Frogfall Verified User
  • Member since Aug 25th 2022

Posts by Frogfall

    The Driveway | Episode 6

    Quote

    Dr. Eugene Mallove’s body is found in the driveway of his childhood home. Some wonder if shadowy forces are at work in Dr. Mallove’s murder. Police frantically search for answers and catch a break in the case. Or so it seems.

    A listener note: this episode contains depictions of violence that some people may find disturbing.


    Revealed: Sellafield nuclear site has leak that could pose risk to public
    Safety concerns at Europe’s most hazardous plant have caused diplomatic tensions with US, Norway and Ireland
    www.theguardian.com


    One caveat: When the Guardian did a technical "exposé" on some UK nuclear submarines, some years ago, they got almost every technical detail wrong.


    It's true that the Sellafield, Calder Hall, and WNL sites (they are not all "Sellafield", despite being together) are a bit of a mess - like most old nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities around the world - but some of the "long distance threats" are a bit fanciful.

    Hmmm. I wonder if the Branly Effect could be useful in the construction of a detector for Strange Radiation?



    (Image from the article in this post.)


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    This is a decent business history of scientific publishing

    That certainly brings back some memories. I used to visit the Pergamon staff social club, in Oxford, in the late 80s (I was in a social group that had a lot of Pergamon employees, so we often met in one of their bars). I would hear hilarious tales of the ongoing exploits of "Cap'n Bob" (as Private Eye used to call Maxwell). But it wasn't so funny when his business skulduggery unravelled.


    The Guardian story is rather UK-centric, though. Cap'n Bob may have been a scoundrel, but it's over 30 years since he drowned, and the whole academic publishing industry has continued on its downward path ever since.


    What does need to be highlighted is the shock that reverberated through the industry, and its critics, by the tragic death of Aaron Swartz, in 2013. The industry was beginning to realise that they had pushed people to the point where guerrilla warfare felt like a valid and ethical option. You can read Aaron's 2008 2 page Guerrilla Open Access Manifesto here.


    After this, the main publishers started to cook-up various "open access" schemes, although in some ways they simply succeeded in facilitating another set of money-making scams (i.e. predatory journals).

    Interesting opinion on this from 'somebody who knows'. It must remain anonymous since it was a private email. (slightly edited byy me)

    I think this is a good post - and does highlight that the true desire of the researchers is always to have their papers read.


    Although I was never a member, I attended the 2014 UK Pirate Party national conference in Manchester. A large number of the activists I met were academics, who were frustrated by the stranglehold that publishers had on academic publishing, and at how they exploited laws that were supposedly enacted to protect the rights of authors - but really allowed publishers to operate a monopolistic cartel on the distribution of information.


    I remember a talk by one academic who detailed the stupid situation where he had published a paper in a journal that had been dropped from the "bundles" to which his University library subscribed - and it meant that he would personally have to pay the publisher around $30 just to access the published version of his own paper. Also, even though he was the author - sending free copies of the published version of his own paper to other researchers was deemed to be a breach of the publishers copyright. Many authors would do that, if personally asked - but they risked being taken to court by their publisher, if caught.


    It was probably around that time that the #ICanHazPDF hashtag was circulating on twitter - as academics posted appeals for certain papers, that they couldn't get through their own university subscriptions. Academics at institutions that did have access would download the paper, place it in a "disposable" public site, and send the person who wanted the paper a link (either in a tweet or a private message). Afterwards, both parties would delete their tweets to cover their tracks. And yes, this is insane - but that was what the publishers had driven them to. Don't forget that Elsevier took social media sites ResearchGate.net and Academia.com to court in an attempt to prevent them from hosting papers on their sites, that were uploaded by authors. (They failed to close those sites, but that doesn't mean all social media sites are in the clear. Those sites have had to make a special deal with the publishers to continue operating.)


    To understand the immoral exploitation of the entire copyright system you have to go back to its origins, and the 1709 Statute of Anne. (Yes, really). Copyright was never really about protecting the rights of authors, but it was used as an excuse for publishers to protect their monopolistic business models. And it still is.

    For someone looking to heat the feet and or face, the extra 50% heat from a fully renewable electricity source is certainly attractive

    The problem is that a single candle gives out around 80 watts - so even when operating at its stated maximum capacity, this device supposedly produces less heat than two candles - and you still need to power it with 100 watts of "renewable electricity".


    But yes, I think you are right that a conventional vapour compression heat pump would be expensive - and not really cost effective at this power level. And the desire for any heating method - in areas where fuels are scarce and expensive (i.e. paraffin, propane, coal, dried peat, dried dung, firewood) is very real.


    As I said, it is a start - and we need to keep an eye on this.

    I have often wondered if the variability of the Ba dosing was the reason some JM Pd worked, and some did not.

    Back when I was looking at the problem of hydrogen embrittlement in alloy steels (e.g. plated high tensile bolts), I did think about "cleanliness" and the presence of solid impurities that might act as hydrogen "centres of migration". Aluminium is often used to "kill" steel (grab oxygen), and some small aluminium oxide particles remain in the melt.


    I was always intrigued by the time delay between the torque tightening of a hydrogen-loaded bolt (say, to 2/3 of yield stress) and the sudden fracture of the bolt. Usually the fracture happened overnight, so nobody saw it happen - and you just found a bolt-head on the floor in the morning.


    The classic view is that the time delay allows hydrogen to migrate to grain boundaries and lattice dislocations - where it builds up pressure, and allows cracks to form. However, when inspecting the surface of the fracture there never seemed to be any evidence of particular crack origins. (Unlike when inspecting, say, the aftermath of a fatigue fracture). The surface was always nicely granular - as if it had been fractured by a sudden tensile overload.


    My suspicion was that there was some kind of sudden physical change in the region of highest stress - leading to the fracture. Maybe the changes centred on impurities, rather than simple dislocations. Some metal oxides can act as catalysts, after all.

    Have been reminded of this post (further up the thread)



    Early Coherers used a "tapper" to disrupt the RF conduction effect. I wonder if Colman was originally trying to create some kind of magnetically disrupted "non-tapping coherer"?



    Coherer - Wikipedia
    en.wikipedia.org


    Successful inventors very often "stumble upon" an odd effect while they are working on something else - and have the presence of mind to not simply dismiss the observation, but investigate it further. Hence, to understand the sequence of events that led to a particular invention, it is always important to look for the "origin story".

    Quote from From their press release

    Venkat Tangirala, CEO, WindStream Technologies, informs, “The power required for this device is very low, that is, 100W per 1 hour, which translates to 2.4 kW per device per day (24 hrs).

    No it does not. The 100 watts consumption is a power, regardless of time. The daily energy consumption is 2.4 kW.hr (kilowatt-hours) - but it is still only consuming 100 watts, continually.


    Whoever wrote the press release doesn't understand electricity, or power calculations.


    Quote

    The SeeGen is advertised as providing 30-50% efficiency, providing 130-150 Watts heat power

    They are actually describing an efficiency of 130% - 150%, electrical to thermal. That is not an efficiency of 30-50%.


    (n.b. You can get better performance from a heat pump.)


    I guess it is a start. But I suspect it doesn't work the way they think it works. Let's see if they can manage to (a) scale it up to a larger device, and (b) increase the CoP to something more useful.

    You said CaO reacts with water. How about hydrogen all by itself? Not H2O.

    I actually said:

    I was wondering if a similar but smaller reaction would occur with plain hydrogen.


    Maybe the chemists here can comment, as information on the monohydrate reaction seems well hidden, across the internet, by all the references to calcium (II) hydrate.

    In other words, I know the monohydrate exists (CaOH) but could not find a reference to reactions between plain hydrogen (either monatomic or H2) with CaO. For all I know, it might not occur - or it might only occur if the CaO granules are very finely divided (which might be extra support for Ed's observed "particle size threshold effect").

    And, of course, the various "rights licensing agencies" are simply a protection racket. None of the money collected ever makes it into the pockets of anyone who created the "content" in the first place. But once they find you - you can never escape...


    I'm also uncomfortable about this thread being visible in the "fully public" area of the forum - as it will turn up in google searches.


    World’s biggest experimental nuclear fusion reactor launched in Japan
    Joint project with EU involves more than 500 scientists and engineers and more than 70 companies
    www.theguardian.com


    This is the JT-60SA.


    Quote

    It was planned for JT-60 to be disassembled and then upgraded to JT-60SA by adding niobium-titanium superconducting coils by 2010. It was intended for the JT60SA to be able to run with the same shape plasma as ITER. The central solenoid was designed to use niobium-tin (because of the higher (9 T) field).

    Construction of the tokamak officially began in 2013, and it was to continue until 2020 with first plasma planned in September 2020. Assembly was completed in the spring of 2020, and in March 2021 it reached its full design toroidal field successfully, with a current of 25.7kA. A test of the poloidal field coils in March 2021 suffered a short circuit leading to a lengthy investigation and repair.


    And, of course, still no surplus power...

    Would some variation of: "I run an online library of scientific material, and I've just received a large donation of physical papers. I want to scan and upload them, but I don't know whether or not it's legal for me to do so. They are copyrighted, but certain exemptions seem to exist in copyright law for fair use, etc. What are my options and potential liability?" work?

    One problem is that even if you buy a physical printed paper, directly from the publisher, and you scan it - just for your own storage and reference purposes (not to share with anyone else) - then you have already infringed mechanical copyright. When purchasing a paper (or, back in the day, a piece of music on a vinyl record) you do not have the "rights" to copy and transform the text into another physical form.


    In practice, of course, most of us used to buy records to play at home, and then record them onto cassette tape to play in the car. We also made copies for friends. We also taped stuff off the radio. It was impossible to stop - and yet (in the UK, at least) the Record Industry tried...



    Note that under the UK version of copyright law, there is no such concept as "fair use", as there is in the US version. This complicates things when the information is transferred across national boundaries - as we now do every day, via the internet.


    The sharing of academic papers has always happened, and (arguably) science would grind to a halt if all researchers always had to comply with the letter of copyright law, and pay publishers whatever they demand for every single copy of every paper we wish to look at.


    (Anecdote time) About 25 years ago, when starting some part-time research at the University of Manchester, my supervisor thought nothing of running a large stack of papers through the photocopier for me to take away and peruse. This sort of thing happened everywhere, and I'm sure many people here will have experienced the same. A couple of years later, some academic publishers took the same University to court - and managed to impose a huge fine on them for photocopying papers without paying licence fees. It was done as a test case - to scare all the other universities into complying with the publishers' demands (and it worked).


    Nowadays, of course, university staff, researchers, and students access papers electronically - but copyright law, and legal threats, mean that each university has to pay eye-watering annual fees to publishers for the privilege.


    Sharing papers between friends still happens, but that is mostly because it either flies under the radar of the publishers, or they decide that it isn't worth pursuing some infringers - as long as it doesn't affect their profits too much.


    But if the infringement becomes too well known, they will not hesitate to use the courts to close it down. That happened with the Z-Library archive last year, which had been used, quietly, by many people for years - until Tik-Tok users heard about it and started making videos telling everyone. The publishers then made sure that the main domains got shut down.

    Ed emphasizes that CaO is inert. It does not react.

    I took him to mean that it didn't react with the palladium.


    But, after all, CaO is quicklime - and does react, exothermically, with water (which is how we make cement). The resulting Ca(OH)2 hydrated molecule is quite a bit bigger than the anhydrate, so I was wondering if a similar but smaller reaction would occur with plain hydrogen.


    Maybe the chemists here can comment, as information on the monohydrate reaction seems well hidden, across the internet, by all the references to calcium (II) hydrate.