau University.
Even if it takes some time to reproduce the results at another lab, having independent researchers come to Purdue and reproduce the experiments should be a big step in moving past the controversy.
Respectfully,
Dr. Ted Forringer
Assistant Professor of Physics
LeTourneau University
p.s. I live in Texas. I hear that plans and rates change from state to state.
I work for a university. The heath plan through the university cost over $800 a month for my wife and three kids. It works out to over $10,000 a year. Even then there were non-negilgable out of pocket expenses (co-pays, deductibles etc.) Who spends that on health care? We dropped the plan and picked up the "saver 2000" plan from Unicare. It costs us $450 per three month period, or less than $2000 per year. It is a very stripped down plan - basically $2000 deductible and $5000 out of pocket maximum per year. You see - even in the worst possible year, it saves me money. One downside is that we go to the doctor less b/c each visit cost us our own money. More bad news is that they do not cover maternity at all. No prenadal visits, no laybor and delivery. These alone can be upwards of $15,000 per kid. We used a mid-wife and home birth for our last two kids (and the one on the way) which only cost $2000 per kid. Statistics show home births are safer anyway. My guess is that there is no cheap way to get heath care in a society where everyone expects to get the latest and greatest (expensive) care when they become terminally ill and people expect huge payouts when doctors make mistakes. The system just costs too much.
Any state that doesn't give all of its votes to the winner is short changing its residents. All splitting the vote does is make that state's vote count less in the overall election. That means the president should campain less in that state and be less concerned with that state's needs.
Please pay attention when you RTFA. The bill would require ALL THREE conditions to be met to make a product illigal to sell to minors - i.e. if it is violent but has scientifiic merrit, it would be OK to sell. If it is violent and has NO other merit (artistic, scientific etc.) then it would be illigal to sell. Get it? By this criteria chess and checkers are in good shape.
:)
Please mod parent - not insightful.
3 gallons of waste oil (free)
0.75 gallons of methanol ($2.25)
3.5 ounces of lye (~$0.25)
Total cost: $2.50 for 3 gallons of biodiesel. This equates to $0.22 per liter.
For more info search biodiesel.infopop.cc
I use dio-diesel in my old VW rabbit pickup and get over 60 miles per dollar. For a $600 investment in a SVO kit, the fuel becomes free ... I am saving up.
best info good kit good kit best kit best book
There are several several groups who have published rulebooks. The end of game scoring is very strange, and each rulebook has a different system, so players of this game are advised to carefully determine which, if any, are correct.
I made the switch when doing work for my Ph.D. thesis (nuclear physics).
Here is the link: Intel.com