lajoswinkler

YouTuber Walrus18 is apparently in the process of making "Kravity", a KSP rendition of "Gravity". Here's one of the scenes. http://youtu.be/P_s_hxyyEeM This is hilarious. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRtxdLiYSEU

If you get hydrogen from water, then it's not an energy source, but an energy storage. if you get it from oil, it's called "black hydrogen". It's an energy source, but comes with a price in the form of CO2. There is no free lunch, people.

No. Chlorine can not exist in its elemental form in any environment. (Let's ignore ephemeral and minute occurences here and there.) It's a fiercely reactive element and as soon as it's exposed to the nature, it binds with something. That's usually water. It will react with planetary ices and hydrogen. Even if such atmosphere was possible, life could not form in it. Life requires a versatility of reaction energies, various states and couplings of molecules. All chlorine can do is to appear and ****up everything like a mad man.

The state of matter depends on the pressure, too, but if we ignore the ultrahigh pressures of diamond anvils, I think there is a potential for something like that. Ammonia is similar to water. It's polar, and that's extremely important for life. Polar solvent gives huge versatility to the system.

Silicon, but it just won't happen. Carbon is abundant and it's a lot more (I mean A LOT MORE) better at making various compounds. It is simply the most suitable element for life and that's why life exists using carbon.

Care to comment newest stupid and misleading articles on Germany's "50% power from solar"?

It was a burst shot. When you take photos of tiny, fast objects, you want to take a lot of them in a short time. Example:

Last night, Slender: The Arrival was like 2.7 € or something like that. The sale was for a few hours at most, so I've grabbed it immediately.

Potato, please, but reserve some money for cooking it, first.

Croatia vs. Mexico, today.

Look the bright side of it - at least this will reduce the number of jaded people who'd like their money to go to the military instead of science sector.

We can say that the chance of that occuring is statistically infinitesimally small. Realistically speaking, it is impossible. Zero chance. Realistic "violations" can occur for tiny systems with very small number of elements. Not true violationsFor macroscopic systems, especially huge, bulk material, realistic chance for that is zero. You could do the experiment for a googolplex of times and it would not happen. That's why it's neccessary to establish conditions in which something is claimed. In defined circumstances, certain things are impossible.

That's plenty of time, thanks!

I didn't say "a test tube with cover on one end, being able to release the gas and change shape", I've said "a test tube filled with helium". In addition, it would be impossible for our atmosphere to spontaneously freeze, fall to the ground, pile up on some tiny island and then launch itself towards the Sun, all in one hour of time.

Rrrrright... Because it's too expensive, not tested enough and not commercially viable yet. Some of the stuff you've wrote there is not true. The reality for thorium is much more complex and no, it's not "because you can make bombs out of uranium". Be sure to read all of this. http://www.whatisnuclear.com/articles/thorium_myths.html

If you start falling from 370 km, you'll hit the denser layers at almost 10,000 km/h. It's not enough to cause ionization and ablation, but your suit would heat up to unbearing levels and you'd probably die from overheating.

As far as I know, only in USA it's called epinephrine. In other countries, at least the ones where English isn't primary language, the chemical is called adrenaline.

It is impossible for a test tube filled with helium to start screaming: "I WANT CANDY!!!"

I think I'll buy Limbo soon. Maybe Surgeon Simulator, too. How long will this sale last?

I've made a poll on this a while back. I shouldn't have put "other" because trolls took advantage of it and skewed the results. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/50083-What-s-your-%2A%2A%2A There is a very small number of females around here, and most of them are in fact lying they're male. Supposedly there were cases of stalking and online abusing them by sexually frustrated forum members who can't get laid, so they drool over anyone who presents as female. It's quite sad. And yes, the correct question is "what's your s-e-x", not gender. *** is a biologically correct term, and I'm not sure why is it censored. This forum has turned into a nanny state place recently.

So what? If you can't reach it efficiently, it's good as grassfield to a lion. Geothermal is good in few places on Earth and that's it. It can not solve energy problems of 99% of people on the planet.

There isn't much I can add to this post. I agree with you completely on this one.

Funny, I used that a lot for my probes.

I don't understand these people that say "yeah, fusion". We don't have a working fusion reactor. Period.

No, the elements in the processed waste do not exist on Earth. They're completely manmade. They do exist after a supernova explosion, though. You don't want to dilute those compounds. What you want is to vitrify them (make a solid solution of those compounds in glass) and place such matrix in a steel and concrete container, then bury it in a concrete tub deep in a geologically stable layer. The glassy matrix ensures that they can't leak out. Certain minor problems exist with this (glass degradation), but nothing huge.