You will take some of the heat from the outside air, and even generate some clean water using condensation - but the heat will only move from the outside air into the ground. The only positive point is that, creatively using the energy transfer, you get (hopefully) energy independence (thus reducing the heat others would put in the air to generate your electricity).
I hope it will work - but you are starting from a very low temperature differential, and you are bound to get only small results
I've had two mobile phones until now - the first, an Ericsson T10, was the best. Worked fine, but after the second battery (non-Ericsson) wouldn't hold a charge, I went to a T230 (Sony-Ericsson now). After two years, the battery was used too, so I chose a Nokia 1600 (to standardize on phone chargers with my fiancee).
I have a Nokia 1600 phone - and it has a charger for the old standard (wider plug), but it seems to have a hole for a smaller plug - could that be the new charger?
I took the example of the helium balloon wrongly. I should remake the computations:
Hot air has about 1kg buoyancy for 3 cubic meters of volume, at 120C. As the envelope is destroyed at launch, one could use higher temperatures - so, one could get (at sea level) some 1kg of buoyancy from 2 cubic meters of volume.
At altitude, this is reduced by the air density (at 30 000 feet, density is 0.4 the density at sea level - but it is colder, so you get maybe half the buoyancy at sea level) - you need 4 cubic meters of volume for each kg of mass.
Now, you need some energy to keep the hot air in the balloon hot - one could maybe use the liquid oxygen and hydrogen that evaporates from the launch vehicle during the ascent (the balloon won't rocket in the skies, but will fly with some 10 m/s - ascent will take 20 minutes at least).
Now, you only need an envelope that will withstand the mass of 3,000 tons (equivalent with 100 and some SUVs), all stretched in a sphere maybe 1000 feet across.
Halogens are working at a higher filament temperature, so more of their energy is given out as light (as compared to infrared/heat). They are more efficient, but not by much
There is a pressure regulator between the gas lines and the . The pressure AFTER the regulator is low enough that you won't hear sound from a pierced line.
When sleeping, smell won't awake you - even more so when the gas only accumulates in the kitchen (due to closed doors). However, an explosion in the kitchen can kill you while you are in the bedroom.
They are perfect to "hover" over an area - as they are lighter than air, they use almost no energy to just stay over a place (high winds notwithstanding). They can't be refueled in flight though (maybe by using the new light, flexible solar panels stretched on their balloon)
The sad thing is that they are extremely visible at day - even if they can't be targeted by rockets (no heat exhaust, no radar reflections).
You would lose the blimp - there aren't many materials to survive the heat from the launch of a rocket, and none of them in the form of a thin enough film to be used for balloons.
Anyway, let's assume a Saturn V rocket - with a mass of 3,000,000kg. As each cubic meter of air has about 1kg of weight, you need a balloon at least 3,000,000 cubic meters for buoyancy at sea level.
Let;s say you want to launch the rocket at 8,000m (some 25,000 feet). Air there has a density around 0,5kg/m^3, so you need at least double the volume just for payload - let's add some more volume for balloon mass, and you end up with 8 million cubic meters of gas, or a cube 200m long.
How much helium is worth? $37.50/1000 ft^3 (28 m^3), by the U.S. Bureau of Mines.
To fill the balloon, you need 10 million dollars worth of helium (which will be lost, as the balloon envelope will be destroyed at rocket launch). How much energy you save using this?
Well, the first stage on Saturn V rockets will fly up to 110km (using some 2 millions kg of fuel). As such, a ballpark estimate would be a tenth of the energy would not be needed if launch was 8km higher - saving you 200,000kg of liquid hydrogen and oxygen (in a proportion about 8:1 for oxygen, mass). Cost? $3.6/kg hydrogen, $0.1/kg oxygen - $100,000 at 1980 prices.
Launching rockets from balloons sounds reasonable?
Even better - the biggest buoyancy force you could get would be having a balloon filled with void. With this, your buoyancy would be almost 20% better than for a helium balloon, and almost 10% better than the hot helium balloon.
Your blimps could be made only so much smaller - you must provide enough buoyancy for your load. The weight of your balloon just adds to that.
True, with new construction materials you could make a blimp half as big (volume of gas) as one of the old - but this only saves you about 30% of linear size.
When you create a database, you standardize on the way the content is correct. Then, you standardize the way you can add/change/remove data. For this, you can have some stored procedures.
In order to keep the stored procedures simple, you then move some of the work, which will be done when triggers are triggered.
Can you use the database as just a collection of tables, and enforcing the client to make the changes? Yes. But this way, you need transactions: if you sell mainboards, K7S5A, and have lots of orders - you can't get any more K7S5a, so you change the item to K7S5A+. If you have a stored procedure, you call it - change all K7S5A in orders in K7S5A+. If you don't, you change some things, start updating the waiting orders, and your computer crashes - your database will be left in a state that's not correct. When your money depend on the correct status of the database, you lose.
The effects of no gravity are well known. Some soviet cosmonauts stayed in orbit (in cramped stations) for hundreds of days - and the results were not pretty. One loses muscle mass and bone mass in zero gravity - on return to Earth they are weaklings
The market is not a better judge for valor of a game, than the elections are for valor of a man.
These being said, it is possible the game was not worthy (but there are plenty of worthy games that had little success on the market)
But last year you didn't buy any TV shows over iTune - so their TV Shows department must have grew by 3/0 * 100% (and I don't remember what 3/0 is, even if it was reported on Slashdot)
To make a liquid bomb big enough in the plane would be suicide (and just that). To make one of the explosives suggested to be used, one must pour very very slowly nitric acid (superconcentrated) into another liquid (don't remember which). All while avoiding shocks, and keeping the reaction cool (the reaction mass becomes very hot). All in the cramped space of a plane toilet, in a flying plane... and while avoiding to inhale the vapors that are produced. Impossible to produce enough explosive.
When explosion occurs, nitric acid will be splashed everywhere, making holes in everything - aluminium skin of the airplane, if the explosion if not big enough to puncture it, holes in the floor and so on.
Would it be bad for passengers? Hell yes. Would the plane continue flying? even more probable
In the 1998, the hard drives were around the 5GB capacity. 8 years later, you could buy a 500GB disk drive. Looks better than doubling in every year.
Meanwhile, you had the ATA33 PIO mode and UltraDMA as standard communication protocols - for a 33MB/s communication speed - and now you have the SATA2, with ten times better communication speed. I don't know about real read rates at those times - I just know that 4-5 years ago, my almost top-of-line, 80GB, 7200rpm hard drive would get >30MB/s read rate in hdtach in Linux (Mandriva I think). How fast is a current hard drive? Double the speed?
Hard drive speed is well below the increase in capacity, and doesn't seem to tend to increase much more.
Right now are the low write count (worked upon, and mostly solved), sequential speed (again, worked upon and mostly solved) and especially the cost per gigabyte.
Will the new format allow lower costs per gigabyte compared to the current hard drive cost? Will the cost be lower than the projected cost of flash memory in the 10 years time frame? How will the cost of magnetic media storage (HDD) change in the following years?
Laptop batteries are at some 18 Volts (or so I've seen on one). If you take into account a laptop with P4 Mobile processor, it can't take (the processor itself) less than 50W. Add to this other electricity uses (hard drive, display), and you end up with a need for up to 10 amps at a time.
I remember this notation only from university physics. As for electric current courses, I don't really remember the way the square root of -1 was written.
Thanks for the reminder
This certainly is a comfortable and nice history of the development of complex arithmetic.
As for wrong, it could totally be - I haven't studied the history of numbers, and as for complex numbers, I was only telling you what I was taught (in school) - that the solutions for x^2 + 1 = 0 equation was baptized i, and was blessed with the property that i squared was -1.
If you are taking the direct trigonometric way (start at positive Ox, rotate toward positive Oy) (unlike the clockwork's way, from positive Oy to positive Ox), then multiplication by i means rotate a quarter of circle.
One can represent a complex number -let's say x+i*y - in a trigonometric sort of way as r*(cos alpha + i * sin alpha) - or the radius of the circle centered in (0,0), and the angle (in trigonometric direction) from the Ox axis to the line from (0,0) to the (x,y) value
Slashdot Mirror
You will take some of the heat from the outside air, and even generate some clean water using condensation - but the heat will only move from the outside air into the ground. The only positive point is that, creatively using the energy transfer, you get (hopefully) energy independence (thus reducing the heat others would put in the air to generate your electricity).
I hope it will work - but you are starting from a very low temperature differential, and you are bound to get only small results
The powered (6-pin) Firewire will certainly do so - but if all you have is a 4-pin unpowered Firewire port, you are out of luck
I've had two mobile phones until now - the first, an Ericsson T10, was the best. Worked fine, but after the second battery (non-Ericsson) wouldn't hold a charge, I went to a T230 (Sony-Ericsson now). After two years, the battery was used too, so I chose a Nokia 1600 (to standardize on phone chargers with my fiancee).
I have a Nokia 1600 phone - and it has a charger for the old standard (wider plug), but it seems to have a hole for a smaller plug - could that be the new charger?
I took the example of the helium balloon wrongly. I should remake the computations:
Hot air has about 1kg buoyancy for 3 cubic meters of volume, at 120C. As the envelope is destroyed at launch, one could use higher temperatures - so, one could get (at sea level) some 1kg of buoyancy from 2 cubic meters of volume.
At altitude, this is reduced by the air density (at 30 000 feet, density is 0.4 the density at sea level - but it is colder, so you get maybe half the buoyancy at sea level) - you need 4 cubic meters of volume for each kg of mass.
Now, you need some energy to keep the hot air in the balloon hot - one could maybe use the liquid oxygen and hydrogen that evaporates from the launch vehicle during the ascent (the balloon won't rocket in the skies, but will fly with some 10 m/s - ascent will take 20 minutes at least).
Now, you only need an envelope that will withstand the mass of 3,000 tons (equivalent with 100 and some SUVs), all stretched in a sphere maybe 1000 feet across.
One could use a submarine body - if it can resist deep underwater, a bit of void inside its shell should be easy
Halogens are working at a higher filament temperature, so more of their energy is given out as light (as compared to infrared/heat). They are more efficient, but not by much
There is a pressure regulator between the gas lines and the . The pressure AFTER the regulator is low enough that you won't hear sound from a pierced line.
When sleeping, smell won't awake you - even more so when the gas only accumulates in the kitchen (due to closed doors). However, an explosion in the kitchen can kill you while you are in the bedroom.
They are perfect to "hover" over an area - as they are lighter than air, they use almost no energy to just stay over a place (high winds notwithstanding). They can't be refueled in flight though (maybe by using the new light, flexible solar panels stretched on their balloon)
The sad thing is that they are extremely visible at day - even if they can't be targeted by rockets (no heat exhaust, no radar reflections).
You would lose the blimp - there aren't many materials to survive the heat from the launch of a rocket, and none of them in the form of a thin enough film to be used for balloons.
Anyway, let's assume a Saturn V rocket - with a mass of 3,000,000kg. As each cubic meter of air has about 1kg of weight, you need a balloon at least 3,000,000 cubic meters for buoyancy at sea level.
Let;s say you want to launch the rocket at 8,000m (some 25,000 feet). Air there has a density around 0,5kg/m^3, so you need at least double the volume just for payload - let's add some more volume for balloon mass, and you end up with 8 million cubic meters of gas, or a cube 200m long.
How much helium is worth? $37.50/1000 ft^3 (28 m^3), by the U.S. Bureau of Mines.
To fill the balloon, you need 10 million dollars worth of helium (which will be lost, as the balloon envelope will be destroyed at rocket launch). How much energy you save using this?
Well, the first stage on Saturn V rockets will fly up to 110km (using some 2 millions kg of fuel). As such, a ballpark estimate would be a tenth of the energy would not be needed if launch was 8km higher - saving you 200,000kg of liquid hydrogen and oxygen (in a proportion about 8:1 for oxygen, mass). Cost? $3.6/kg hydrogen, $0.1/kg oxygen - $100,000 at 1980 prices.
Launching rockets from balloons sounds reasonable?
Even better - the biggest buoyancy force you could get would be having a balloon filled with void. With this, your buoyancy would be almost 20% better than for a helium balloon, and almost 10% better than the hot helium balloon.
Your blimps could be made only so much smaller - you must provide enough buoyancy for your load. The weight of your balloon just adds to that.
True, with new construction materials you could make a blimp half as big (volume of gas) as one of the old - but this only saves you about 30% of linear size.
When you create a database, you standardize on the way the content is correct. Then, you standardize the way you can add/change/remove data. For this, you can have some stored procedures.
In order to keep the stored procedures simple, you then move some of the work, which will be done when triggers are triggered.
Can you use the database as just a collection of tables, and enforcing the client to make the changes? Yes. But this way, you need transactions: if you sell mainboards, K7S5A, and have lots of orders - you can't get any more K7S5a, so you change the item to K7S5A+. If you have a stored procedure, you call it - change all K7S5A in orders in K7S5A+. If you don't, you change some things, start updating the waiting orders, and your computer crashes - your database will be left in a state that's not correct. When your money depend on the correct status of the database, you lose.
The effects of no gravity are well known. Some soviet cosmonauts stayed in orbit (in cramped stations) for hundreds of days - and the results were not pretty. One loses muscle mass and bone mass in zero gravity - on return to Earth they are weaklings
The market is not a better judge for valor of a game, than the elections are for valor of a man.
These being said, it is possible the game was not worthy (but there are plenty of worthy games that had little success on the market)
Windows is "good enough" for most of the people in the world - and for some, Linux is not good enough.
But last year you didn't buy any TV shows over iTune - so their TV Shows department must have grew by 3/0 * 100% (and I don't remember what 3/0 is, even if it was reported on Slashdot)
To make a liquid bomb big enough in the plane would be suicide (and just that). To make one of the explosives suggested to be used, one must pour very very slowly nitric acid (superconcentrated) into another liquid (don't remember which). All while avoiding shocks, and keeping the reaction cool (the reaction mass becomes very hot). All in the cramped space of a plane toilet, in a flying plane... and while avoiding to inhale the vapors that are produced. Impossible to produce enough explosive.
When explosion occurs, nitric acid will be splashed everywhere, making holes in everything - aluminium skin of the airplane, if the explosion if not big enough to puncture it, holes in the floor and so on.
Would it be bad for passengers? Hell yes. Would the plane continue flying? even more probable
In the 1998, the hard drives were around the 5GB capacity. 8 years later, you could buy a 500GB disk drive. Looks better than doubling in every year.
Meanwhile, you had the ATA33 PIO mode and UltraDMA as standard communication protocols - for a 33MB/s communication speed - and now you have the SATA2, with ten times better communication speed. I don't know about real read rates at those times - I just know that 4-5 years ago, my almost top-of-line, 80GB, 7200rpm hard drive would get >30MB/s read rate in hdtach in Linux (Mandriva I think). How fast is a current hard drive? Double the speed?
Hard drive speed is well below the increase in capacity, and doesn't seem to tend to increase much more.
Right now are the low write count (worked upon, and mostly solved), sequential speed (again, worked upon and mostly solved) and especially the cost per gigabyte.
Will the new format allow lower costs per gigabyte compared to the current hard drive cost? Will the cost be lower than the projected cost of flash memory in the 10 years time frame? How will the cost of magnetic media storage (HDD) change in the following years?
Laptop batteries are at some 18 Volts (or so I've seen on one). If you take into account a laptop with P4 Mobile processor, it can't take (the processor itself) less than 50W. Add to this other electricity uses (hard drive, display), and you end up with a need for up to 10 amps at a time.
I remember this notation only from university physics. As for electric current courses, I don't really remember the way the square root of -1 was written.
Thanks for the reminder
This certainly is a comfortable and nice history of the development of complex arithmetic.
As for wrong, it could totally be - I haven't studied the history of numbers, and as for complex numbers, I was only telling you what I was taught (in school) - that the solutions for x^2 + 1 = 0 equation was baptized i, and was blessed with the property that i squared was -1.
If you are taking the direct trigonometric way (start at positive Ox, rotate toward positive Oy) (unlike the clockwork's way, from positive Oy to positive Ox), then multiplication by i means rotate a quarter of circle.
One can represent a complex number -let's say x+i*y - in a trigonometric sort of way as r*(cos alpha + i * sin alpha) - or the radius of the circle centered in (0,0), and the angle (in trigonometric direction) from the Ox axis to the line from (0,0) to the (x,y) value
Couldn't agree more