This was intended in the earlier posting, but not explicitly mentioned - Anyways I think it is better to explicitly mention - Also any acceleration can be offset by the deceleration of the same vehicle - provided the brakes are designed to push in the energy back to the vehicle (through some engergy storing mechanism [spring??] on crankshaft maybe ??).
Hi all,
I am not a mechanical engineer, so pardon my ignorance.
My question is as follows -
Why do we have fuel consumption this high in vehicles?
That too when the vehicles are benchmarked on level roads.
I was thinking that only energy that is needed to keep the vehicle in motion is the energy to overcome rolling friction + drag.
(+ all the losses inside the moving parts of the vehicle, which I think can be minimised)
In this case why is the fuel consumption this high in vehicles?
Any further energy needed (to go up a slope for ex), can be reused from earlier (before that it could have gone down a slope, so that energy stored is used) energies (since on an average all + and - tends to cancel out).
I know that this would have been thought out much much earlier by engineers, but I just wanted to know.
But is the world mature enough for that? I was under the impression that 3G would be an overkill, till the mobiles etc does get mature enough for that..
Come to think of that, even now 2G is unavailable at quite a few places.
Maybe.
But that is *no* reason to ignore him completely.
The article was quite comprehensive and looks like quite a bit of big guys are behind it.
I do agree that a distinguished list also stood behind ramar too, and which was disproved completely, but I believe we should keep an open mind towards these.
Maybe his deduction is wrong, but if his invention _works_, it means something else (currently unknown) is there.
maybe..
Quite. That is none of my business at all.
I do agree, I had not thought about it in that sense at all. Thanks.
But the reason why I said, 'hope not' was not *only* that.
I had read earlier that WJ Sidis had major nevrous breakdowns due to the incessant pressure put on him by the media, and even by peers.
Even when he was found to be doing a mundane job, major newsparpers of the day published the same as a major thing. Think about the (possible) humilation.
So even now, I 'hope not', but now the reasons are different.
Water is a covalent compound. I was comparing the energy needed to break the covalent bond vis-a-vis the energy that is created due to conversion of matter.
Sorry, If I wasnt clear enough.
Another sidis in the making?
I really really hope not...
How much is this guys IQ? No mention of the same in the article.
Another issue with child prodigies are that they grow up fast, but in the end have the same intelligence as a normal human being.
Anyways, here, I don't think that's an issue since I dont know too many [ normal:-) ] people completely understanding shrodinger's eq at 30 let alone 7 years of age.
Not quite. The H2 produced, say even by electrolysis of water using fossil fuels, for this needs to be a miniscule amount. Since the hydrogen here is used for fusion - remember the basic E=mc^2 theory.
So what we are comparing here is 'a chemical reaction, where the enery put in is to break the covalent bonds only' with fusion where matter is converted to energy (with a high o/p).
So if at all it works (which I am really really skeptical of), the break even is easily achievable
Quite. The issue here is that we are doing hunting/gathering for 6 billion people. If only we can find a way to make aqua-farming much more efficient and varied...
Quite So. Just because they are professors, it doesn't mean they all are squeaky clean. There is always black sheep in any group, be it comprised of professors in MIT or laymen.
The moot point here is that there was a system well in place to catch the erring person. Also that MIT publicly announced the same.
This will do their reputation no harm at all.
A sad thing is that the professor, Parijs, did not do any fabrication (from data till now) on his primary research, but only on some tangential research associated with his primary, which do *not* change the findings of the primary area of research.
What is so new/different about this? Doesn't all our code have bugs? With such a big system, it is very probable that somebody is going to miss/mess something up.
Same with the solutions too... Are all our bug fixes perfect? I don't think so....
This is newz just becoz the erring party is microsoft. Isnt it? Anywayz some poor chap is going to lose his job over this...
Is it possible to use a hybrid here? A MPD thruster at the ground, which produces *huge* specific impulses, (has to increase the thrust level though) and then a chemical rocket to take it all the way...
Since it is at the ground, extreme high wattage even if for a few seconds are possible... Once the initial power is obtained, the rocket propulsion can be used to counteract the gravitational force only...
Looks a good point. Their idea, I think, is as follows - Whereever there is a high incidence of mosquitoes, they will release millions of these sterilized mosquitoes in the wild. They should decrease the population in a jiffy.
Another option I can think of is to make the make the mosquitoes completely luminous. This also should decrease the population, cos these mosquitoes would stand out in the night/evening, and thereby become quite an easy meal for the predators. Also the genes does pass on to the next generation due to some of them actually going through having children.
Here also, we might have to release millions in the wild every few generations to have the desired effect. This should have been already thought of, I think.
I know I am going completely off-topic here.. But why is parent given troll ? Just because we dont believe in his theories, we shouldnt be modding him down..
I also am completely against the whole idea postulated by the parent.. But pushing the idea down is exactly opposite of what any discussion should be.
oof.. Seems like we are overrating our intelligence quite a bit!!
Nothing says neanderthals were dumber than us... As per the latest evidence, they were supposed to be brainier than homo-sapiens at that point of time.
I would say, we are here cos we were better suited than them to survive in the wild. In the end, that is all that matters.
We were thin (not now:-) ), did not have too much body hair etc. Ok, an issue when the climate is cold or freezing. But we could always use animal hide for clothes and we were Ok. But if the climate became hotter then we just have to discard it. For neanderthals they did not have this option at all, since they were having quite a bit of muscle mass and fat. and overheating does kill quite fast.
With their technology at that time, there werent any A/C or freezer to shed the excess heat off.
So,as I said earlier, we do give too much importance to brain for our evolution. We became world beaters cos of our brains, but for the basic survival at that time, brawn does win over.
Then why do we not have three eyes ? Two in front and one (atleast a rudimentary one) on the back. This would have saved many a deer from being ambushed from behind...
Also to have a very rudimentary eye behind the head doesnt look like it consumens too much energy for it to be a huge disadvantage during droughts kR/\/
Slashdot Mirror
This was intended in the earlier posting, but not explicitly mentioned -
Anyways I think it is better to explicitly mention -
Also any acceleration can be offset by the deceleration of the same vehicle -
provided the brakes are designed to push in the energy back to the vehicle (through some engergy storing mechanism [spring??] on crankshaft maybe ??).
Please let me know.
Regards,
lol
Hi all,
I am not a mechanical engineer, so pardon my ignorance.
My question is as follows -
Why do we have fuel consumption this high in vehicles?
That too when the vehicles are benchmarked on level roads.
I was thinking that only energy that is needed to keep the vehicle in motion is the energy to overcome rolling friction + drag.
(+ all the losses inside the moving parts of the vehicle, which I think can be minimised)
In this case why is the fuel consumption this high in vehicles?
Any further energy needed (to go up a slope for ex), can be reused from earlier (before that it could have gone down a slope, so that energy stored is used) energies (since on an average all + and - tends to cancel out).
I know that this would have been thought out much much earlier by engineers, but I just wanted to know.
Regards
lol
No..no.. It cannot be considered for this award. ......
It was actually not 'foot' in the mouth, you see
But is the world mature enough for that?
I was under the impression that 3G would be an overkill, till the mobiles etc does get mature enough for that..
Come to think of that, even now 2G is unavailable at quite a few places.
Not only the pirates, but the ships crew and all the passengers tooo.. :-)
Maybe.
But that is *no* reason to ignore him completely.
The article was quite comprehensive and looks like quite a bit of big guys are behind it.
I do agree that a distinguished list also stood behind ramar too, and which was disproved completely, but I believe we should keep an open mind towards these.
Maybe his deduction is wrong, but if his invention _works_, it means something else (currently unknown) is there.
maybe..
Quite. That is none of my business at all. I do agree, I had not thought about it in that sense at all. Thanks. But the reason why I said, 'hope not' was not *only* that. I had read earlier that WJ Sidis had major nevrous breakdowns due to the incessant pressure put on him by the media, and even by peers. Even when he was found to be doing a mundane job, major newsparpers of the day published the same as a major thing. Think about the (possible) humilation. So even now, I 'hope not', but now the reasons are different.
Water is a covalent compound. I was comparing the energy needed to break the covalent bond vis-a-vis the energy that is created due to conversion of matter. Sorry, If I wasnt clear enough.
Another sidis in the making? ...
:-) ] people completely understanding shrodinger's eq at 30 let alone 7 years of age.
I really really hope not
How much is this guys IQ? No mention of the same in the article.
Another issue with child prodigies are that they grow up fast, but in the end have the same intelligence as a normal human being.
Anyways, here, I don't think that's an issue since I dont know too many [ normal
Not quite.
The H2 produced, say even by electrolysis of water using fossil fuels, for this needs to be a miniscule amount.
Since the hydrogen here is used for fusion - remember the basic E=mc^2 theory.
So what we are comparing here is 'a chemical reaction, where the enery put in is to break the covalent bonds only' with fusion where matter is converted to energy (with a high o/p).
So if at all it works (which I am really really skeptical of), the break even is easily achievable
But, Why isn't anybody talking about Nyquist criterion here?
Should that be applicable here ?
Good. Now they know where to search for the relatives...
How are they going to edit it now? :-)
Using post cards?
kR/\/
Quite. ...
The issue here is that we are doing hunting/gathering for 6 billion people.
If only we can find a way to make aqua-farming much more efficient and varied
kR/\/
Quite So.
Just because they are professors, it doesn't mean they all are squeaky clean.
There is always black sheep in any group, be it comprised of professors in MIT or laymen.
The moot point here is that there was a system well in place to catch the erring person.
Also that MIT publicly announced the same.
This will do their reputation no harm at all.
A sad thing is that the professor, Parijs, did not do any fabrication (from data till now) on his primary research, but only on some tangential research associated with his primary, which do *not* change the findings of the primary area of research.
Really sad way to lose out on the reputation...
kR/\/
What is so new/different about this?
...
Doesn't all our code have bugs?
With such a big system, it is very probable that somebody is going to miss/mess something up.
Same with the solutions too...
Are all our bug fixes perfect?
I don't think so....
This is newz just becoz the erring party is microsoft. Isnt it?
Anywayz some poor chap is going to lose his job over this
kR/\/
Like say a 9.6 earthquake, or a comet hitting earth... ...
...
This changes the wobble of earth and so the time is in error after all
I want my refund
kR.\'
Yes. Quite so.
Everywhere we hear about volcanoes in other planets..
Tectonic movement should be one of the primary suspects in all these cases.
kR.\'
Just guessing -
Is it possible to use a hybrid here?
A MPD thruster at the ground, which produces *huge* specific impulses, (has to increase the thrust level though) and then a chemical rocket to take it all the way...
Since it is at the ground, extreme high wattage even if for a few seconds are possible... Once the initial power is obtained, the rocket propulsion can be used to counteract the gravitational force only...
kR.\'
Politically Naive .. Very possible. .. Never.
:-)
Moron
This guy was a famous scientist, before he became president.
Retired as the head of the space research organisation of India .
Pretty hard for a moron to reach that level
kR/\/
Looks a good point.
Their idea, I think, is as follows -
Whereever there is a high incidence of mosquitoes, they will release millions of these sterilized mosquitoes in the wild. They should decrease the population in a jiffy.
Another option I can think of is to make the make the mosquitoes completely luminous.
This also should decrease the population, cos these mosquitoes would stand out in the night/evening, and thereby become quite an easy meal for the predators. Also the genes does pass on to the next generation due to some of them actually going through having children.
Here also, we might have to release millions in the wild every few generations to have the desired effect.
This should have been already thought of, I think.
kR/\/
I know I am going completely off-topic here..
But why is parent given troll ?
Just because we dont believe in his theories, we shouldnt be modding him down..
I also am completely against the whole idea postulated by the parent.. But pushing the idea down is exactly opposite of what any discussion should be.
oof .. Seems like we are overrating our intelligence quite a bit!!
... As per the latest evidence, they were supposed to be brainier than homo-sapiens at that point of time.
:-) ), did not have too much body hair etc. Ok, an issue when the climate is cold or freezing. But we could always use animal hide for clothes and we were Ok. But if the climate became hotter then we just have to discard it. For neanderthals they did not have this option at all, since they were having quite a bit of muscle mass and fat. and overheating does kill quite fast.
Nothing says neanderthals were dumber than us
I would say, we are here cos we were better suited than them to survive in the wild. In the end, that is all that matters.
We were thin (not now
With their technology at that time, there werent any A/C or freezer to shed the excess heat off.
So,as I said earlier, we do give too much importance to brain for our evolution. We became world beaters cos of our brains, but for the basic survival at that time, brawn does win over.
Hope they get the s/w right for this one..
.. it got burnt right through... aarghhhhhhhh
...
F16 Pilot - Hey, one MIG on the radar, fix him proper
**presses phoenix missile button**
Aowwwww
Other guy shoots him down with cannon
kR/\/
Then why do we not have three eyes ? ...
Two in front and one (atleast a rudimentary one) on the back.
This would have saved many a deer from being ambushed from behind
Also to have a very rudimentary eye behind the head doesnt look like it consumens too much energy for it to be a huge disadvantage during droughts
kR/\/