I'd guess two pints. A link two threads up claims they were making red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets from the skin cells. Given that blood is 55% plasma (which itself is mostly water) it stands to reason that a 'pint' of skin makes two pints of blood - just add water!:)
It works the other way too. Ever hear of the Chicken Tax? It annihilated the light truck industry. People like to bitch about how many large trucks and SUVs are on the road (and how fuel inefficient they are), but the reality is your own government is almost entirely responsible for that. Manufacturers (even "domestic" ones who were supposed to benefit from the tax) have to do stupid things like assemble trucks and vans overseas, then partially disassemble it, ship it to the US, and then reassemble it again. Or even weirder stuff like the Ford Transit which has to be shipped to the US with rear seats and rear-windows so it qualifies as a "passenger vehicle". Once here, they rip the rear seats out and junk them so they can turn it back into a cargo van. The reason many Japanese manufacturers built plants in the US in the first place was so they could sell their SUVs without a ridiculous 25% tax hike. Ultimately the chicken tax is the reason why the US light truck industry is utterly emaciated compared to the global light truck market.
Something similar happened to me that I found hysterical: During the school year I store my car (a bus pass is included in my tuition, so I might as well use it), so I went on my mothers insurance as an occasional driver (even though I don't live at home and rarely use her car) and her insurance went DOWN by ~$25 a year! The only thing we can figure is that she's had a handful (three? four?) of speeding tickets in her lifetime (none are recent), and I haven't had any yet (knock on wood). So she just keeps me on year round. Same trick didn't work with my dad though - apparently having your class 1 gives you a damn good break on insurance.
Awesome. So tell me, what happens when companies start to use this to toss around defamation lawsuits (RIAA style) to squash negative opinions of their product(s)? Won't someone think of the Apple-haters?!
Then it occurred to me that a foreign national news source is likely to contain less bias/spin than an american one, but I have yet to read the article and confirm that.
I wondered about that too, but I think the problem there is that a rotary engine is better suited to low compression. IIRC the gas rotaries usually run around 8:1 (whereas newer gas-piston engines do 10 or 11:1), which is peanuts compared to a 20:1 diesel engine. Furthermore, one of the longstanding problems with a rotary is sealing the combustion chamber (specifically the apex seals), and high boost or compression exacerbates that.
Ah, I see what you mean. What you have to do is keep the same number of cylinders, not the same number of pistons. So you'd have a 4 cylinder 8 piston OPOC with the same 2L displacement, but each cylinder would only cover 4.3cm in the same time (1/40th/sec), giving you half the speed.
In the same vein you could have an 2L V8 with half the piston speed per volume/time.
That part of the design is slightly better, slightly worse than common cylinder deactivation. It's better in that it deactivates the associated pistons, rods, and crank too, so there's less rotating mass when deactivated. Unfortunately it does this via clutch, which is a consumable part in a particularly bad location (inside the engine). This means more cost, more complexity, and one nightmare of a repair bill when it needs replaced.
The deal with lower piston speeds is all about momentum. The less momentum a piston has, the less energy is wasted trying to get it to suddenly move in the opposite direction.
Unfortunately, one of the problems with opposed-piston designs is that they really just move the problem of from one spot to another. Sure, your pistons have less momentum, but you end up attaching two of them (the outside pistons) to incredibly long and relatively fragile connecting rods. At that point you either have to limit the amount of power/cylinder you're producing (so you don't break the rod), or you need a big, thick, heavy, super-strong rod to handle high loads (power) and vibrations (rpm) - at which point you've defeated the whole purpose of reducing the rotating mass (or, alternatively, the total mass when you stack 10 of these things together) anyway.
Opposed piston engines are nothing new. In fact they're over 100 years old. And this guy hasn't given us anything radically new that would thrust an opposed-piston design to the forefront of internal combustion. So to trot out an old meme: Nothing to see here, move along.
It's sort of inherent to the design. The big problem with a (wankel) rotary's emissions is that the combustion chamber is relatively long and flat (think of a really thin banana), which means that the flame front(s) have to travel farther and faster in order to completely burn everything. Since this is easier to do in a cylinder (ie: piston-engine), a rotary tends to put out more unburned and partially combusted gasses - the bad stuff.
That said, you can fix anything by throwing enough money at it. Most rotary engines i've seen have at least two spark plugs per rotor (equivalent to having two spark plugs per cylinder) to help spread the flame front. Maybe there's a better/faster way of ignition such that it travels the length of the chamber at (very very very) high speeds? Maybe some sort of (frikkin') laser? Who knows?
Not out yet. iD and Epic are just having a bit of a pissing match with "Our latest nexest-gen video game engine with gobs of megatextures and pixel-threaded-hyper-polygons will run on *gasp* an iPHONE! So when you're looking to make your next craptastic overpriced piece of shit farmworld-on-an-iWhatever, developers, pick me! Pick ME!" Of course, this is ignoring from the fact that they look like ass and are utilizing the worst control scheme known to man.
I'm half expecting someone to announce next week that they've ported their newest game engine to a freakin' TI-82.
Welcome to the world of video games, where everything is wrapped in thick layers of bubble wrap and plastered with warning signs because, "O-M-G, think of the CHILDREN!!!!!1`1" Input your age to view this, input your age to read that, input your age to input your age so we can ask about your age and make sure you are of age! It's fucking ridiculous. But video games have been labeled as a bogey-man, so god help us we'll pressure and legislate the piss out of them until they are completely safe for your children! The interwebz you say? There's nothing wreched and disgusting on the interwebz other than evil, evil video games! *Sigh*
I'm with you. I was a giant BSG nut but I didn't at all think the ending was bad. They ended on a spiritual note, not the more logical theme that carried the series for so long, and I think that's why it upset so many people. I was a little sour with the ending myself, but after a while I really started to like it. If they had finished it any other way, it would have ended on such a cold note. This was the only somewhat warm-n-fuzzy ending. Bittersweet, really. But it makes for a great memory of the series: "Goodbye Kara Thrace. You won't be forgotten."
The sad thing is you don't even need to go to such lengths to find a weapon on (or near) a plane.
1) Waltz through security with nothing but your wallet and the clothes on your back 2) Head to duty free, buy a heavy glass bottle 3) Board. Optionally, enjoy some of your beverage (liquid courage!) 4) Mid way through the flight, stand up and smash the bottle on something hard (like a stewardess' cart). 5) Hijack plane 6) ??? 7) Profit.
As an aside, no security is 100%. A two years ago I was visiting the Hoover Dam and managed to walk right through security (just a metal detector) with a pocket knife without even realizing it until much later.
Slashdot Mirror
Gesundheit.
Maybe FaceMelt was already taken?
(With my apologies for using a WoW joke)
Me too.
Yet somehow i'm not that disappointed. It's sort of like not being eligible for a free drool-tray because I haven't had a lobotomy.
Oh well.
I'd guess two pints. A link two threads up claims they were making red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets from the skin cells. Given that blood is 55% plasma (which itself is mostly water) it stands to reason that a 'pint' of skin makes two pints of blood - just add water! :)
It works the other way too. Ever hear of the Chicken Tax? It annihilated the light truck industry. People like to bitch about how many large trucks and SUVs are on the road (and how fuel inefficient they are), but the reality is your own government is almost entirely responsible for that. Manufacturers (even "domestic" ones who were supposed to benefit from the tax) have to do stupid things like assemble trucks and vans overseas, then partially disassemble it, ship it to the US, and then reassemble it again. Or even weirder stuff like the Ford Transit which has to be shipped to the US with rear seats and rear-windows so it qualifies as a "passenger vehicle". Once here, they rip the rear seats out and junk them so they can turn it back into a cargo van. The reason many Japanese manufacturers built plants in the US in the first place was so they could sell their SUVs without a ridiculous 25% tax hike. Ultimately the chicken tax is the reason why the US light truck industry is utterly emaciated compared to the global light truck market.
My girlfriend, who is a huge wrestling fan, would beg to differ. :>
Something similar happened to me that I found hysterical: During the school year I store my car (a bus pass is included in my tuition, so I might as well use it), so I went on my mothers insurance as an occasional driver (even though I don't live at home and rarely use her car) and her insurance went DOWN by ~$25 a year! The only thing we can figure is that she's had a handful (three? four?) of speeding tickets in her lifetime (none are recent), and I haven't had any yet (knock on wood). So she just keeps me on year round. Same trick didn't work with my dad though - apparently having your class 1 gives you a damn good break on insurance.
Awesome. So tell me, what happens when companies start to use this to toss around defamation lawsuits (RIAA style) to squash negative opinions of their product(s)?
Won't someone think of the Apple-haters?!
Yeah I noticed that little oddity too.
Then it occurred to me that a foreign national news source is likely to contain less bias/spin than an american one, but I have yet to read the article and confirm that.
Still, as a Canadian it gave me a chuckle. :)
I wondered about that too, but I think the problem there is that a rotary engine is better suited to low compression. IIRC the gas rotaries usually run around 8:1 (whereas newer gas-piston engines do 10 or 11:1), which is peanuts compared to a 20:1 diesel engine. Furthermore, one of the longstanding problems with a rotary is sealing the combustion chamber (specifically the apex seals), and high boost or compression exacerbates that.
It sure would sound great though! :D
Ah, I see what you mean. What you have to do is keep the same number of cylinders, not the same number of pistons. So you'd have a 4 cylinder 8 piston OPOC with the same 2L displacement, but each cylinder would only cover 4.3cm in the same time (1/40th/sec), giving you half the speed.
In the same vein you could have an 2L V8 with half the piston speed per volume/time.
It's all in how you slice it. :)
A boxer engine is not an opposing piston engine, its an opposing cylinder engine. This has two pistons per cylinder:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposed_piston
That part of the design is slightly better, slightly worse than common cylinder deactivation. It's better in that it deactivates the associated pistons, rods, and crank too, so there's less rotating mass when deactivated. Unfortunately it does this via clutch, which is a consumable part in a particularly bad location (inside the engine). This means more cost, more complexity, and one nightmare of a repair bill when it needs replaced.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposed-piston
The deal with lower piston speeds is all about momentum. The less momentum a piston has, the less energy is wasted trying to get it to suddenly move in the opposite direction.
Unfortunately, one of the problems with opposed-piston designs is that they really just move the problem of from one spot to another. Sure, your pistons have less momentum, but you end up attaching two of them (the outside pistons) to incredibly long and relatively fragile connecting rods. At that point you either have to limit the amount of power/cylinder you're producing (so you don't break the rod), or you need a big, thick, heavy, super-strong rod to handle high loads (power) and vibrations (rpm) - at which point you've defeated the whole purpose of reducing the rotating mass (or, alternatively, the total mass when you stack 10 of these things together) anyway.
Opposed piston engines are nothing new. In fact they're over 100 years old. And this guy hasn't given us anything radically new that would thrust an opposed-piston design to the forefront of internal combustion.
So to trot out an old meme: Nothing to see here, move along.
Opposing pistons, in addition to opposing cylinders.
It's sort of inherent to the design. The big problem with a (wankel) rotary's emissions is that the combustion chamber is relatively long and flat (think of a really thin banana), which means that the flame front(s) have to travel farther and faster in order to completely burn everything. Since this is easier to do in a cylinder (ie: piston-engine), a rotary tends to put out more unburned and partially combusted gasses - the bad stuff.
That said, you can fix anything by throwing enough money at it. Most rotary engines i've seen have at least two spark plugs per rotor (equivalent to having two spark plugs per cylinder) to help spread the flame front. Maybe there's a better/faster way of ignition such that it travels the length of the chamber at (very very very) high speeds? Maybe some sort of (frikkin') laser? Who knows?
Not out yet. iD and Epic are just having a bit of a pissing match with "Our latest nexest-gen video game engine with gobs of megatextures and pixel-threaded-hyper-polygons will run on *gasp* an iPHONE! So when you're looking to make your next craptastic overpriced piece of shit farmworld-on-an-iWhatever, developers, pick me! Pick ME!" Of course, this is ignoring from the fact that they look like ass and are utilizing the worst control scheme known to man.
I'm half expecting someone to announce next week that they've ported their newest game engine to a freakin' TI-82.
Welcome to the world of video games, where everything is wrapped in thick layers of bubble wrap and plastered with warning signs because, "O-M-G, think of the CHILDREN!!!!!1`1"
Input your age to view this, input your age to read that, input your age to input your age so we can ask about your age and make sure you are of age! It's fucking ridiculous. But video games have been labeled as a bogey-man, so god help us we'll pressure and legislate the piss out of them until they are completely safe for your children!
The interwebz you say? There's nothing wreched and disgusting on the interwebz other than evil, evil video games!
*Sigh*
Yeah, why not just sit in the coffee house running FireShepard instead? ;-P
True Audio
Lossless, open source, etc.
"You're big-assed! Dinosaurs are big-boned! Put the fork down."
(Credit belonging to Mr. Denis Leary)
I'm with you. I was a giant BSG nut but I didn't at all think the ending was bad. They ended on a spiritual note, not the more logical theme that carried the series for so long, and I think that's why it upset so many people. I was a little sour with the ending myself, but after a while I really started to like it. If they had finished it any other way, it would have ended on such a cold note. This was the only somewhat warm-n-fuzzy ending. Bittersweet, really. But it makes for a great memory of the series:
"Goodbye Kara Thrace. You won't be forgotten."
The sad thing is you don't even need to go to such lengths to find a weapon on (or near) a plane.
1) Waltz through security with nothing but your wallet and the clothes on your back
2) Head to duty free, buy a heavy glass bottle
3) Board. Optionally, enjoy some of your beverage (liquid courage!)
4) Mid way through the flight, stand up and smash the bottle on something hard (like a stewardess' cart).
5) Hijack plane
6) ???
7) Profit.
As an aside, no security is 100%. A two years ago I was visiting the Hoover Dam and managed to walk right through security (just a metal detector) with a pocket knife without even realizing it until much later.
Keep trying Mr.Bush, you'll get it one day!