Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) and irradiation happen to be the general subject of a term project I'm finishing up...
There's a lot of uses for CNTs ( http://www.sciencemag.org/content/297/5582/787.full Might work. Might be paywalled. Yay University). The article didn't look to specific. (Or just plain wrong) I'm not clear if they're cutting a single CNT at a time or not.
One approach I've seen is suspending CNTs in a H2O2 solution, and irradiating with gamma rays to get shorter more uniform lengths of CNTs. The result basically is sphaghetti. A potential application though is as an additive in epoxies for strength. Identify the ideal length for structural purposes, and irradiate CNTs to get said length. This article also mentioned using ultrasonic treatment or whatever to shorten CNTs. (So this article is not new science, I think) ("Shortening of multi-walled carbon nanotubes by c-irradiation in the presence of hydrogen peroxide," Jung, et al., 2008)
I've also seen electron irradiation for cutting multi-walled nanotubes. The electron microscope pics look almost like chopped up tree trunks.
Diameter of (single walled) CNTs is on the order of 0.5 to 5 nm. (Interestingly, carbon fiber fibers have diameters on the scale of microns, e.g. 1000x greater)
The only real downside here is making background images that span both and line up.
I too had the same complaints when looking for monitors a couple months ago... and no, I didn't end up with a lot of vertical... 1920x1080 (and a 1080x1920).... Horizontally, said monitor is wide enough to view three entire pages in Word, side by side, without wasting space.
I find two faults with your observations. The first (isn't really yours as it's so common) is equating the 5% of energy use as foreign oil with "only". Seems to me that combining the energy used to generate electricity and that used to transportation (and industrial/other "energy uses") is flawed in that it's too general of a statement. Pulling that 17% of our fuel out of our transportation infrastructure would be a plenty big problem without stockpiles/rapidly increased production.
And at the same time (still the first fault), you even downplay nuclear's contribution, since it's purely for electricity currently (ignoring a few cases where the heat does get used in other ways). Nuclear is 19-20% of the total electricity we use in the US.
Additionally, you seem to maybe be a bit behind on the nuclear news front (but I approve of your sources... so maybe we just interpret stuff we've both seen differently). Recent polls of Americans have shown increases in favorable views of nuclear power (especially the last 5 years), and that rating's over half* **. Additionally we're kind of on track to build new reactors. There are at least a dozen currently in the approval process (expensive and tedious in the US, alas), with construction starting sometime in the next 5 years (probably sooner, but NRC is slooowww).
*(my source is a non-free nuclear industry mag "Nuclear News", alas)
**Fears are more evident when discussing the more general "radioactive stuff" subject, e.g. more negative poll responses..
iPad meh... I've been reading books like a fiend over the past year with my iPod touch. It's readable outside without a problem (with sunglasses), it's small so my puny nerd arms don't get tired, fits in a pocket, supports Kindle software, as well as numerous others (I recommend Stanza - vertical swipe -> brightness adjustment).
Battery life of maybe a day without charging, but I can live with that.
In my experience, this won't make any difference. They don't tell you about data/web blocks anyways. I happened to read a mention of that concept on/. shortly before getting my most recent phone. So I asked and got that without a problem. Yay.
Though I suppose the noteworthy bit here is to assume that there's hidden money to be had/saved when dissatisfied. Because ya, they don't tell you.
Assuming top companies are measured by how big they/their profits are... Someone remind me why this metric is so important. Surely the smaller companies are contributing too? (obviously for massive prototypes costing billions, you do need a lot of money, of course) I agree with the first post that this sounds like lobbyist talk.
It'll also be the middle of the day. For quite a large number of residential locations, the home will be empty. Doesn't matter if the house gets a bit warm while you're not there... If you're there, override it!
This isn't about "making all cars have this fuel efficiency." It's about individual companies "making a fleet of cars which average this fuel efficiency level." No one vehicle is going to satisfy everyone, and at least the government seems to sort of recognize this by acknowledging that some types of vehicles won't attain massive improvements in the near future.
Also, it's Tata Motors...
However, driving your current car for as long as it's working/not spewing waste is the best approach, of course:)
Educating, not sensationalizing, is what the nuclear industry needs. Or at least not exclamation marks.
Alas, I can can guarantee you that 1: it will take another decade minimum of legal wrangling to get large-scale stuff like this in the works 2: This type of research in general is old news. It's still viable, but from reading the summary (I'm lazy) it doesn't seem to be anything new that I haven't heard of before.
P.S. I don't consider myself knowledgeable enough to be one who does the educating. (Oh wait, I don't need credentials to educate on the internet, do I?:P )
Thank you for finally being the first non-speculative and comprehensive post on this.
Summary of my own (born hearing impaired): -Low power requirement. Extremely -Digital is not the same as analog. Digitals require programming to set each frequency's (frequency range) amplification range. You can modify a lot more of these with digital aids than with analog. -Durability (some people's sweat is more corrosive than others...) -You're paying for the servicing time of the audiologist.... the audiologist is the one who does the programming. 95% of people wouldn't be smart enough to do it themselves and could potentially do more damage to their hearing. -You get one or two months of trial period with them. -Compact/miniaturized electronics -"Approved medical device" status probably has something to do with prices, though I haven't actually heard about this... -Digitals also have multiple programs, generally. Not going to explain the gamut of these, but they're what made using digitals worthwhile after using analog for my first 16 years with hearing aids.
And in the end, I still sort of hate hearing aids. There's so much of life that I miss without proper hearing, and so much that hearing aids just don't do.
Seriously. What I'm inferring from the article is that you can see the difference in the cells, e.g. male vs. female....
So how the hell have they never noticed that female and male birds have these slightly different cells before, and reached the non-hormone driven conclusion before this?
My first logitech mouse was a bluetooth one. It worked nicely, but I always had troubles with the pairing, e.g. having to partly redo it in some way or another. There was also the delay when "waking up" the mouse.
Their more recent mice with the extremely small usb receivers work flawlessly and are plug and play. I carry one around my college campus for use with campus computers (the mice on campus suck, and it helps me remember not to forget my usb drive...).
I also use bluetooth headphones with my laptop, and connection quality is much better when I only have one device paired at a time.
Actually I'm pretty sure that Miyamoto was growing a lot of hallucinogenic cacti and other wacky flora in his garden prior to coming up with the concept for Pikmin.
Aside from hype about "competing with other power sources" (it's old hype... I can't quite give a damn if it's for real or not this time), I wonder what the distribution of their clients is... (mainly by nationality)
And I'd bet this number predates the economic crisis... I do wonder how many of these orders will be withdrawn; though I'm sure it won't be enough to slow Solyndra's production at peak capacity.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been following the American Nuclear Society's page:
http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2011/03/11/media-updates-on-nuclear-power-stations-in-japan/
In addition, this second link contains a concise summary and background about this accident:
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/03/13/ans-japanese-nuclear-power-plant-update/
(I received the latter in pdf form from an ANS emailing, initially, and it's been the easiest* to read piece that I've seen so far)
*where easy means doesn't make me cringe, and IAAANE (I am almost a nuclear engineer)
I bet it works as dental floss.
(No idea, nor do I care to bother to look, what dental floss actually is made from.)
Also, meters are fixed measurement, while hairs vary in size.
The diameters of carbon nanotubes varies over an order of magnitude. So g'luck with that.
Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) and irradiation happen to be the general subject of a term project I'm finishing up...
There's a lot of uses for CNTs ( http://www.sciencemag.org/content/297/5582/787.full Might work. Might be paywalled. Yay University). The article didn't look to specific. (Or just plain wrong) I'm not clear if they're cutting a single CNT at a time or not.
One approach I've seen is suspending CNTs in a H2O2 solution, and irradiating with gamma rays to get shorter more uniform lengths of CNTs. The result basically is sphaghetti. A potential application though is as an additive in epoxies for strength. Identify the ideal length for structural purposes, and irradiate CNTs to get said length. This article also mentioned using ultrasonic treatment or whatever to shorten CNTs. (So this article is not new science, I think) ("Shortening of multi-walled carbon nanotubes by c-irradiation in the presence of hydrogen peroxide," Jung, et al., 2008)
I've also seen electron irradiation for cutting multi-walled nanotubes. The electron microscope pics look almost like chopped up tree trunks.
Diameter of (single walled) CNTs is on the order of 0.5 to 5 nm. (Interestingly, carbon fiber fibers have diameters on the scale of microns, e.g. 1000x greater)
Dual monitors. One mounted sideways.
The only real downside here is making background images that span both and line up.
I too had the same complaints when looking for monitors a couple months ago... and no, I didn't end up with a lot of vertical... 1920x1080 (and a 1080x1920).... Horizontally, said monitor is wide enough to view three entire pages in Word, side by side, without wasting space.
I find two faults with your observations. The first (isn't really yours as it's so common) is equating the 5% of energy use as foreign oil with "only". Seems to me that combining the energy used to generate electricity and that used to transportation (and industrial/other "energy uses") is flawed in that it's too general of a statement. Pulling that 17% of our fuel out of our transportation infrastructure would be a plenty big problem without stockpiles/rapidly increased production.
And at the same time (still the first fault), you even downplay nuclear's contribution, since it's purely for electricity currently (ignoring a few cases where the heat does get used in other ways). Nuclear is 19-20% of the total electricity we use in the US.
Additionally, you seem to maybe be a bit behind on the nuclear news front (but I approve of your sources... so maybe we just interpret stuff we've both seen differently). Recent polls of Americans have shown increases in favorable views of nuclear power (especially the last 5 years), and that rating's over half* **. Additionally we're kind of on track to build new reactors. There are at least a dozen currently in the approval process (expensive and tedious in the US, alas), with construction starting sometime in the next 5 years (probably sooner, but NRC is slooowww).
*(my source is a non-free nuclear industry mag "Nuclear News", alas)
**Fears are more evident when discussing the more general "radioactive stuff" subject, e.g. more negative poll responses..
Better yet, order the keyboard separately. Dell was about $30 when I had a some keys break on my laptop. Might be worth it to you.
Ya. We have unlimited supplies of helium.
Oh, wait, no we don't.
Hydrogen could be done fairly safe these days, though, I think?
That trumps the "Why ICANN no haz .XXX?"
iPad meh... I've been reading books like a fiend over the past year with my iPod touch. It's readable outside without a problem (with sunglasses), it's small so my puny nerd arms don't get tired, fits in a pocket, supports Kindle software, as well as numerous others (I recommend Stanza - vertical swipe -> brightness adjustment).
Battery life of maybe a day without charging, but I can live with that.
In my experience, this won't make any difference. They don't tell you about data/web blocks anyways. I happened to read a mention of that concept on /. shortly before getting my most recent phone. So I asked and got that without a problem. Yay.
Though I suppose the noteworthy bit here is to assume that there's hidden money to be had/saved when dissatisfied. Because ya, they don't tell you.
Assuming top companies are measured by how big they/their profits are... Someone remind me why this metric is so important. Surely the smaller companies are contributing too? (obviously for massive prototypes costing billions, you do need a lot of money, of course) I agree with the first post that this sounds like lobbyist talk.
And no I didn't RTFA.
I can't wait til PokéBerry evolves into Pokéium and we can put him nuclear reactors!
Instead of placing the foot near the midline on each step, the body shits laterally to get over the foot.
Shitting sideways? That's quite the fetish you have, if you like that sort of thing.
Those aren't cheap though.
BUT you can put the 2 dimensional desks on top of each other. Pretty much same effect!
Ya, realized this afterward. (e.g. read other comments...)
Still, for the people without pets :)...
It'll also be the middle of the day. For quite a large number of residential locations, the home will be empty. Doesn't matter if the house gets a bit warm while you're not there... If you're there, override it!
This isn't about "making all cars have this fuel efficiency." It's about individual companies "making a fleet of cars which average this fuel efficiency level." No one vehicle is going to satisfy everyone, and at least the government seems to sort of recognize this by acknowledging that some types of vehicles won't attain massive improvements in the near future.
Also, it's Tata Motors...
However, driving your current car for as long as it's working/not spewing waste is the best approach, of course :)
Educating, not sensationalizing, is what the nuclear industry needs. Or at least not exclamation marks.
Alas, I can can guarantee you that 1: it will take another decade minimum of legal wrangling to get large-scale stuff like this in the works
2: This type of research in general is old news. It's still viable, but from reading the summary (I'm lazy) it doesn't seem to be anything new that I haven't heard of before.
P.S. I don't consider myself knowledgeable enough to be one who does the educating. (Oh wait, I don't need credentials to educate on the internet, do I? :P )
Thank you for finally being the first non-speculative and comprehensive post on this.
Summary of my own (born hearing impaired):
-Low power requirement. Extremely
-Digital is not the same as analog. Digitals require programming to set each frequency's (frequency range) amplification range. You can modify a lot more of these with digital aids than with analog.
-Durability (some people's sweat is more corrosive than others...)
-You're paying for the servicing time of the audiologist.... the audiologist is the one who does the programming. 95% of people wouldn't be smart enough to do it themselves and could potentially do more damage to their hearing.
-You get one or two months of trial period with them.
-Compact/miniaturized electronics
-"Approved medical device" status probably has something to do with prices, though I haven't actually heard about this...
-Digitals also have multiple programs, generally. Not going to explain the gamut of these, but they're what made using digitals worthwhile after using analog for my first 16 years with hearing aids.
And in the end, I still sort of hate hearing aids. There's so much of life that I miss without proper hearing, and so much that hearing aids just don't do.
Seriously. What I'm inferring from the article is that you can see the difference in the cells, e.g. male vs. female....
So how the hell have they never noticed that female and male birds have these slightly different cells before, and reached the non-hormone driven conclusion before this?
My first logitech mouse was a bluetooth one. It worked nicely, but I always had troubles with the pairing, e.g. having to partly redo it in some way or another. There was also the delay when "waking up" the mouse.
Their more recent mice with the extremely small usb receivers work flawlessly and are plug and play. I carry one around my college campus for use with campus computers (the mice on campus suck, and it helps me remember not to forget my usb drive...).
I also use bluetooth headphones with my laptop, and connection quality is much better when I only have one device paired at a time.
Actually I'm pretty sure that Miyamoto was growing a lot of hallucinogenic cacti and other wacky flora in his garden prior to coming up with the concept for Pikmin.
Aside from hype about "competing with other power sources" (it's old hype... I can't quite give a damn if it's for real or not this time), I wonder what the distribution of their clients is... (mainly by nationality)
And I'd bet this number predates the economic crisis... I do wonder how many of these orders will be withdrawn; though I'm sure it won't be enough to slow Solyndra's production at peak capacity.
We're electing robots?