Science - a symposium. (Feat. SMBP) - Page 8

Sithdarth · 02-22-2012, 07:57 PM

I'm not buying the no ecological impact. You see there are these things called currents in the ocean and these currents depend on the temperature differential between the surface and the ocean floor. There is also this thing where deep sea water tends to have more nutrients and causes explosions of life where its forced to the surface. This can happen when water runs into an underwater mountain range and it also happens in the Arctic and Antarctic ocean do to convection.

The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk · 02-22-2012, 08:13 PM

Yeah, you really can't say it has no ecological effects until you actually build one and study what effects it might be having. Just goin "hey guys we've got this new idea for an energy source and all it does is steal massive amounts of heat from the ocean it'll be totally fine and safe", does not sound like science to me.

phil_ · 02-22-2012, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sithdarth

stuff

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawk

stuff

But we get to keep building giant metal ocean penises and make more ~~money~~ current by doing so. It doesn't matter if it kills everything; metal money penises!

Grandmaster_Skweeb · 02-22-2012, 11:14 PM

Man, I'm beginning to wonder if you guys even read the article thoroughly and the subsequent linked articles. Wonder if I should've tossed in buzz words like eco terrorism for better replies.

Going to be a bit of an asshole here, but hey it's in the name of science. Let's use the power of rational logical thought and imagery.

The amount of thermal transferrence is so miniscule that to imply that this system would effect the tidal system in any significant way is hilariously laughable.
Of course there'll be an impact on the environment, the gipper here is that it'll be astoundingly less than, say, conventional power sources that fuck the environment up far worse over a much longer period of time like this or this or hell..Fukushima.
again, because it is just hilarious to imply: it won't change the tidal system beyond the fuckery we already implement. Hell, might improve things.
Nowhere in the multiple articles on this does it state that it'll pump up cold water. nutrients and other goodies sit nice and tidy in their cold water. That is counterproductive to the very system in question. In fact, by the astounding powers vested in me of logical deduction I've drawn up a very fuckin amazing picture of the system (that should be forwarded to the engineers because it is that goddamn amazing, mirite?). Now, this is just a drawing but the concept is pretty much spot on.
Also, eco terrorism.
Also, also carbon is amazing.

Grandmaster_Skweeb · 02-23-2012, 04:28 PM

Righte, I cocked up on the word choice. Meant currents instead of tides. Derped that one up while typing between lab projects.

I don't think it'll be as drastic as you make it out to be, in any case. The required generator setup has been in testing for well around six months with great results. Ranging from prevention of corrosion to the effectiveness of the graphite foam. The graphite foam is the real clincher for this and its role is kinda played down. Utilizes heat transference far more efficiently with much less wasted heat.

A working model, albeit a smaller one, will be hitting hawaii this spring for longer term test results. So's more or less a waiting game at this point. I'm hoping for the best, honestly. Anything to get rid of, or significantly reduce, the reliance on foreign oil, coal burning, etc. Even if the generator doesn't pan out the graphite foam has already shown it can increase the efficiency of existing heat based power systems by a fair amount.

Professor Smarmiarty · 03-03-2012, 06:23 AM

http://www.nature.com/news/computer-...-a-box-1.10066
Here's a report on an interesting idea- basically trying to make computer simulations of the brain from the bottom up.
I've long said the problem with neuroscience is that there is no functional model of how the brain works, it's all just various individual sections that don't work together. soattempts to overcome this are welcome.
I agree with the stated criticisms, however, and really hink a unified model needs to come from the overway- firstly a quite broad model which doesn't include all the details of how exactly neurons fire etc that can then be added detail to once you have a functional large scale model. This is how physics and chemistry have always work and they know have highly detailed yet full ranging models. The problem with neuroscience is that it was created in the last 50 years reall, when we had high level techniques of experiment, high levels of interest in tiny parts of the brain and very sophisticated knowledge of chemistry which allows us to strip to the core how bits of the brain work. There was no long slow development of the science, we could instantly focus in massive detail on any bit of the brain we want and a unified model suffered. The other problem is the brains intense plasticity, complexity and adaptivity which mean a model will be ver difficult to derive but I'm not sure this is the right approach.

Gregness · 03-10-2012, 07:28 PM

So, apparantly someone went and made an LED with an electrical efficiency of 230%. To keep thermodynamics from shitting itself, apparantly it makes up the extra energy by extracting heat from its surroundings. There's even a link to the research paper itself, but I don't have an account with the place its on and I'll be damned if I get one for one paper.

Any of you more physics aligned chaps have an account there already and want to add their two cents?

Sithdarth · 03-10-2012, 08:06 PM

Its old news and almost completely useless at this stage and probably for anything really. Its a neat trick but right now it requires small band gaps which means infrared light and it requires exceedingly low bias voltages which means exceedingly low power.

Professor Smarmiarty · 03-11-2012, 07:45 AM

As a speculative concept its been around since at least the 90s possibly earlier. Its not really soemthing you can scale up though because you are basically using lattice heat to get the extra power and it is never going to be particularly large.
Actually making it is prett nifty though.

Professor Smarmiarty · 03-12-2012, 04:04 PM

Old news but it came out up in the chat and some people haven't heard it.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...-proteins.html
We found dinosaur blood mofos. Dinosaur fucking blood.
This article is a bit out of date- since then they have confirmed that they have indeed found blood cell proteins.
No way blood can survive millions of years- this is pretty much proof all dinosaur bones are fake.

02-22-2012, 11:14 PM	#4
Grandmaster_Skweeb Doesn't care anymore Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 2,429	Man, I'm beginning to wonder if you guys even read the article thoroughly and the subsequent linked articles. Wonder if I should've tossed in buzz words like eco terrorism for better replies. Going to be a bit of an asshole here, but hey it's in the name of science. Let's use the power of rational logical thought and imagery. The amount of thermal transferrence is so miniscule that to imply that this system would effect the tidal system in any significant way is hilariously laughable. Of course there'll be an impact on the environment, the gipper here is that it'll be astoundingly less than, say, conventional power sources that fuck the environment up far worse over a much longer period of time like this or this or hell..Fukushima. again, because it is just hilarious to imply: it won't change the tidal system beyond the fuckery we already implement. Hell, might improve things. Nowhere in the multiple articles on this does it state that it'll pump up cold water. nutrients and other goodies sit nice and tidy in their cold water. That is counterproductive to the very system in question. In fact, by the astounding powers vested in me of logical deduction I've drawn up a very fuckin amazing picture of the system (that should be forwarded to the engineers because it is that goddamn amazing, mirite?). Now, this is just a drawing but the concept is pretty much spot on. Also, eco terrorism. Also, also carbon is amazing. Last edited by Grandmaster_Skweeb; 02-22-2012 at 11:17 PM.

03-10-2012, 07:28 PM	#7
Gregness Never give up. Never give in. Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 1,034	So, apparantly someone went and made an LED with an electrical efficiency of 230%. To keep thermodynamics from shitting itself, apparantly it makes up the extra energy by extracting heat from its surroundings. There's even a link to the research paper itself, but I don't have an account with the place its on and I'll be damned if I get one for one paper. Any of you more physics aligned chaps have an account there already and want to add their two cents? __________________ A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. - Robert Heinlein

02-22-2012, 07:57 PM	#1
Sithdarth Friendly Neighborhood Quantum Hobo Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Outside the M-brane look'n in Posts: 5,403	I'm not buying the no ecological impact. You see there are these things called currents in the ocean and these currents depend on the temperature differential between the surface and the ocean floor. There is also this thing where deep sea water tends to have more nutrients and causes explosions of life where its forced to the surface. This can happen when water runs into an underwater mountain range and it also happens in the Arctic and Antarctic ocean do to convection.

02-23-2012, 04:28 PM	#5
Grandmaster_Skweeb Doesn't care anymore Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 2,429	Righte, I cocked up on the word choice. Meant currents instead of tides. Derped that one up while typing between lab projects. I don't think it'll be as drastic as you make it out to be, in any case. The required generator setup has been in testing for well around six months with great results. Ranging from prevention of corrosion to the effectiveness of the graphite foam. The graphite foam is the real clincher for this and its role is kinda played down. Utilizes heat transference far more efficiently with much less wasted heat. A working model, albeit a smaller one, will be hitting hawaii this spring for longer term test results. So's more or less a waiting game at this point. I'm hoping for the best, honestly. Anything to get rid of, or significantly reduce, the reliance on foreign oil, coal burning, etc. Even if the generator doesn't pan out the graphite foam has already shown it can increase the efficiency of existing heat based power systems by a fair amount.

03-03-2012, 06:23 AM	#6
Professor Smarmiarty Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: K-space Posts: 9,758	http://www.nature.com/news/computer-...-a-box-1.10066 Here's a report on an interesting idea- basically trying to make computer simulations of the brain from the bottom up. I've long said the problem with neuroscience is that there is no functional model of how the brain works, it's all just various individual sections that don't work together. soattempts to overcome this are welcome. I agree with the stated criticisms, however, and really hink a unified model needs to come from the overway- firstly a quite broad model which doesn't include all the details of how exactly neurons fire etc that can then be added detail to once you have a functional large scale model. This is how physics and chemistry have always work and they know have highly detailed yet full ranging models. The problem with neuroscience is that it was created in the last 50 years reall, when we had high level techniques of experiment, high levels of interest in tiny parts of the brain and very sophisticated knowledge of chemistry which allows us to strip to the core how bits of the brain work. There was no long slow development of the science, we could instantly focus in massive detail on any bit of the brain we want and a unified model suffered. The other problem is the brains intense plasticity, complexity and adaptivity which mean a model will be ver difficult to derive but I'm not sure this is the right approach.

03-10-2012, 08:06 PM	#8
Sithdarth Friendly Neighborhood Quantum Hobo Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Outside the M-brane look'n in Posts: 5,403	Its old news and almost completely useless at this stage and probably for anything really. Its a neat trick but right now it requires small band gaps which means infrared light and it requires exceedingly low bias voltages which means exceedingly low power.

03-11-2012, 07:45 AM	#9
Professor Smarmiarty Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: K-space Posts: 9,758	As a speculative concept its been around since at least the 90s possibly earlier. Its not really soemthing you can scale up though because you are basically using lattice heat to get the extra power and it is never going to be particularly large. Actually making it is prett nifty though.

03-12-2012, 04:04 PM	#10
Professor Smarmiarty Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: K-space Posts: 9,758	Old news but it came out up in the chat and some people haven't heard it. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...-proteins.html We found dinosaur blood mofos. Dinosaur fucking blood. This article is a bit out of date- since then they have confirmed that they have indeed found blood cell proteins. No way blood can survive millions of years- this is pretty much proof all dinosaur bones are fake.