Meredith Poor + 895 MP February 18, 2020 2 hours ago, George8944 said: They can either tax one side or give away free money to the other side. Both have political advantages, but few economic advantages for the tax payer. How much 'free money' did the US government give away on nuclear energy between 1941 and 1955? How much did the private sector invest in the technology over that time period? How much 'free money' did the US government give away on photovoltaic research between 1957 and 1965? Why would anyone in the US government have cared? What benefits have the taxpayers received from these 'investments'? 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
George8944 + 128 February 18, 2020 40 minutes ago, Meredith Poor said: How much 'free money' did the US government give away on nuclear energy between 1941 and 1955? How much did the private sector invest in the technology over that time period? How much 'free money' did the US government give away on photovoltaic research between 1957 and 1965? Why would anyone in the US government have cared? What benefits have the taxpayers received from these 'investments'? First, I'm not sure why this is in bold. It shouldn't be. Please overlook it. You are definitely on a tear and I don't understand where you are going or actually your point. It is a good use of tax payer money to research technology that will benefit society as a whole, but shows little economic benefit at the time. A good current example is graphene. There's a lot of tax dollars going into this research and not much by private companies. The difference between this and solar energy is for right now, we are still trying to figure out the uses and practical applications for graphene. Solar panels have been commercially made for a few decades. No company will do the level of basic research needed without hoping to recoup their costs and get a return on their investment. However, basic research needs to be done, so enter the Fed! A common mistake I see in the media these days is to judge past decisions using today's standards and understanding. We know a lot more about nuclear radiation then we did in 1941. We know a lot more about lots of things. With that said, government funding of basic research was not my point at all and you are building a straw man's in your reply. My point was governments can and do interfere in free markets by using tax payer money to subsidize ideas politically in vogue. Equally destructive is taxing industries that have fallen out of favor. That was my only point and it nothing to do with specific people or specific parties. (going to bed now. Tomorrow is another exciting day and I need my REM sleep.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ronwagn + 6,290 February 19, 2020 On 2/14/2020 at 1:14 PM, Geoff Guenther said: For a renewables transition I don't see many better options than NG for peaking and backup power. Yes, batteries will soon take over on super-peaking, but for a mix of reliability, flexibility, and relative cleanliness NG is great. Renewables have killed coal and they'll make a big dent in oil before we see any real reduction in NG consumption. I think we are very likely to see an increase in natural gas use worldwide to replace the pollution of coal. As oil prices increase I expect to see natural gas gradually replace a lot of diesel and gasoline also. Renewables and batteries will not keep up with the need at a comparable cost. Just my opinion. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0R0 + 6,251 February 20, 2020 On 2/17/2020 at 11:11 PM, Meredith Poor said: How much 'free money' did the US government give away on nuclear energy between 1941 and 1955? How much did the private sector invest in the technology over that time period? How much 'free money' did the US government give away on photovoltaic research between 1957 and 1965? Why would anyone in the US government have cared? What benefits have the taxpayers received from these 'investments'? Everyone wanted free energy. Which is why governments everywhere pushed into nukes and PV. Required lots of basic science to be done. Pilot plant Nukes to thermal and PV solar etc.. Can't blame the ole' gal for trying. Even decade after decade. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meredith Poor + 895 MP February 28, 2020 On 2/20/2020 at 4:28 PM, 0R0 said: Everyone wanted free energy. Which is why governments everywhere pushed into nukes and PV. Required lots of basic science to be done. Pilot plant Nukes to thermal and PV solar etc.. Can't blame the ole' gal for trying. Even decade after decade. There was something called Sputnik in 1957. Anyone tried burning oil in space? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0R0 + 6,251 February 28, 2020 21 minutes ago, Meredith Poor said: There was something called Sputnik in 1957. Anyone tried burning oil in space? I am sure that thought didn't make it to the experimental design stage... But there was a series of articles published about flame patterns in 0 G from space experiments withing the spacecraft lab. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enthalpic + 1,496 February 28, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Meredith Poor said: Anyone tried burning oil in space? It is a very bad idea - like for ocean ships in the past a fire is almost certain death. Much worse for spaceships as oxygen has to be shipped up or made via electrolysis from what was probably your own urine. That said it has been done and it is really neat - without gravity separating chemicals by density the fire is, as far as I recall, is mostly spherical and somewhat self extinguishes as cool oxygen doesn't flow in from the bottom like what you would see in a candle flame. Edited February 28, 2020 by Enthalpic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enthalpic + 1,496 February 28, 2020 (edited) I was high and used the Boltzman equation to simulate a candle fire for fun years ago. https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/23039637/ Pretty decent considering as it is all code generated, a few tweaks to the shading and clone rates would make it even better, perhaps some adjustment of the wind randomizer. Other space shit: Lunar lander took like 20min max. Have your kids modify and improve the project tree on Scratch. https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/17671257/ Orbit fun is cool, took longer. Use turbo mode, and hit the "b" button a couple time, then hit the pen down button and wait for a bit for cool spiralgraphs. https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/17567062/ Edited February 28, 2020 by Enthalpic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enthalpic + 1,496 February 28, 2020 (edited) Fish automation...https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/18077844/ tell them to breed clones with b (2 or 3 total presses works best for turbo). You can scare the fish with spacebar. Edited February 28, 2020 by Enthalpic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enthalpic + 1,496 February 28, 2020 40 minutes ago, Enthalpic said: Orbit fun is cool, took longer. Use turbo mode, and hit the "b" button a couple time, then hit the pen down button and wait for a bit for cool spiralgraphs. https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/17567062/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enthalpic + 1,496 February 28, 2020 (edited) It is a pretty fun program I wrote, kids should love it. Hit "b" a few times at least and then "d" and wait Edited February 28, 2020 by Enthalpic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enthalpic + 1,496 February 28, 2020 (edited) it's fun, play with my stupid code. Please improve it you can. Edited February 28, 2020 by Enthalpic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enthalpic + 1,496 February 28, 2020 It's fun and should demonstrate that I attempt the 3 body problem for fun... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enthalpic + 1,496 February 28, 2020 (edited) Shitty source code is right there to rework if you think you can do better.... (face it you can't). Edited February 28, 2020 by Enthalpic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enthalpic + 1,496 February 28, 2020 Two trials almost achieved stable orbits today; pretty fun playing with old code on a much faster computer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Most Active Members
Recently Online
Popular Members
Most Active Members
Recently Online
Popular Members
