First of all the term "above unity" does not exist in physics.
Secondly: So put two on the edge of a wheel 1m in diameter, and pump 1kW in. When you have put 1kW into a spinning wheel with a EM drive, you already have expended GWs or TWs on energy. Regardless what you can recover from the spinning wheel, you are deep into minus with your energy balance.
If F>1/c N/W (photon drive) then you can choose a velocity v such that you can extract more energy than you're putting in without the vehicle slowing down This is complete bollocks.
How do you extract the 20W exactly? And how would that be different from an Ion engine where you "extract 20W" after moving 20M?
If you loko at the specs of the EM drive you see, it gains speed so slow (aka the force is so low), you can never extract more energy than it puts into gaining speed. To be precise: you probably can only extract something in the order of a millions of the energy you put into it: so "inefficient" is it.
So your idiotic idea about a PM is just a gigantic energy wasting device.
The Casimir effect has nothing to do with Newtonian laws. And surprisingly the "conservation of momentum" still holds. The sum of the momentum of the two plates used to "create" the effect is always zero.
We all would like to know how a working EM drive could be used for a 'perpetium mobile' machine! Especially for one that fits the definition and 'creates' more energy than it consumes... and one that is still 'perpetium' when its energy source has run out... you might attempt on the first part and fail, the later part is impossible, hence a perpetium mobile machine with an EM drive as source is impossible.
A cable in the shadows... of what ever... does not get any heat. So it has not to radiate away any heat.
And all that has nothing to do with thermodynamics.
I suggest to read wikipedia what thermodynamics is about. Space and vacuum has nothing to to with thermodynamics.
So thank you that you are concerned about my lack of understanding of thermodynamics, it is not approbiated;D
Please go and read some of the papers on space elevator design. The maths isn't that complicated and people have spent years thinking through some of these problems. Those papers are pretty irrelevant. A working space elevator will be a MASSIVE construction, not a simple ribbon (as our currently running "contests" imply). Imagine an Eiffel Tower, 45000 times bigger as it is. Not a single asteroid/rock with a ribbon coming down.
The idea that you can have solar panels and a laser on ground to power a crawler is utopic at best and most likely more idiotic.
But what counts with GUIs is how well they function for users, and java isn't doing too well there And? No user ever complaint about a GUI being done in Java or Qt... because they never notice. (*facepalm*)
Yes, that's what people do with open standards: they extend them and come up with their own implementations and enhancements. If those break the standard, it is no longer a standard... wow, that was easy. You seem not to be a programmer and likely don't grasp it...
Morally, Sun had been deceiving and defrauding the Java community for years at that point. 3 years or something... what you actually want to say eludes me however.
Sun had a good chance of prevailing already told you that Sun had an iron grip on the language. Again it eludes me what you want to say with that and what you consider wrong with that.
Where do you think open source software would be if C, C++, or the UNIX kernel couldn't have been functionally extended because AT&T had a perpetual monopoly on extending them? That is a bollocks argument. Extension is not automatically a lead to incompatibility. All those products you mention here made sure they where backward compatible as good as possible as in "compile once run everywhere", M$ did not do that thing. They produced a Java version that was aimed to kill Suns Java. Not one that followed standards, agreements and/or trade mark issues.
Understood but historically speaking more people have died from solar than nuclear. This is not insightful but irrelevant. And it is wrong anyway. In Chernobyl died by conservative estimations about 1 million people.
I am going to speculate on air cooled nuclear reactors. Current reactors are not air cooled and can not be air cooled, so your idea makes no sense.
To lazy to refute the rest of your post.
I also can speculate about a 100% efficient solar panel...
In Europe most countries have mandatory inspections for every car, about every two years, sometimes 3 sometimes 1.
You have a special mark on your tail license plate for that. Colour coded for the next your your inspection is about to happen, blue, green and yellow in Germany e.g.
If you are found with an outdated mark you are fined. If your mark is outdated more than 6 month your car is iced.
You can not drive a car, regardless if used privately or commercially, for more than roughly 5 month without the required inspections. And usually you get caught a month or two after the inspection was due.
Anyhow, why do you care? If you like your expensive taxi service, then go use it. Uber makes transportation more widely available. That is not the point of the argument. And frankly: I use a taxi so rarely I don't care if it costs 5 dollars (yes, that is the minimum price here) or 25 dollars. Here no one uses Taxis, that is why they are so super expensive. If you rather ride with a guy who is a hobbyist on the road, that is your problem:D I for my part never will use an Uber or Lyft unless they either follow the same regulations or are automatic/autonomous cars.
on which you get a 30% cut of every single thing a user installs on it - Apple does not get that cut. 90% of the software I install on my Mac is OOS/FS, 9% is sold outside of the App Store, and the only thing I bought lately in the AppStrore is "Baldurs Gate", considering the numbers that is not even 1%.
We should have had a major rewrite by now. That is an idiotic idea. Software does not age. Why would you rewrite something that runs perfectly well?
S 10 hit the market in 2001 and even though there have been major updates to make it less obsolete, we are now again approaching 16 years. And... what is the problem?
Windows got kinda rewritten several times, and it became worse and worse... why would a rewritten Mac OS X (how we call it then? Y?) have anything better to offer than a normal upgrade has (which are already pretty messy imho)?
Macs are for niche users -- mostly students and artists. 90% - 95% of all Mac users I know are: programmers. Or otherwise busy in the software industry.
You must live at a very special place that you think Actually, the market is NOT serious computer users. Those stick with the PC models. makes any sense.
iOs beyond iOS 6 is ugly, iOS 7 barely bearable. OS X from 10.10 on is ugly... and on the company laptops I used last months, it crashes constantly (15" laptops, don't know how old).
I still have my old 17" on OS X 10.6... and won't upgrade the OS. I actually consider to buy a few used/refurbished 17" of the latest generation, with matte screens ofc. But they cost used nearly as much as a new 15" one:)
I would use one of them and mothball the others, till finally in their wisdom the gnomes at Apple build new 17" machines, ooooor: even bigger ones!
Until iOS does not get back nice Apps, like iBook reader, Calendar, Notes etc. like they where on iOS 5 or iOS 6, I never buy an iPad or iPhone again...
The current versions look like they are designed by people with eye cancer, or worthe.
On my Mac book air, I have OS X 10.9. It stores my calendars in the cloud, I can not even change that. It has parts of my self written text documents (Textedit) in the cloud. I can mot remove them from there without getting the notice: 'they will be removed from the device, too!' What an idiot did 'design' that? Now I have to manually copy all text documents to an usb stick. Delete the cloud (because it is to complicated to figure which files are in the cloud and which aren't) then copy them back from the USB stick.
Anyway... I wished they would stop bringing out a new OS every few months and simply fix the bugs in the old ones, keep the usability high (because it is declining fast) and for fuck sake stop the continuous uglification of the GUI! The nice red, yellow, green gems as windows icons before 10.10 replaced by coloured 'dots'??? Why the fuck is even anyone considering to put a single minute work in changing that? And with such a result? The guys responsible for this should be dragged into a very deep and dark cellar.
I actually should stop awnser ing more than one of your idiotic posts per day. You might be right about the USA. (but I doubt that) However Lyft and Uber are operating world wide. I can assure you: everything you claim, it would not exist, is existing very heavily in Germany and France, the two countries I'm most experienced in.
The technology of today is the same as 20 years ago. You use silicon like in the chips industry, dote it, like in the chips industry and basically thats it. However 20 years ago the world market for solar power was extremely small (and all power markets where relatively small) That is why Germany e.g.started subsidizing solar power about 30 years ago... The main reason is the capital intensity. Not many companies can build a multi billion fab for solar panels from their pocket money or get funding in such high amounts.
The last time you spread this wrong 'information' you probably where misinformed. However you got corrected just a few days ago by dozens of/. readers that your claim is: wrong. So repeating this claim now, makes it: a lie.
So what is your agenda in lying to the audience in such an important matter?
A more efficient PV cell is easier to activate under low light. That is bollocks. The amount of photons able to kick an electron into the conducting band depends on the doting and the kind of 'junctions'. In the bandwidth of light spectrum where a solar panel is working it is already very efficient regarding that frequencies. It takes a certain level of light to get a PV cell to overcome it's internal resistance, No it does not. Resistance has nothing to do with light level. The question only is: are there enough electrons kicked inot the 'conducting band' to get a current. if this resistance can be lowered then it can operate through a larger part of the day. Larger as in how many seconds exactly? Where we have best places for solar plants, we have the shortest times of twilight. Anyway, the discussion if efficiency is irrelevant for CFs... the CF is mainly determined by number of solar hours per year which again is determined by location of the plant. And the internal resistance of a photovoltaic panel is close to irrelevant for its power production.
Actually at peak the solar plant will deliver its 9.5 peak. Same for the gas plant... and the gas plant has no CF of 100% either, unless it is a base load plant then it likely runs at 95% power output with enough down time to have a CF of about 90%. In real life a gas plant will be at absolute minimum at night, barely producing power, and load following between roughly 9AM till 5PM or 7AM and 7PM at decision of the operators, so its CF is just about 45 percent, as most power plants that are not used for base load.
It does not really matter if you fall from the roof cleaning a solar panel or cleaning a chimney. Both can be avoided by following safety standards.
The carbon footprint of solar panels approaches zero. The only carbon dioxide produced is basically the transportation of raw material and finalized products to the installation place! If you take that into account then the carbon footprint of nuclear plants are a nightmare. They produce over their life span nearly the same amount as a similar coal plant does.
All power plants, that includes nuclear plants, need a favorable place. The main reason why Germany did mot build more â" before the decision to abolish them â" is that Germany has no space left where we could build one. Except the option to upgrade an existing one with another reactor.
Same for France btw. That is the main reason France is buying so much power from Germany and in parallel is investing in renewables. Climate change is hitting Germany and France noticeable already: less snow in winter means far less water in summer in the rivers. Which means: shut down nuclear plants due to environmental regulations regarding temperature of water in the rivers. Or simple lack of water.
Geothermal btw, does not really need special places. You only need to bore deep enough. Ofc. it is fun to have geysers in front of the house...
Slashdot Mirror
First of all the term "above unity" does not exist in physics.
Secondly:
So put two on the edge of a wheel 1m in diameter, and pump 1kW in.
When you have put 1kW into a spinning wheel with a EM drive, you already have expended GWs or TWs on energy. Regardless what you can recover from the spinning wheel, you are deep into minus with your energy balance.
If F>1/c N/W (photon drive) then you can choose a velocity v such that you can extract more energy than you're putting in without the vehicle slowing down
This is complete bollocks.
Sorry, that is nonsense.
How do you extract the 20W exactly?
And how would that be different from an Ion engine where you "extract 20W" after moving 20M?
If you loko at the specs of the EM drive you see, it gains speed so slow (aka the force is so low), you can never extract more energy than it puts into gaining speed. To be precise: you probably can only extract something in the order of a millions of the energy you put into it: so "inefficient" is it.
So your idiotic idea about a PM is just a gigantic energy wasting device.
The Casimir effect has nothing to do with Newtonian laws.
And surprisingly the "conservation of momentum" still holds. The sum of the momentum of the two plates used to "create" the effect is always zero.
We all would like to know how a working EM drive could be used for a 'perpetium mobile' machine! ... and one that is still 'perpetium' when its energy source has run out ... you might attempt on the first part and fail, the later part is impossible, hence a perpetium mobile machine with an EM drive as source is impossible.
Especially for one that fits the definition and 'creates' more energy than it consumes
A cable in the shadows ... of what ever ... does not get any heat.
So it has not to radiate away any heat.
And all that has nothing to do with thermodynamics.
I suggest to read wikipedia what thermodynamics is about. Space and vacuum has nothing to to with thermodynamics.
So thank you that you are concerned about my lack of understanding of thermodynamics, it is not approbiated ;D
Please go and read some of the papers on space elevator design. The maths isn't that complicated and people have spent years thinking through some of these problems.
Those papers are pretty irrelevant.
A working space elevator will be a MASSIVE construction, not a simple ribbon (as our currently running "contests" imply).
Imagine an Eiffel Tower, 45000 times bigger as it is. Not a single asteroid/rock with a ribbon coming down.
The idea that you can have solar panels and a laser on ground to power a crawler is utopic at best and most likely more idiotic.
But what counts with GUIs is how well they function for users, and java isn't doing too well there ... because they never notice. (*facepalm*)
And? No user ever complaint about a GUI being done in Java or Qt
Yes, that's what people do with open standards: they extend them and come up with their own implementations and enhancements. ... wow, that was easy. ...
If those break the standard, it is no longer a standard
You seem not to be a programmer and likely don't grasp it
Morally, Sun had been deceiving and defrauding the Java community for years at that point. ... what you actually want to say eludes me however.
3 years or something
Sun had a good chance of prevailing already told you that Sun had an iron grip on the language.
Again it eludes me what you want to say with that and what you consider wrong with that.
Where do you think open source software would be if C, C++, or the UNIX kernel couldn't have been functionally extended because AT&T had a perpetual monopoly on extending them?
That is a bollocks argument. Extension is not automatically a lead to incompatibility. All those products you mention here made sure they where backward compatible as good as possible as in "compile once run everywhere", M$ did not do that thing. They produced a Java version that was aimed to kill Suns Java. Not one that followed standards, agreements and/or trade mark issues.
Understood but historically speaking more people have died from solar than nuclear.
This is not insightful but irrelevant.
And it is wrong anyway. In Chernobyl died by conservative estimations about 1 million people.
I am going to speculate on air cooled nuclear reactors.
Current reactors are not air cooled and can not be air cooled, so your idea makes no sense.
To lazy to refute the rest of your post.
I also can speculate about a 100% efficient solar panel ...
You are an idiot as I mentioned before.
In Europe most countries have mandatory inspections for every car, about every two years, sometimes 3 sometimes 1.
You have a special mark on your tail license plate for that. Colour coded for the next your your inspection is about to happen, blue, green and yellow in Germany e.g.
If you are found with an outdated mark you are fined. If your mark is outdated more than 6 month your car is iced.
You can not drive a car, regardless if used privately or commercially, for more than roughly 5 month without the required inspections. And usually you get caught a month or two after the inspection was due.
Anyhow, why do you care? If you like your expensive taxi service, then go use it. Uber makes transportation more widely available. :D I for my part never will use an Uber or Lyft unless they either follow the same regulations or are automatic/autonomous cars.
That is not the point of the argument.
And frankly: I use a taxi so rarely I don't care if it costs 5 dollars (yes, that is the minimum price here) or 25 dollars.
Here no one uses Taxis, that is why they are so super expensive.
If you rather ride with a guy who is a hobbyist on the road, that is your problem
You failed to say what you want to say with your link.
Answered to the wrong post?
Considering the shite OS X / MAC OS has become. The last version that was ok was 10.6.8
EXCTLY!
on which you get a 30% cut of every single thing a user installs on it -
Apple does not get that cut.
90% of the software I install on my Mac is OOS/FS,
9% is sold outside of the App Store, and the only thing I bought lately in the AppStrore is "Baldurs Gate", considering the numbers that is not even 1%.
We should have had a major rewrite by now.
That is an idiotic idea. Software does not age. Why would you rewrite something that runs perfectly well?
S 10 hit the market in 2001 and even though there have been major updates to make it less obsolete, we are now again approaching 16 years. ... what is the problem?
And
Windows got kinda rewritten several times, and it became worse and worse ... why would a rewritten Mac OS X (how we call it then? Y?) have anything better to offer than a normal upgrade has (which are already pretty messy imho)?
Not sure, but I believe the compilers are OSS anyway ...
It runs on non Apple Hardware just fine, google "Hackintosh". Or google "OS X on non apple hardware" ... it is as simple as that!
I've hired IT peeps by the shitloads for corporations and none were Mac-trained.
What is "Mac trained" supposed to mean?
Macs are for niche users -- mostly students and artists.
90% - 95% of all Mac users I know are: programmers. Or otherwise busy in the software industry.
You must live at a very special place that you think Actually, the market is NOT serious computer users. Those stick with the PC models. makes any sense.
Well,
iOs beyond iOS 6 is ugly, iOS 7 barely bearable. ... and on the company laptops I used last months, it crashes constantly (15" laptops, don't know how old).
OS X from 10.10 on is ugly
I still have my old 17" on OS X 10.6 ... and won't upgrade the OS. I actually consider to buy a few used/refurbished 17" of the latest generation, with matte screens ofc. But they cost used nearly as much as a new 15" one :)
I would use one of them and mothball the others, till finally in their wisdom the gnomes at Apple build new 17" machines, ooooor: even bigger ones!
Until iOS does not get back nice Apps, like iBook reader, Calendar, Notes etc. like they where on iOS 5 or iOS 6, I never buy an iPad or iPhone again ...
The current versions look like they are designed by people with eye cancer, or worthe.
On my Mac book air, I have OS X 10.9. It stores my calendars in the cloud, I can not even change that. It has parts of my self written text documents (Textedit) in the cloud. I can mot remove them from there without getting the notice: 'they will be removed from the device, too!' What an idiot did 'design' that? Now I have to manually copy all text documents to an usb stick. Delete the cloud (because it is to complicated to figure which files are in the cloud and which aren't) then copy them back from the USB stick.
Anyway ... I wished they would stop bringing out a new OS every few months and simply fix the bugs in the old ones, keep the usability high (because it is declining fast) and for fuck sake stop the continuous uglification of the GUI! The nice red, yellow, green gems as windows icons before 10.10 replaced by coloured 'dots'??? Why the fuck is even anyone considering to put a single minute work in changing that? And with such a result? The guys responsible for this should be dragged into a very deep and dark cellar.
I actually should stop awnser ing more than one of your idiotic posts per day.
You might be right about the USA. (but I doubt that)
However Lyft and Uber are operating world wide. I can assure you: everything you claim, it would not exist, is existing very heavily in Germany and France, the two countries I'm most experienced in.
I think the worst thing about Hillary (from an outside non US view) is: she simply is ugly.
Trump is ugly, too.
However people seem to prefer an ugly man over an ugly woman all the time (no idea if that is a general rule, but it looks to me like it is).
The technology of today is the same as 20 years ago. ...
You use silicon like in the chips industry, dote it, like in the chips industry and basically thats it.
However 20 years ago the world market for solar power was extremely small (and all power markets where relatively small)
That is why Germany e.g.started subsidizing solar power about 30 years ago
The main reason is the capital intensity. Not many companies can build a multi billion fab for solar panels from their pocket money or get funding in such high amounts.
The last time you spread this wrong 'information' you probably where misinformed. /. readers that your claim is: wrong.
However you got corrected just a few days ago by dozens of
So repeating this claim now, makes it: a lie.
So what is your agenda in lying to the audience in such an important matter?
A more efficient PV cell is easier to activate under low light. ... the CF is mainly determined by number of solar hours per year which again is determined by location of the plant. And the internal resistance of a photovoltaic panel is close to irrelevant for its power production.
That is bollocks. The amount of photons able to kick an electron into the conducting band depends on the doting and the kind of 'junctions'. In the bandwidth of light spectrum where a solar panel is working it is already very efficient regarding that frequencies.
It takes a certain level of light to get a PV cell to overcome it's internal resistance,
No it does not. Resistance has nothing to do with light level. The question only is: are there enough electrons kicked inot the 'conducting band' to get a current.
if this resistance can be lowered then it can operate through a larger part of the day.
Larger as in how many seconds exactly? Where we have best places for solar plants, we have the shortest times of twilight.
Anyway, the discussion if efficiency is irrelevant for CFs
Actually at peak the solar plant will deliver its 9.5 peak. Same for the gas plant ... and the gas plant has no CF of 100% either, unless it is a base load plant then it likely runs at 95% power output with enough down time to have a CF of about 90%.
In real life a gas plant will be at absolute minimum at night, barely producing power, and load following between roughly 9AM till 5PM or 7AM and 7PM at decision of the operators, so its CF is just about 45 percent, as most power plants that are not used for base load.
It does not really matter if you fall from the roof cleaning a solar panel or cleaning a chimney.
Both can be avoided by following safety standards.
The carbon footprint of solar panels approaches zero. The only carbon dioxide produced is basically the transportation of raw material and finalized products to the installation place! If you take that into account then the carbon footprint of nuclear plants are a nightmare. They produce over their life span nearly the same amount as a similar coal plant does.
All power plants, that includes nuclear plants, need a favorable place. The main reason why Germany did mot build more â" before the decision to abolish them â" is that Germany has no space left where we could build one. Except the option to upgrade an existing one with another reactor.
Same for France btw. That is the main reason France is buying so much power from Germany and in parallel is investing in renewables. Climate change is hitting Germany and France noticeable already: less snow in winter means far less water in summer in the rivers. Which means: shut down nuclear plants due to environmental regulations regarding temperature of water in the rivers. Or simple lack of water.
Geothermal btw, does not really need special places. You only need to bore deep enough. Ofc. it is fun to have geysers in front of the house ...