Hydro: Ruins the ecosystem in the entire river by deprivig it of water, changing temperatures, and destabilizing water levels in lakes.
Fossil: Significant atmospheric sideeffects such as greenhouse, pollution etc.
Nuclear: Even worst case scenarios have little impact on ecosystems. Longitudinal studies of rodents living in areas with radioactive waste, such as Hanford shows degenerative metations in a very small percentage. Mice populations appears just fine after hundreds of generations with high lifetime radiation.
Of course, a meltdown near a big city can be devastating. The alternative however appears to be:
1. A healty diverse ecosystem and nuclear power, or 2. Hydro and fossil fuel and a ruined earth.
However, I am curious
as to where you observed them using a quadratic relationship between magnetic
field strength and applied force.
The formula is on page 1: "This is defined by the formula
for the magnetic force of attraction. The formula is:F=B^2*A/2u"
The reason that four
"units of force" are applied (as opposed to the two units without
using the coils) is that the field strength from the coils matches the field
strength of the permanent magnets, and thus doubles the overall field strength
in the "circuit". Up to this point, I think their theory is
reasonable (though I'm hardly expert in this topic).
For simpicity, just count the number of field lines in the drawings. On page 1 first figure you see two fieldlines
crossing the airgap, and a resulting 1 unit of force. OK.
Now right below, you see a figure with four fieldlines
crossing the airgap. This doubling in
field strengt should double the force to 2 units of force. Flynn here indicate
4 units of force based on the above equation.
Even the drawing reveals the fallacy of this.
You certainly can redirect magnetic flux with coils. That is basically what all electromotors
do. Drawings on p.2 may be correct:
instead of one magnet acting, you have 4: two magnets and two matching coils. Then p.3 is wrong again.
A long time ago at the university I worked on a team
building a MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imager).
We used a lot of powerful magnets, and had a lot of setups testing
various configurations as well as computer models for simulation.
To clarify: 'Linear' was meant in the sense that the system can be modelled with a linear function. Wether this is a vector, matrix or tensor is irrelevant in this context. 'Linear' in the word 'linear accelerator' is entirely different, and refers to the geometry of the particle trajectory.
The Pondoromotive force is not a 'non-linear quantum effect', and have nothing to do with electromotors. It can be deduced using Maxwell's classical equations, and applies to free particles in THz fields such as a plasma in a laser.
The answer is: Just doctor up formulaes: Force is proportional to magnetic flux. Se http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/ Look up 'amperes law', 'magnetic force' and 'Lorentz force'. As you can see they are all _linear_. I.e. F=B*k. (Force = Field times some constant. Flynn makes the relationship quadratic: F=B^2*A/2u.
To translate for/. readers: You have one C++ programmer, and you need more work done. Just hire one more programmer, and to your surprise, you get 4 times as much done.
Mankind is of course a cancer on this earth, and will soon exhaust all resources like yeast cells in a vat of merlot, however:
The article uses an unfounded and probably incorrect basis that production will peak when half the resurces are extracted. This can be a rule of thunb at best. Then it goes on to use this rule to extrapolate a date with 4 decimal digits. That's a joke.
There are for example enormous oil reserves in oil sand. Possibly more than all other known resources It costs maybe $30/barrel to extract, but at current prices, that is economical.
Prices will most likely continue to grow moderately as other new resouces become economical. This includes alcohol from grain and sugar cane, natural gas, and nuclear power (At least for stationary power)
Slashdot Mirror
Hydro: Ruins the ecosystem in the entire river by deprivig it of water, changing temperatures, and destabilizing water levels in lakes.
Fossil: Significant atmospheric sideeffects such as greenhouse, pollution etc.
Nuclear: Even worst case scenarios have little impact on ecosystems. Longitudinal studies of rodents living in areas with radioactive waste, such as Hanford shows degenerative metations in a very small percentage. Mice populations appears just fine after hundreds of generations with high lifetime radiation.
Of course, a meltdown near a big city can be devastating. The alternative however appears to be:
1. A healty diverse ecosystem and nuclear power, or
2. Hydro and fossil fuel and a ruined earth.
However, I am curious as to where you observed them using a quadratic relationship between magnetic field strength and applied force.
The formula is on page 1: "This is defined by the formula for the magnetic force of attraction. The formula is:F=B^2*A/2u"
The reason that four "units of force" are applied (as opposed to the two units without using the coils) is that the field strength from the coils matches the field strength of the permanent magnets, and thus doubles the overall field strength in the "circuit". Up to this point, I think their theory is reasonable (though I'm hardly expert in this topic).
For simpicity, just count the number of field lines in the drawings. On page 1 first figure you see two fieldlines crossing the airgap, and a resulting 1 unit of force. OK.
Now right below, you see a figure with four fieldlines crossing the airgap. This doubling in field strengt should double the force to 2 units of force. Flynn here indicate 4 units of force based on the above equation. Even the drawing reveals the fallacy of this.
You certainly can redirect magnetic flux with coils. That is basically what all electromotors do. Drawings on p.2 may be correct: instead of one magnet acting, you have 4: two magnets and two matching coils. Then p.3 is wrong again.
A long time ago at the university I worked on a team building a MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imager). We used a lot of powerful magnets, and had a lot of setups testing various configurations as well as computer models for simulation.
That was science, this is fiction.
To clarify: 'Linear' was meant in the sense that the system can be modelled with a linear function. Wether this is a vector, matrix or tensor is irrelevant in this context. 'Linear' in the word 'linear accelerator' is entirely different, and refers to the geometry of the particle trajectory.
The Pondoromotive force is not a 'non-linear quantum effect', and have nothing to do with electromotors. It can be deduced using Maxwell's classical equations, and applies to free particles in THz fields such as a plasma in a laser.
Current electrical motors/generators are up to 99% efficient, and the loss is mostly in resistive loss in wire.
/. readers: You have one C++ programmer, and you need more work done. Just hire one more programmer, and to your surprise, you get 4 times as much done.
There is no room for any meaningful improvement unless you claim to have more than 100% efficiency, and they do. Lunatic bin right here!
Current electrical motors/generators are up to 99% efficient, and the loss is mostly in resistive loss in wire.
There is no room for any meaningful improvement unless you claim to have more than 100% efficiency, and they do. Lunatic bin right here.!
I was curious as to what they based their claim on?
First, go to http://www.flynnresearch.net/ to se some details on this.
The answer is:
Just doctor up formulaes: Force is proportional to magnetic flux. Se http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/ Look up 'amperes law', 'magnetic force' and 'Lorentz force'. As you can see they are all _linear_. I.e. F=B*k. (Force = Field times some constant. Flynn makes the relationship quadratic: F=B^2*A/2u.
To translate for
Mankind is of course a cancer on this earth, and will soon exhaust all resources like yeast cells in a vat of merlot, however:
The article uses an unfounded and probably incorrect basis that production will peak when half the resurces are extracted. This can be a rule of thunb at best. Then it goes on to use this rule to extrapolate a date with 4 decimal digits. That's a joke.
There are for example enormous oil reserves in oil sand. Possibly more than all other known resources It costs maybe $30/barrel to extract, but at current prices, that is economical.
Prices will most likely continue to grow moderately as other new resouces become economical. This includes alcohol from grain and sugar cane, natural gas, and nuclear power (At least for stationary power)