AngelLestat

Of course is not possible, but we can imagine an object so cold, so cold.. that at certain point would disappear and cease to exist. Also, the quantum laws rules in objects close to 0k, no matter how big the object.

I am agree in mostly all less: "We produce more heat than we can radiate away" ?? What does it means? You mean here on earth? Or in space? In space that is not true if we are in the night side.. Because we are radiating with a temperature difference close to 300 degress, meanwhile here on earth we radiate with few degrees of difference (we are receiving radiactive heat from all objects). Of course that process is not instant, it takes several minutes.

From the video: "Intelligence is a physsical process that tries to maximaze future freedom of action and avoid constraint in its own future" But he also said that an AI would not be a problem for humanity.. (or maybe I understood wrong), how that is possible if the same AI would try to maximaze future freedom and avoid any constraint in its own future.. Humans are a constraint for an AI.

That is what many are trying right now. If possible to make something that can not be cracked? The story of the boiling frog, sounds familiar?

NASA study predicts devastating droughts during the last half of the century: We talk about this many times already, but all studies keep pointing that burn more CO2 it will be a very bad thing; and these studies are more pessimist each year. Source: http://www.gizmag.com/nasa-drought-study-united-states/36128/

I always knew the danger of an IA. I made several post in the past saying that is something that we need to avoid and how to fight it. Many people thinks that an AI needs much faster hardware than today. In fact the only that it needs is the right algorithm to allow it to learn by it self, adding info complexity will reach the time to rise awareness of it self. If we measure the amount of info that we have in our brain as memories, etc.. Is about 300mb. The true trick (more than the speed) is how that info is related. The connection between memories and circuits. Once we discover that, it will rise the first awareness IA. What would happen, nobody can tell. If we are the IA, how it will feel wait what might looks like an eternity between each human command. Maybe with few senses and locked to the outside information. This can end in 2 ways, suicide or gather a high anger against its creator. Is not diffirent than frankenstein. Elon Musk understand this.. He is trying to create the first entity regulator of this AI path. There is 2 ways to survive this. 1-We become the machines. 2-We move aside from all AI wishes showing that we can not be any threat to them, live without much technology under their care (if they want).

of course are speculations, the same goes for anything predicted on and beyond the event horizon. General relativity is not the only theory that might have something to said in that zone.

First, I was saying that you can survive to cross the even horizon.. I dint said nothing else.. But there is a possible trajectory entering by the poles which can lead to another universe. The black hole size also may help in your chances to survive.

you can survive, it depends on how big is the black hole. But it also depends if general relativity predictions are correct.

Carl Sagan call, it said that you are not allowed to use his name in vain The even horizon of a black hole is the edge of our unirverse. You crossed and our universe ends for that person. http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2012/measuring-a-black-holes-event-horizon-0927 “Once objects fall through the event horizon, they’re lost forever. It’s an exit door from our universe. You walk through that door, you’re not coming back.†And I still believe that my pole example depending the size of the black hole is the most accurate, taking into account the amount of words that I use.. Even 16 billon light years away, that is another even horizon from our universe, a different edge that you never can reach, and if you do.. the universe you knew ends.

Yeah, but something is better than nothing. Some news (I guess) and details as maps about the landing pad agreement with US force. http://www.patrick.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-141107-004.pdf Gizmag source: "SpaceX outlined its plans for the LC-13 pad, which will consist of a 750-ft (228-m) diameter pad of compressed soil and gravel designed to support the thrust and weight of returning spacecraft, and four 150-ft (45-m) contingency pads on the periphery for last-second emergency landings. In addition, SpaceX will build an access road and a mobile crane to move landed vehicles."

But the first stage had a camera on board, it could transmit the video in vhf or uhf.

factor capacity, maintenance and lifetime are not ommited, is all mentioned in the tables. For example: Levalized cost for wind: 37 - 81 = 59 average (this variance means mostly turbines location), capacity factor: 40%, lifetime 20 years, contruction time: 12 months, capital cost: 1600. Levalized cost for Nuclear: 124 (for new models), capacity factor: 90%, lifetime 40 years, contruction time: 69 months, capital cost: 7500 (see the capital cost graph) After editing some mistakes: Levelized cost of energy takes into account all these factors: LEC = Average lifetime levelized electricity generation cost It = Investment expenditures in the year t Mt = Operations and maintenance expenditures in the year t Ft = Fuel expenditures in the year t Et = Electricity generation in the year t r = Discount rate n = Life of the system I am not sure how well estimate the cost of lifetime, for example a nuclear plant last 40 years against 20 in wind. But you only need to waste a 10% (or less) of the initial cost to remplace a wind turbine. Because wind turbine cost drop a lot by time, new transportation methods as the one mentioned in the first page will be avariable. And one huge part of the cost does not need to be remplaced (foundations). Not sure if estimate the time lost in construction time, 59 months more than wind, those lost on profits are included? Then we have capital cost being 4.5 times more than wind. In case is not already estimate, it will be 7500 (vs 1200 wind farm) divide by 2 because you dont put all the money at the same time = 3750 over 59 months with a 15% of that cost lost by year. 75% of the 3750 = 2182 in capital cost lost becouse that money was freeze instead making profits. So if we ignore the last 3 thing that I mention imagine that are already include in the analysis then wind vs nuclear is: Wind: 59 vs Nuclear =124 Now we need to add storage, in the table all levalized cost takes into account the same anual power, price by kw. It can storage over 6 hours. This is more than enoght, because your wind farms can use the storage from other wind farms, the wind always blow some where. But we will use the new storage price which is 168 as the table show. In most cases is not necesary to install storage at the same time you build your wind farm, you installed when your wind-solar energy overseed the 25% 59+168= 227 wind 227 vs nuclear 124 This does not take into account nuclear plant descomission cost (which may be high for a 40 years nuclear plant), waste managment and disasters or possible new counter taxes or closures in the future. That is a risk and a bet that an investor needs to do if they choice nuclear. Wind and solar energy cost will still fall and new transport methods may reduce that even more. Storage was not needed before, that is way we never had great advantages in that area, now is needed and we learn that there are huge ways to reduce cost. Is estimated that it will be the technology branch that will experience bigger cost drops. The thing with china is that they need so much energy, than even if they want to get just wind or solar, the demand will grow so fast that the price will go up. Also the current price of wind and solar + storage needed does not equal yet the price of nuclear.But the topic talks that in 5 to 10 years, wind and solar will be the way to go. This table is from the 2011, so for sure the CO2 trace go down at least half for wind and solar. Because Co2 emissions are related to cost in manufacture. If you can reduce cost of PV and wind, is because you find a way to made them using less energy, taking your raw materials more efficient and without much transportation, etc. This link talk about raw materials: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/renewables-are-as-green-as-you-d-expect/ And this taking into account that you can not remplace that iron with carbon composite. Carbon composite are becoming more cheap to manufacture every day, and we know that carbon is a lot cheap than any other raw material. This will start to change in just 5 years. Correct, Insulation is the most efficient way to save energy. Before find more efficient ways to produce that energy, first try to not lose it. Ok, now I understand what you said, I am agree. We need to add too the economic cost for that country of not use those fossil reservoirs, carbon capture is included in the graph that I show, that tech still needs some time to reduce the cost even more. I guess all this will be solved if the world put a price to each energy source. If is clean, it needs to cost less. If is dirty it needs to cost more. People needs to pay the price for what kind of energy they consume. If that happens wind and solar will be way ahead of any fossil energy. Is heat transfer on an airship. I will send you a pm when I finish.

it will be a video on the first stage splashdown?

Wow so nice to hear. go go then Any help you need in that matter I offer to help. I know that the density and the surface is a key factor. But I saw many studies about the role of oceans in climate. The effect is huge. Because oceans has much more thermal capacity than the atmosphere and their produce its own weather. It does not matter if a planet is tidal locked to its star in cases there is a big ocean there, which is enoght to carry heat to other side to keep a temperature almost warm, at high altitude you will have similar super rotation as we see in venus. To resume, you said to me that your model produce always super winds, even at low height. In my understanding, that might be related to the case that oceans in the model are not moving heat, so these try to compensate the job that needs to do the ocean. How do you distribute the different absortions coeficients over kerbin? I imagine that you use the different biomes to set different values. The climate is very complex, the clouds reflectivity has also a huge effect on local weather. Well I wish you and nertea the best of lucks in this project.. this is huge. very excited to hear. Winds only work in layers? Or it may add vertical component in winds later on?

I guess that maybe in 10 years we will know how to make a fusion comercial plant, but it will take at least 10 or 15 years more to compete with other types of energy, more if their prices keep falling. But fusion will have many utilities, does not need be profitable in all applications from the begining. I am agree with your words on nuclear technology and some other things, but that only counts if we dont have good storage alternatives. Right now on sale... we dont have. But there are many in development with huge potential and some other already in testing which it will come out to sale already at half price of today cost. It is currently projected in this study: These are some of the technologies that are already in testing phase and obtaining their licenses. http://lightsailenergy.com/ http://www.eosenergystorage.com/technology-and-products/ http://redflow.com/redflow-products/zbm/ http://www.isentropic.co.uk/ I dont wanna give ideas, but if you kill a president, it will be another in just 10 min. If you manage to put a bomb in a waste storage, you will ignite all the radioactive waste which will go to the atmosphere, the ground, and a huge zone will be close to almost any kind of live. Firing against a nuclear reactor close to a city is another bad possibility, In France there is the chance that the country would cease to exist economically speaking. Almost nothing... all the energy waste in a wind generator or solar cell is paid in the first or second month of activity. None use danger or polluting materials. 2009?? When we speak on wind and solar energy you need to take the data from the current year. But nuclear energy is not something that you can mass produce.. Is not like a 2x3 silicon panel or hundreds of eolic generators.. The pieces of a nuclear plants needs a super quality control, not all factories can made these things, they need special licences (you dont want anybody making reactors parts) I highly doubt to see the price of nuclear go down after fukuhima and with so many emerging technologies. I saw it, is just propaganda of an economic sector that is falling. They had many twisted info, like said that solar produce more deaths than nuclear?? Death by cancer due radiation are difficult to prove, but you can see the growth on rate from people diagnose by cancer, but with such high poppulation, you can have 400000, but the normal is 360000.. How can you prove that those extra 40000 was due chernobyl or it was just higher number due chance. They also said that you need 1 gas power plant for each wind farm.. The radiation close to fukushima and in the cities is real and you can not live anymore there. The cleaning cost may rise to 600 billions, of course for now they will paid only 200 or 300 bilions. But they can not retake that piece of country until many years and billions. Who paid that? is include in the nuclear cost? Disasters, waste management and descomission cost are not included. Meanwhile problems, accidents or relations with renewable energies are the same companies who paid the errors. Let me said that I was a nuclear fan just 10 years ago. I like green technologies but I always use my head to know when is greenpeace stupidity or when something has real potential. But few years back that was not more true. So I change my opinion. Is still the best option in some countries. I guess they destroy the hydrodam? You are saying this from my Argentina Example about wind? Nobody lives down river in those locations. Also we are talking on wind and solar energy. if you have a hydrodam close you use it, but is not really needed. Heh I dint understand that last line. How the money that a nuclear plant will not produce (in case shutdown before lifetime) will finance new renwable energy? Nuclear energies had another advantage which is slowly changing now, the finance plans and capital strategies were a lot better than the ones used by wind or solar, that is starting to change now. Solar and wind start to take the same advantage of those economic strategic to help the investors in deal with initial costs. One question not related to this discussion, how good are you with heat transfer calculations? I want help to improve a ksp mod, but not sure if all my calculations on conduction, convective and radiation will be ok. So I will like to have somebody with experience to check my logic and equations when I finish. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Some data recopiled from the lazard 2014 study. Take a look in the last table, what is the best technology to remplace coal... By far Solar.

Our universe is space and time. You can see the edge from distance, but if you get more close the universe ends and you go to some other place (or at least your energy) No, because you have similar time distortion than your pole, it depends on the size of the black hole. 1) very tiny, your pole would break 2) medium size, you break too. 3) very big, both falls into the black hole.

If you accomplish to pass that line, it means that our universe ends due time dilation. So yes, that is the limit of our universe. Not, is easy, nothing that moves slower than light can escape. So nothing. And there is other implecations in time-space distortion.

even if you drop a camera with a wire, you will not be able to sent any signal from the camera to your ship. There is no way that we know, to measure how a black hole looks inside. The event horizon is the limit between this universe and something else.

in my case I dont use any tank, any faring or almost nothing of KW. Just some engines and 2 other parts. If someone wants a fixed size with farings, they can save as subassemblies a fixed PF size and thats it. But is matter of tastes, I do it for 2 main reasons, I hate to have many parts in my menu selection (I lose a lot of time finding the right part) and I save memory (very important if you want to use other mods). So I give a good welcome to any mod who add parts in a procedural way.

yeah those countries are doom with solar. However they use more solar than my country (we 34 latitude, they 57). But I already said this is my previous post "Now in reality, there are countries which does not have so good solar energy or winds spot. Thats why it will be always a mix of energies" If you implement something like that from one day to the other, yes it wil be caos.But in reality it will take several years, if all had indicators on energy cost and automatic devices with smart grid + other stuffs. It can be done. But it was just an example that even without storage can be possible. But from all the companies that are trying to harvester the high winds, they are the ones that are more advance.And we are talking about 20 different companies (included google) that are trying. They are one of the oldest and with more experience, they even give some tips to the glenn research center when they was researching the same thing. From all the data they have, they design their own kite shape that will be ideal for their conditions. It will cross the sky from size to size at 80 to 100 m/s at 2000m average altitud. And yes, it was supercritic Co2, thanks Really? so the chances to the nuclear fuel leak and goes to the aquifers that we drink is low? Because already happen. And the remaning waste needs to hold by thousands of years more. You will be there to said the future people that they dont have nothing to worry about? I guess not. What happen if you drop a bomb in that american football field? That is a very good idea for any terrorist. Also saying that are worst stuffs is not the way to defend that. I will love to see your math and sources behind these "estimations" The math is simple, solar + wind + storage in 5 years will be chepear than nuclear (now is closely a tie), so remplace the same amount of energy with nuclear will be worst, also it will be like walk in a minefield. You are talking as if solar and wind is not an alternative.. again read the prices and tends.How many studies you need to understand that are in fact a very good alternative? Dont worry, I will stay here to remind you each time something new come out ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Take a look here in my country, to see that not always a country decision means that was the best choice. They will make 2 new nuclear plant, when we have the best wind conditions in the world. And not only that, there is already a power line to transfer the power, hydro reservoirs and a hydro plant to pump water as storage. We have enoght storage capacity to remove all our gas plants (50% of the country energy) Even the rest of the world can not believe why we are not exploting that. In addiction, the nuclear plants will take more than 5 years to be finish. So we need to wait 5 years to get some energy of this huge investment? The answer is easy, corruptions and arrangements. http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2009/12/wind-power-in-argentina-ready-for-take-off

Oh I dint saw it. Nice You have stronger winds because you are not including the ocean in your small climate model. Oceans are the ones which transfer heat more efficiently. That is why the earth has slow winds on surface (on average) and faster winds at high altitude. But I applaud you for even try something so hard as this. Some days back I was thinking that the game needs an Atmosphere Mod, first to provide accurate data on temperature, pressure, air density, viscosity and composition. That last one is very important, we need to know if some atmosphere has 75%nitrogen and 25% oxygen, or 60% co2, 30%oxygen and 10 % amoniac, or 80% hydrogen and 20 % hellium, etc. All those atmosphere would share a single density value for the mix of course, but is important so mods can use those % and element names as resources. For example if you have mod that suck air from the atmosphere, you need to know what are you collecting. Lets said that you are in jupiter, you only need oxygen to burn things. How mods knows if they collect something of the atmosphere what resource it is and in what proportion. A complete atmosphere mod with the help of a meteorologist, can give us simple math functions to obtain a simple weather system using your functions. Why the kite in the picture has 100m/s winds? Lower winds are not enoght? Is by the mass of the wing?

Why you mean, there is always strong winds at those heights.. http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/250hPa/orthographic=-66.88,9.41,427 At least to day the winds blow in the same direction, they can provide 10 or 20 m/s on deltav.

Someone already try to fly a kite/wing with 2 KAS winches?

Low irradiation in a high pressure system? this means no clouds.. It gets dark before 1700hrs? what country are we talking? Take a look to the winds, choose any country: http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/orthographic=-85.70,22.62,427 In case you never use it, Press in "earth", then "Control" to see previous days. You will see that always there is winds in one place or another in any country, at least you are talking about Monaco, in that case a wire to the closest neighbor will solve the problem. I already said that there was 5% of chances to be at 40% on 1 day, so chances to be 2 weeks with low power are almost null (we are not talking on a single wind generator in a single place, we are talking in lots of wind generators and PV over many places, even in cloud days you generate something of electricity, also means strong wings), Why you mention? There is already countries that do this, factories choose to produce at certain hrs, in home families put their clothes to wash when the energy is cheap, etc. But lets forget about these methods, take a look to the winds on sea, much stronger but harded to exploit because its very difficult to install a normal wind turbine there. But what about a kite? Now in earth.nullschool.net set Height at 500 hPa, these kites can harvester those winds which are a lot more constant and 5 times stronger. A kite base does not need a strong base, it can move, and float being anchored to the deep. http://kitegen.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/ala_arco-1024x587.jpg A group of these kites can be far from coast producing H2 by electrolisys (90% of efficiency) A boat can collect that H2, there are ways now to avoid any leak painting the h2 container interior with graphene oxyde. A fuel cell plant can produce electricity at 70% efficiency or more. In few years the platinum catalyst can be remplaced by composite graphene ones which it will reduce the cost of any fuel cell. My brother is electrical enginner and works doing that, I have some background studies too. We can talk about how complicated is each job if you saw it in deep detail, but it does not mean that can not being done it. mmm I can agree with you that it would not compete over the next 5 to 7 years, but 10 to 15... come on... Nuclear plants would not drop in cost, in fact they will increase, because each time that solar and wind prices fall, it means that is a lot more risky to invest in nuclear, what if another disaster happens and the world said lets stop all nuclear facilities?Also each nuclear plant takes 2 years (in the best cases) to build (in my country 5 ), that is more than half of the money that stay in one place doing nothing. Ok. I take your word. In other countries solar thermal can deal with payload. http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2010/12/02/3081889.htm The new solar thermal plants would work with a new design that uses supercrit (not remember what gas) which will increase the efficiency and cost.