danghungithp/text_dataset · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 2.94k
>No, it is nothing like perpetual motion.
Note that I didn't say it was perpetual motion, or even that it
sounded like perpetual motion; the phrase was "sounds almost like
perpetual motion", which I, at least, consider a somewhat different
propposition than the one you elect to criticize. Perhaps I should
beg your pardon for being too precise in my use of language?
>The physics is well
>understood; the energy comes from fission of actinides in subcritical
>assemblies. Folks have talked about spallation reactors since the
>1950s. Pulsed spallation neutron sources are in use today as research
>tools. Accelerator design has been improving, particularly with
>superconducting accelerating cavities, which helps feasibility. Los
>Alamos has expertise in high current accelerators (LAMPF), so I
>believe they know what they are talking about.
I will believe that this process comes even close to approaching
technological and economic feasibility (given the mixed nature of the
trash that will have to be run through it as opposed to the costs of
separating things first and having a different 'run' for each
actinide) when I see them dump a few tons in one end and pull
(relatively) clean material out the other. Once the costs,
technological risks, etc., are taken into account I still class this
one with the idea of throwing waste into the sun. Sure, it's possible
and the physics are well understood, but is it really a reasonable
approach?
And I still wonder at what sort of 'burning' rate you could get with
something like this, as opposed to what kind of energy you would
really recover as opposed to what it would cost to build and power
with and without the energy recovery. Are we talking ounces, pounds,
or tons (grams, kilograms, or metric tons, for you SI fans) of
material and are we talking days, weeks, months, or years (days,
weeks, months or years, for you SI fans -- hmmm, still using a
non-decimated time scale, I see ;-))?
>The real reason why accelerator breeders or incinerators are not being
>built is that there isn't any reason to do so. Natural uranium is
>still too cheap, and geological disposal of actinides looks
>technically reasonable.
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
[email protected] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Here are some recent observations taken by the Hubble Space Telescope:
o The Faint Object Spectrograph (FOS) was used to make ultraviolet
observations of both the planet Pluto, and its moon Charon. The
peakups were successful. The observations were executed as
scheduled, and no problems were reported.
o Observations were made using the High Speed Photometer of the Planet
Uranus during an occultation by a faint star in Capricornus. These
observations will help in our understanding of the planet's
atmospheric radiative and dynamical processes. This event occurred
close to the last quarter moon, and special arrangements had to be
made to modify the lunar limit tests to allow these observations.
The observations are currently being reviewed, and all the
observations looked okay.
/_ /\| /____/ \ /_ /\| Ron Baalke \| [email protected]
\| \| \| \| __ \ /\| \| \| \| Jet Propulsion Lab \|
___\| \| \| \| \|__) \|/ \| \| \|__ M/S 525-3684 Telos \| Being cynical never helps
/___\| \| \| \| ___/ \| \|/__ /\| Pasadena, CA 91109 \| to correct the situation
\|_____\|/ \|_\|/ \|_____\|/ \| and causes more aggravation
\| instead.
In <[email protected]> [email protected] (Matthew DeLuca) writes:
>In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (William Reiken) writes:
>> Well this pretty much says it. I have gotten alot of replys to this
>>and it looks like oil is only on Earth. So if those greedy little oil companys
>>who obviously don't give **** about it uses up all the oil then that leaves us
>>high a dry.
>Greedy little oil companies? Don't blame them; oil companies just supply the
>demand created by you, me, and just about everyone else on the planet. If we
>run out, its all our faults.
He also ignores a few other things. While organics would become
significantly more expensive were all the oil to disappear (and thus
some things would no longer be economically feasible), oil is hardly
an irreplaceable resource any more than most other consumables. As
supply decreases, prices rise and alternatives become more
competetive. He also needs to consider that there has been an
estimated 30 years of reserves pretty much as long as anyone has cared
about petroleum; whatever the current usage rate is, we always seem to
have about a 30 year reserve that we know about.
[I'm not sure that last figure is still true -- we tend not to look as
hard when prices are comparatively cheap -- but it was certainly true
during hte 'oil crisis' days of the 70's.]
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
[email protected] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (CLAUDIO OLIVEIRA EGALON) writes:
> There was a Science fiction movie sometime ago (I do not remember its
> name) about a planet in the same orbit of Earth but hidden behind the
> Sun so it could never be visible from Earth.
This was known as Journey to the Far Side of the Sun in the United
States and as Doppelganger in the U.K. It was produced by the great
team of Gerry and Sylvia Anderson (whose science was usually a bit
better than this). It may have been their first production using live
actors-- they were better known for their technophilic puppet shows,
such as Supercar, Stingray, and Thunderbirds. Later, they went
on to do more live-action SF series: UFO and Space: 1999.
The astronomy was lousy, but the lifting-body spacecraft, VTOL
airliners, and mighty Portugese launch complex were wonderful to
look at.
Bill Higgins, Beam Jockey \| In a churchyard in the valley
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory \| Where the myrtle doth entwine
Bitnet: [email protected] \| There grow roses and other posies
Internet: [email protected] \| Fertilized by Clementine.

>No, it is nothing like perpetual motion.

Note that I didn't say it was perpetual motion, or even that it

sounded like perpetual motion; the phrase was "sounds almost like

perpetual motion", which I, at least, consider a somewhat different

propposition than the one you elect to criticize. Perhaps I should

beg your pardon for being *too* precise in my use of language?

>The physics is well

>understood; the energy comes from fission of actinides in subcritical

>assemblies. Folks have talked about spallation reactors since the

>1950s. Pulsed spallation neutron sources are in use today as research

>tools. Accelerator design has been improving, particularly with

>superconducting accelerating cavities, which helps feasibility. Los

>Alamos has expertise in high current accelerators (LAMPF), so I

>believe they know what they are talking about.

I will believe that this process comes even close to approaching

technological and economic feasibility (given the mixed nature of the

trash that will have to be run through it as opposed to the costs of

separating things first and having a different 'run' for each

actinide) when I see them dump a few tons in one end and pull

(relatively) clean material out the other. Once the costs,

technological risks, etc., are taken into account I still class this

one with the idea of throwing waste into the sun. Sure, it's possible

and the physics are well understood, but is it really a reasonable

approach?

And I still wonder at what sort of 'burning' rate you could get with

something like this, as opposed to what kind of energy you would

really recover as opposed to what it would cost to build and power

with and without the energy recovery. Are we talking ounces, pounds,

or tons (grams, kilograms, or metric tons, for you SI fans) of

material and are we talking days, weeks, months, or years (days,

weeks, months or years, for you SI fans -- hmmm, still using a

non-decimated time scale, I see ;-))?

>The real reason why accelerator breeders or incinerators are not being

>built is that there isn't any reason to do so. Natural uranium is

>still too cheap, and geological disposal of actinides looks

>technically reasonable.

"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live

in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden

[email protected] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

Here are some recent observations taken by the Hubble Space Telescope:

o The Faint Object Spectrograph (FOS) was used to make ultraviolet

observations of both the planet Pluto, and its moon Charon. The

peakups were successful. The observations were executed as

scheduled, and no problems were reported.

o Observations were made using the High Speed Photometer of the Planet

Uranus during an occultation by a faint star in Capricornus. These

observations will help in our understanding of the planet's

atmospheric radiative and dynamical processes. This event occurred

close to the last quarter moon, and special arrangements had to be

made to modify the lunar limit tests to allow these observations.

The observations are currently being reviewed, and all the

observations looked okay.

/_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | [email protected]

| | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab |

___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Being cynical never helps

/___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | to correct the situation

|_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | and causes more aggravation

| instead.

In <[email protected]> [email protected] (Matthew DeLuca) writes:

>In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (William Reiken) writes:

>> Well this pretty much says it. I have gotten alot of replys to this

>>and it looks like oil is only on Earth. So if those greedy little oil companys

>>who obviously don't give **** about it uses up all the oil then that leaves us

>>high a dry.

>Greedy little oil companies? Don't blame them; oil companies just supply the

>demand created by you, me, and just about everyone else on the planet. If we

>run out, its all our faults.

He also ignores a few other things. While organics would become

significantly more expensive were all the oil to disappear (and thus

some things would no longer be economically feasible), oil is hardly

an irreplaceable resource any more than most other consumables. As

supply decreases, prices rise and alternatives become more

competetive. He also needs to consider that there has been an

estimated 30 years of reserves pretty much as long as anyone has cared

about petroleum; whatever the current usage rate is, we always seem to

have about a 30 year reserve that we know about.

[I'm not sure that last figure is still true -- we tend not to look as

hard when prices are comparatively cheap -- but it was certainly true

during hte 'oil crisis' days of the 70's.]

"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live

in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden

[email protected] - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (CLAUDIO OLIVEIRA EGALON) writes:

> There was a Science fiction movie sometime ago (I do not remember its

> name) about a planet in the same orbit of Earth but hidden behind the

> Sun so it could never be visible from Earth.

This was known as *Journey to the Far Side of the Sun* in the United

States and as *Doppelganger* in the U.K. It was produced by the great

team of Gerry and Sylvia Anderson (whose science was usually a bit

better than this). It may have been their first production using live

actors-- they were better known for their technophilic puppet shows,

such as *Supercar*, *Stingray*, and *Thunderbirds*. Later, they went

on to do more live-action SF series: *UFO* and *Space: 1999*.

The astronomy was lousy, but the lifting-body spacecraft, VTOL

airliners, and mighty Portugese launch complex were *wonderful* to

look at.

Bill Higgins, Beam Jockey | In a churchyard in the valley

Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory | Where the myrtle doth entwine

Bitnet: [email protected] | There grow roses and other posies

Internet: [email protected] | Fertilized by Clementine.