very interesting. my only problem with it is... i don't understand it and if i were to understand then it would most likely be something that really wouldn't work. it passes my test that its science.
anywho, if i may jack the thread slightly with a science question that is more important to me at the moment. I just bought one of those 2.5 gallon disposable water dispensers, zeppheyerlhills brand. i live in florida which i think might have something to do with the fact it taste so strongley of plastic, ie sun,heat,ect...
so my question is is it ok to drink water that taste like plastic and if you can answer how that fusion works instead of that question about the water i would be equally content i suppose.
gregoropolis:very interesting. my only problem with it is... i don't understand it and if i were to understand then it would most likely be something that really wouldn't work. it passes my test that its science.
anywho, if i may jack the thread slightly with a science question that is more important to me at the moment. I just bought one of those 2.5 gallon disposable water dispensers, zeppheyerlhills brand. i live in florida which i think might have something to do with the fact it taste so strongley of plastic, ie sun,heat,ect...
so my question is is it ok to drink water that taste like plastic and if you can answer how that fusion works instead of that question about the water i would be equally content i suppose.
This was my area of graduate study. My advisor did his Ph.D. on the Princeton tokamak; I did my Master's research on a plasma etching chamber mapping out Argon plasma potentials.
Skeptics point out that ever since the idea of fusion power was first touted in the 1950s, fusion's promise of clean power has receded endlessly into the future.
Ding ding ding! In grad school, I realized that when uncontrolled nuclear fusion was achieved in the 30s, they estimated commercially-viable fusion would be 30 years away. In the 60s, it was only 30 years away. In the 70s, the carrot was still on that 30-year stick, ditto for the 80s.
I did not want to spend 30 years of my career chasing a carrot that would be 30 years away when I retired, and left grad school.
After 20 years searching for the ideal adsorber -- including sintered metals and porous minerals called zeolites -- Day's team decided on charcoal.
Apparently I would have spent the past 20 years publishing papers like "He3 Plasma Impingment And Retention Testing Upon A Piece Of Gum I Found Under The Table At Bennigan's". fark that.
gregoropolis:I just bought one of those 2.5 gallon disposable water dispensers, zeppheyerlhills brand. i live in florida which i think might have something to do with the fact it taste so strongley of plastic, ie sun,heat,ect...
so my question is is it ok to drink water that taste like plastic and if you can answer how that fusion works instead of that question about the water i would be equally content i suppose.
What's it made of? Does it have a recycling symbol?
Baking soda in water is good for getting rid of off flavors, but I'm not as relaxed about stuff leaching out of plastic bottles as I used to be.
ProdigalSigh:FTA: Tokamak (from the Russian for "toroidal chamber with magnetic coils")
They have a word for that?
It's an acronym: toroidal'naya kamera c magnitnymi katushkami
I'm skeptical about this whole project though. The Tokamak has been around for decades at this point, and I don't think it's ever netted positive in energy production. That is, it takes more energy to run it than it can produce. Are they really saying that coconut charcoal can make that big of a difference?
syrynxx:This was my area of graduate study. My advisor did his Ph.D. on the Princeton tokamak; I did my Master's research on a plasma etching chamber mapping out Argon plasma potentials.
Skeptics point out that ever since the idea of fusion power was first touted in the 1950s, fusion's promise of clean power has receded endlessly into the future.
Ding ding ding! In grad school, I realized that when uncontrolled nuclear fusion was achieved in the 30s, they estimated commercially-viable fusion would be 30 years away. In the 60s, it was only 30 years away. In the 70s, the carrot was still on that 30-year stick, ditto for the 80s.
I did not want to spend 30 years of my career chasing a carrot that would be 30 years away when I retired, and left grad school.
After 20 years searching for the ideal adsorber -- including sintered metals and porous minerals called zeolites -- Day's team decided on charcoal.
Apparently I would have spent the past 20 years publishing papers like "He3 Plasma Impingment And Retention Testing Upon A Piece Of Gum I Found Under The Table At Bennigan's". fark that.
Really? Please enlighten me.
The reality is this...
Nuclear Engineers: Fusion Power is 40 years away (if we put the kind of money and effort that we put into developing and commercializing fission power) Can I has some funding? Government: Can this be used for weapons? Nuclear Engineers: Well no but... Government: Here is five dollars and some government cheese
Nuclear Engineers: Fusion Power is 40 years away (if we put the kind of money and effort that we put into developing and commercializing fission power) Can I has some funding? Government: Can this be used for weapons? Nuclear Engineers: Well no but... Government: Here is five dollars and some government cheese
That comment struck me as funny, too, since obviously no one had even uncontrolled fission working until close to the end of WWII. Apparently the first successful fusion test was done in 1952.
FTFA: "In what sounds like it could be the beginnings of a Star Trek-like Federation, the United States has joined the European Union, Japan, the Russian Federation, China, Korea, and India..."
ProdigalSigh:FTA: Tokamak (from the Russian for "toroidal chamber with magnetic coils")
They have a word for that?
From what I remember growing up, the godless commies actually thought of everything in ultrarational, scientific terms. So yes, they have a word for that.
Nuclear Engineers: Fusion Power is 40 years away (if we put the kind of money and effort that we put into developing and commercializing fission power) Can I has some funding? Government: Can this be used for weapons? Nuclear Engineers: Well no but... Government: Here is five dollars and some government cheese
That comment struck me as funny, too, since obviously no one had even uncontrolled fission working until close to the end of WWII. Apparently the first successful fusion test was done in 1952.
You got the date correct. The Mike Shot was the first major thermonuclear test.
He may have been referring to the Farnsworth Device. It is asinine to imagine that was anything more than fleeting attempt at Fusion energy. Nearly everything in the US related to Fusion has been weapons related. I always get a chuckle when they talk about the NIF as an "energy" project. Its only real purpose is for stockpile stewardship.
Commercial fusion energy will happen. When it happens is simply a matter of how much money we are willing to spend. Given the $5 Billion we spend on ethanol subsidies, we could afford to do much better than we are.
Makh
2009-11-03 03:09:49 AM
PC LOAD LETTER
2009-11-03 03:50:33 AM
Cheese eating surrender monkey
2009-11-03 04:07:47 AM
kayanlau
2009-11-03 04:11:15 AM
\looked it up :P
ProdigalSigh
2009-11-03 04:11:50 AM
They have a word for that?
gregoropolis
2009-11-03 04:14:34 AM
anywho, if i may jack the thread slightly with a science question that is more important to me at the moment. I just bought one of those 2.5 gallon disposable water dispensers, zeppheyerlhills brand. i live in florida which i think might have something to do with the fact it taste so strongley of plastic, ie sun,heat,ect...
so my question is is it ok to drink water that taste like plastic and if you can answer how that fusion works instead of that question about the water i would be equally content i suppose.
Cheese eating surrender monkey
2009-11-03 04:15:33 AM
They have a word for that?
Speaking was actually inwented by a little old lady near Novosibirsk.
InsaneJelloTroll
2009-11-03 04:17:21 AM
anywho, if i may jack the thread slightly with a science question that is more important to me at the moment. I just bought one of those 2.5 gallon disposable water dispensers, zeppheyerlhills brand. i live in florida which i think might have something to do with the fact it taste so strongley of plastic, ie sun,heat,ect...
so my question is is it ok to drink water that taste like plastic and if you can answer how that fusion works instead of that question about the water i would be equally content i suppose.
Man up, Nancy.
DemonEater
2009-11-03 04:46:03 AM
Mr Logo
2009-11-03 05:18:57 AM
The story below is a repeat from several hours ago....
Mister Peejay
2009-11-03 07:08:36 AM
/stopped at "adsorbs"
//rest of article: "it uses magmetic thingys to keep the kaboom in"
dryknife
2009-11-03 08:47:13 AM
syrynxx
2009-11-03 09:02:47 AM
Skeptics point out that ever since the idea of fusion power was first touted in the 1950s, fusion's promise of clean power has receded endlessly into the future.
Ding ding ding! In grad school, I realized that when uncontrolled nuclear fusion was achieved in the 30s, they estimated commercially-viable fusion would be 30 years away. In the 60s, it was only 30 years away. In the 70s, the carrot was still on that 30-year stick, ditto for the 80s.
I did not want to spend 30 years of my career chasing a carrot that would be 30 years away when I retired, and left grad school.
After 20 years searching for the ideal adsorber -- including sintered metals and porous minerals called zeolites -- Day's team decided on charcoal.
Apparently I would have spent the past 20 years publishing papers like "He3 Plasma Impingment And Retention Testing Upon A Piece Of Gum I Found Under The Table At Bennigan's". fark that.
jfarkinB
2009-11-03 09:10:23 AM
so my question is is it ok to drink water that taste like plastic and if you can answer how that fusion works instead of that question about the water i would be equally content i suppose.
What's it made of? Does it have a recycling symbol?
Baking soda in water is good for getting rid of off flavors, but I'm not as relaxed about stuff leaching out of plastic bottles as I used to be.
IXI Jim IXI
2009-11-03 09:37:51 AM
That's what the last headline for this repeat story said, anyway...
Arkanaut
2009-11-03 09:48:07 AM
They have a word for that?
It's an acronym: toroidal'naya kamera c magnitnymi katushkami
I'm skeptical about this whole project though. The Tokamak has been around for decades at this point, and I don't think it's ever netted positive in energy production. That is, it takes more energy to run it than it can produce. Are they really saying that coconut charcoal can make that big of a difference?
b2theory
2009-11-03 09:56:49 AM
Skeptics point out that ever since the idea of fusion power was first touted in the 1950s, fusion's promise of clean power has receded endlessly into the future.
Ding ding ding! In grad school, I realized that when uncontrolled nuclear fusion was achieved in the 30s, they estimated commercially-viable fusion would be 30 years away. In the 60s, it was only 30 years away. In the 70s, the carrot was still on that 30-year stick, ditto for the 80s.
I did not want to spend 30 years of my career chasing a carrot that would be 30 years away when I retired, and left grad school.
After 20 years searching for the ideal adsorber -- including sintered metals and porous minerals called zeolites -- Day's team decided on charcoal.
Apparently I would have spent the past 20 years publishing papers like "He3 Plasma Impingment And Retention Testing Upon A Piece Of Gum I Found Under The Table At Bennigan's". fark that.
Really? Please enlighten me.
The reality is this...
Nuclear Engineers: Fusion Power is 40 years away (if we put the kind of money and effort that we put into developing and commercializing fission power) Can I has some funding?
Government: Can this be used for weapons?
Nuclear Engineers: Well no but...
Government: Here is five dollars and some government cheese
you have pee hands
2009-11-03 10:12:16 AM
The reality is this...
Nuclear Engineers: Fusion Power is 40 years away (if we put the kind of money and effort that we put into developing and commercializing fission power) Can I has some funding?
Government: Can this be used for weapons?
Nuclear Engineers: Well no but...
Government: Here is five dollars and some government cheese
That comment struck me as funny, too, since obviously no one had even uncontrolled fission working until close to the end of WWII. Apparently the first successful fusion test was done in 1952.
JavanDane
2009-11-03 10:31:33 AM
Plus one subby strange bedfellows (new window)
Slow today, more so than normal, Pyrosis awoke me at midnight and stayed for hours.
imfallen_angel
2009-11-03 10:39:15 AM
Fano
2009-11-03 10:49:22 AM
They have a word for that?
From what I remember growing up, the godless commies actually thought of everything in ultrarational, scientific terms. So yes, they have a word for that.
Citation: Drago, Rocky IV
calculator13
2009-11-03 11:02:05 AM
PirateKing
2009-11-03 11:10:42 AM
They found them.
b2theory
2009-11-03 11:28:55 AM
The reality is this...
Nuclear Engineers: Fusion Power is 40 years away (if we put the kind of money and effort that we put into developing and commercializing fission power) Can I has some funding?
Government: Can this be used for weapons?
Nuclear Engineers: Well no but...
Government: Here is five dollars and some government cheese
That comment struck me as funny, too, since obviously no one had even uncontrolled fission working until close to the end of WWII. Apparently the first successful fusion test was done in 1952.
You got the date correct. The Mike Shot was the first major thermonuclear test.
He may have been referring to the Farnsworth Device. It is asinine to imagine that was anything more than fleeting attempt at Fusion energy. Nearly everything in the US related to Fusion has been weapons related. I always get a chuckle when they talk about the NIF as an "energy" project. Its only real purpose is for stockpile stewardship.
Commercial fusion energy will happen. When it happens is simply a matter of how much money we are willing to spend. Given the $5 Billion we spend on ethanol subsidies, we could afford to do much better than we are.
PC LOAD LETTER
2009-11-03 12:29:40 PM
They found them.
But coconuts are tropical.