The plastic is only part of it... Nature also needed us to refine silicon and manufacture the first IC's. We're just Nature's first quick and dirty way to compute with meat. (Bart Kosko prof. USC)
You need to be more clear. Do you mean so that he can learn something? Or, do you mean to remind them that the activist Benjamin Franklin is acknowledged to have founded the public library as an institution? Help them out, they're clearly being narrow minded.
100 day year won't work... but a 13 month year, each month being an even 4 weeks of 7 days, with a stand alone new years day and leap year day, set aside for partying, makes more sense than what we have now. Damn the ancient Egyptians and their insistance on keeping time with a base 12 counting system. (actually their system wasn't too bad, 12 months of 30 days with a 5 day new year celebration)
Yes, and for this use it would be appropriate. However, the parent said "tractors have less sophisticated engines that could probably run on mostly alcohol without much damage". Unless they have an older Ford 2000, International Harvester Farm All, or the like, which had gasoline engines, they are going to be very disappointed when they put the (m)ethanol in the diesel engine and try to start it.
lots of people are correctly telling you that the media might not be readable in 17 years, either because it degraded or you simply can't find a drive to read it. Here's my suggestion: Get an Ipod. Take out the battery and replace it with an external battery pack that uses AAA or AA batteries. Store everything on it (which should nicely verify your mod works). Take out the batteries. Put the iPod with empty battery pack into a ziplock bag with some dessicant. Wrap that in a second and third ziplock (redundant seals). Heat sealed bags would be better than Ziplock, if you can do it. Place this in your "time capsule". For redundancy, throw in paper copies of the most important text(s) and photos, similarly protected. Seal it. There's a fair chance that the iPod will work in 20 years; but, there's no guarantee....
The political reality is that this is very unlikely to happen.
The US has proposed de-orbiting it in 2016, because we are spending $1.5B/year in support of it's operations (not including the shuttle launches); and, given NASA's current budget, they long ago admitted they could not continue to support the ISS and meet their other objectives.
We are only part owner (a major part) of the ISS. Russia laid the cornerstone, Zarya, along with the US module, Unity. Russia, Japan, Canada, ESA (representing several European contributors) all own major components. All of the major players have said they do not support decommissioning the ISS before 2020. Russia has indicated it should be operational well beyond that date. They have all already started applying political pressure.
It was also recommended in the Augustine Committee report that ISS be funded at least through 2020.
NASA doesn't build the rockets. They have an army of contractors who build them. Sure, they assemble the shuttle in the VAB; but, the components were almost exclusively all built by someone, not NASA. The shuttle orbiter itself was built by Rockwell and Boeing.
The reason you've not seen a commercial entity launching big rockets, is there's no money in it. The money is, right now, in participating as the contractors to the government which supply the components for the big rocket. IF the economic model changes, because the factors driving it change, then the landscape will change. IF NASA decides to buy seats from commercial companies instead of launching it's own vehicles, then companies will line up with options for providing that service. Lockheed, Boeing, and SpaceX have all expressed interest providing this service to LEO. The price would have to be right though: These are companies whose goal is ultimately to make a profit. At a minimum, they'd have to break even on the manned vehicle launches.
The cheapest option, that no-one is considering btw, is to just give SpaceX the $300m for crew transfer to LEO
Actually, it has been discussed by the committee. It is the commercial option for launching humans to LEO suggested in several of their presentations; and, SpaceX is specifically mentioned as a viable option
but you'd have to think the Ford designers are complete morons not to plan a 50-year life span ship
Not at all. And for the record, I live in Newport News... There's available space on these ships and spaces can be re-arranged during the re-fits they get about once a decade.
OK, so, let me rephrase this in light of the green initiatives prompted by various forces: The Navy's primary consideration here is not being green, it is making certain they have fuel for the aircraft and turbine powered surface vessels.
There is no link between EM radiation and cancer. There's some history here that will help dispel the myth
First, where there was an association with cancer and power lines: When an in depth study was done in cases of cancer clusters near power lines, there was always another cause found. It was usually a toxic waste dump or industrial discharge upstream. It's unfortunate, but, the cluster of kids with leukemia in the neighborhood wasn't caused by the power lines running through the back yard, it was caused by the chemical plant a mile or two up the road that the power lines were feeding.
Second: There has never been a peer reviewed study which showed any link between power lines or EM fields and cancer. None that have been confirmed. There was one study published, but the scientist was discredited. No one could duplicate his results. Nearly a decade was spent in the attempt. So, as part of the peer review process, he was asked to present his original data. When he refused, his employer, Lawrence Berkely National Lab, forced the issue. After that, he admitted to faking the data in order to get research grant money. I worked for Department of Energy at the time and this was a real slap in the face to the labs which made us review how we did internal peer review. Look up Robert P. Liburdy
Unfortunately, the original media anouncement of this false finding still persists in the general populous' memory. It has lead to suggestions like cell phones cause brain cancer. So, to the best of my knowledge (and I admit to being no expert, I'm a physicist who's work is not related to the medical field) There has never been a repeatable, peer reviewed study which has confirmed a link, with any statistical certainty, between EM fields and cancer.
Actually, there is a lot of uranium naturally occuring in space. That's how it got on Earth; or, more to the point, when the Earth was formed out of the cloud of dust and debris, that's where it picked it up from. There's likely to be a fair amount on the Moon, Mars and some of the asteroids too. Concentration should be slightly higher on Earth, only because the denser stuff tends to be of higher concentration closer to the star.
14 days without light IS the problem. Assuming the 40kW power of the nuclear reactor and calculating the equivalent requirements: If they use a 160V DC bus, like on ISS, then they'd need 84,000 Amp-hours worth of batteries. To give you an idea of how big that is (and recalculating for a specific battery type), using Nickel Hydrogen batteries (also like the ISS) which are 75 Wh/kg, you'd need 179,200kg = 394,240lb = 197 tons of batteries.
Let's get through that "first source you'd use" issue, first. Then let's get through the "designing a working fusion reactor". Then, and only then, we'll discuss using helium 3 as a fuel, OK?
Slashdot Mirror
4. Plastic eating microbes find something else they like that taste's better...
The plastic is only part of it... Nature also needed us to refine silicon and manufacture the first IC's. We're just Nature's first quick and dirty way to compute with meat. (Bart Kosko prof. USC)
You need to be more clear. Do you mean so that he can learn something? Or, do you mean to remind them that the activist Benjamin Franklin is acknowledged to have founded the public library as an institution? Help them out, they're clearly being narrow minded.
Physics says the electron is negative.
100 day year won't work... but a 13 month year, each month being an even 4 weeks of 7 days, with a stand alone new years day and leap year day, set aside for partying, makes more sense than what we have now. Damn the ancient Egyptians and their insistance on keeping time with a base 12 counting system. (actually their system wasn't too bad, 12 months of 30 days with a 5 day new year celebration)
Yes, and for this use it would be appropriate. However, the parent said "tractors have less sophisticated engines that could probably run on mostly alcohol without much damage". Unless they have an older Ford 2000, International Harvester Farm All, or the like, which had gasoline engines, they are going to be very disappointed when they put the (m)ethanol in the diesel engine and try to start it.
ummm, most modern tractors (last I looked) were diesel. sunflower oil, yes. Ethanol, NO.
lots of people are correctly telling you that the media might not be readable in 17 years, either because it degraded or you simply can't find a drive to read it. Here's my suggestion: Get an Ipod. Take out the battery and replace it with an external battery pack that uses AAA or AA batteries. Store everything on it (which should nicely verify your mod works). Take out the batteries. Put the iPod with empty battery pack into a ziplock bag with some dessicant. Wrap that in a second and third ziplock (redundant seals). Heat sealed bags would be better than Ziplock, if you can do it. Place this in your "time capsule". For redundancy, throw in paper copies of the most important text(s) and photos, similarly protected. Seal it. There's a fair chance that the iPod will work in 20 years; but, there's no guarantee....
You don't know what you're talking about. I multi...
uh, What were you saying?
The political reality is that this is very unlikely to happen.
The US has proposed de-orbiting it in 2016, because we are spending $1.5B/year in support of it's operations (not including the shuttle launches); and, given NASA's current budget, they long ago admitted they could not continue to support the ISS and meet their other objectives.
We are only part owner (a major part) of the ISS. Russia laid the cornerstone, Zarya, along with the US module, Unity. Russia, Japan, Canada, ESA (representing several European contributors) all own major components. All of the major players have said they do not support decommissioning the ISS before 2020. Russia has indicated it should be operational well beyond that date. They have all already started applying political pressure.
It was also recommended in the Augustine Committee report that ISS be funded at least through 2020.
NASA doesn't build the rockets. They have an army of contractors who build them. Sure, they assemble the shuttle in the VAB; but, the components were almost exclusively all built by someone, not NASA. The shuttle orbiter itself was built by Rockwell and Boeing.
The reason you've not seen a commercial entity launching big rockets, is there's no money in it. The money is, right now, in participating as the contractors to the government which supply the components for the big rocket. IF the economic model changes, because the factors driving it change, then the landscape will change. IF NASA decides to buy seats from commercial companies instead of launching it's own vehicles, then companies will line up with options for providing that service. Lockheed, Boeing, and SpaceX have all expressed interest providing this service to LEO. The price would have to be right though: These are companies whose goal is ultimately to make a profit. At a minimum, they'd have to break even on the manned vehicle launches.
The cheapest option, that no-one is considering btw, is to just give SpaceX the $300m for crew transfer to LEO
Actually, it has been discussed by the committee. It is the commercial option for launching humans to LEO suggested in several of their presentations; and, SpaceX is specifically mentioned as a viable option
vacuum tubes are common in high power applications
but you'd have to think the Ford designers are complete morons not to plan a 50-year life span ship
Not at all. And for the record, I live in Newport News... There's available space on these ships and spaces can be re-arranged during the re-fits they get about once a decade.
OK, so, let me rephrase this in light of the green initiatives prompted by various forces: The Navy's primary consideration here is not being green, it is making certain they have fuel for the aircraft and turbine powered surface vessels.
sometimes, it's a don't care.
So, Newport News will make them a hair bigger to accomodate.
Navy doesn't care about green. They care about aircraft having fuel to fly.
That's what you get for drinking your beer out of cans. Proper beer comes in bottles, kegs, or better yet, is distilled and aged in a barrel.
There is no link between EM radiation and cancer. There's some history here that will help dispel the myth
First, where there was an association with cancer and power lines: When an in depth study was done in cases of cancer clusters near power lines, there was always another cause found. It was usually a toxic waste dump or industrial discharge upstream. It's unfortunate, but, the cluster of kids with leukemia in the neighborhood wasn't caused by the power lines running through the back yard, it was caused by the chemical plant a mile or two up the road that the power lines were feeding.
Second: There has never been a peer reviewed study which showed any link between power lines or EM fields and cancer. None that have been confirmed. There was one study published, but the scientist was discredited. No one could duplicate his results. Nearly a decade was spent in the attempt. So, as part of the peer review process, he was asked to present his original data. When he refused, his employer, Lawrence Berkely National Lab, forced the issue. After that, he admitted to faking the data in order to get research grant money. I worked for Department of Energy at the time and this was a real slap in the face to the labs which made us review how we did internal peer review. Look up Robert P. Liburdy
Unfortunately, the original media anouncement of this false finding still persists in the general populous' memory. It has lead to suggestions like cell phones cause brain cancer. So, to the best of my knowledge (and I admit to being no expert, I'm a physicist who's work is not related to the medical field) There has never been a repeatable, peer reviewed study which has confirmed a link, with any statistical certainty, between EM fields and cancer.
above a certain size, it becomes harder to form defects significant enough to cause failure. I think around 200um you don't even need a clean room.
self assembly and the ability to modify the structure of the molecule using simple methods to serve a specific purpose.
Actually, there is a lot of uranium naturally occuring in space. That's how it got on Earth; or, more to the point, when the Earth was formed out of the cloud of dust and debris, that's where it picked it up from. There's likely to be a fair amount on the Moon, Mars and some of the asteroids too. Concentration should be slightly higher on Earth, only because the denser stuff tends to be of higher concentration closer to the star.
14 days without light IS the problem. Assuming the 40kW power of the nuclear reactor and calculating the equivalent requirements: If they use a 160V DC bus, like on ISS, then they'd need 84,000 Amp-hours worth of batteries. To give you an idea of how big that is (and recalculating for a specific battery type), using Nickel Hydrogen batteries (also like the ISS) which are 75 Wh/kg, you'd need 179,200kg = 394,240lb = 197 tons of batteries.
Let's get through that "first source you'd use" issue, first. Then let's get through the "designing a working fusion reactor". Then, and only then, we'll discuss using helium 3 as a fuel, OK?