Re: Art That Reminds Me to Say No to the Doctor
Fascinating shadow projections. Conjures up thoughts in me about the holographic universe. On Wednesday, February 5, 2014 6:25 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: more http://rollership.tumblr.com/post/75567004763 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: Eidetic memory and the comp hypothesis
Liz - The pace of what we are discovering about the brain makes everything we know about it a moving goal post; case in point the key role it now appears astrocytes or glial cells play in the formation of memories http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/27913/title/Glial-cel ls-aid-memory-formation/ . Astrocytes account for around 90% of all brain cells. This indicates to my view of things that until we really do understand the actual mechanisms (and the second follow on ring of emergent meta-mechanisms that characterize and emerge within vastly parallel networks as well), it is too early to put hard upper boundaries on capacity. If we are just now discovering previously overlooked critical actors for the formation of memories; do we even really know that much about the physical mechanisms for memory in the brain? This is, as you may have guessed, a subject in which I am fairly interested; I believe a rigorous micro and dynamic network scale understanding of brain functioning is required in order to form a theory of consciousness, self-aware intelligence etc. I also feel we are getting tantalizingly close to a kind of gestalt moment when all the pieces will emerge naturally as one whole dynamic elegant theory that will win someone a Nobel prize and a grand understanding of the brain/mind and of ourselves emerges. Cheers, Chris From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2014 9:32 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Eidetic memory and the comp hypothesis This is a very interesting point. What is the estimated capacity of the human brain? I seem to recalls some 10^17 bits being mentioned somewhere, or at least that figure has stuck in my mind (but not having an eidetic memory, or much of a normal one, I can't say where from). On 6 February 2014 15:58, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: An aspect of my string cosmology is that the metaverse contains a 4D-space (in which one space axis is time) that records every event that ever happened in this and every universe much like the Akashic Records. Eidetics and gurus can apparently time travel in this block-space. Richard On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 8:32 PM, Pierz pier...@gmail.com wrote: The phenomenon of eidetic (photographic) memory is well established as a reality. For an example of what it means, read the top answer to this quora.com question http://www.quora.com/digest/track_click?hash=2e8ec7de05b636790212092c83f093 6eaoid=pLlVYjWVKaaoty=2ty_data=4012999ty=1digest_id=241884556click_pos =1st=1391558946766537source=3stories=1_L4sR6imoEQB%7C1_aytbQbnb2zW%7C1_jA 8otFvN9FH%7C1_4XH6bzBFPwr%7C1_4TMBUpDzRpy%7C1_8f6Kgdm4jXW%7C1_XDaAF5TDFVy%7C 1_zsSejxTjfe6v=2aty=4 . People with this gift/disability remember every moment of their lives in perfect detail. To me this raises real questions about the comp hypothesis and the 'yes doctor'. Consider the 'RAM' required for this type of recall. Memories are 3d and 'retina' resolution. If we consider that an hour of Blu-ray footage consumes about 30Gb, then some rough calculations show that Blu-ray quality footage of an entire life of 60 years would consume around 17,000 terabytes of storage. But these memories include tactile, olfactory and cognitive channels as well as visual and auditory information, and of course the resolution of the visual system is far better than Blu-ray. I'd take a rough guess and say that full recording of a person's mental experience in all external and internal channels would have to require hundreds or even thousands of times the bandwidth of Blu-ray. But even at what I'd think would be an extremely conservative estimate of a hundred times, we're up near two million terabytes (two exabytes). What's more, there appears to be no strain, no sign of running out of space at all, as if capacity was simply not an issue. This type of example makes me really question whether digital prosthetics are a real possibility at all - it looks to me strongly suggestive of a totally different way of recording information, or even of the possibility that recording and storage are the wrong metaphor entirely. 'Christian' in the above quora response says that he has little means of distinguishing a memory from a live experience, making for a very confusing mental life. This type of memory looks more like a kind of time travel than a recording. Perhaps this is still compatible with Bruno's version of comp - the universal subject inhabiting the pure space of Number - but it's more problematic for step one of the whole argument that leads to this vision, namely saying 'yes' to a digital brain. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Re: Indian physicist resolved Black Hole paradox much before Hawking
Perhaps, but also true that most ALS sufferers do not get such attention media adulation. On Thursday, February 6, 2014 1:49 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Hawking gets the attention because he has ALS. It's not a tradeoff many would want to make. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Indian physicist resolved Black Hole paradox much before Hawking
From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net Mitra's theory seems to contradict Penrose's proof that any GR solution with a closed event horizon must contain a singularity. Before Penrose's theorem there was a widespread opinion among physicists that something like Mitra's picture must be true and that the singularities in solutions like Schwarzschild's were just due to the idealized perfect spherical symmetry or the idealized equations of state. But Penrose bypassed all that and made a purely topological argument. So Hawking isn't saying that Mitra is right, Hawking is rejecting Penrose's theorem on the grounds that it doesn't consider quantum effects. Thanks for the clarification about the subtle distinction between the reasoning in Hawking's recent short paper and Mitra's earlier theory. Brent On 2/6/2014 12:45 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote: Giving credit where credit is due. http://twocircles.net/2014feb05/indian_physicist_resolved_black_hole_paradox_much_hawking.html Indian physicist resolved Black Hole paradox much before Hawking By K.S.Jayaraman, IANS, Bangalore : A new paper released late last month in which famed British physicist Stephen Hawking contradicts his own theory and says that Black Holes - in the real sense - do not actually exist has startled the world science community. But Abhas Mitra, a theoretical physicist at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) in Mumbai, is not at all surprised. I said more than a decade ago that the Black Hole solutions found in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity actually correspond to zero mass and are never formed. This implies that the so-called Black Holes candidates must be Grey Holes or quasi-Black Holes, Mitra told IANS. Hawking is saying the same thing now. Mitra's papers, published in peer reviewed journals since 2000 - that still remain unchallenged - maintain that there can be objects in the universe that are quasi-static or eternally collapsing but not exactly Black Holes. This work was largely ignored by mainstream physicists as well as the media while Hawking's recent two-page online paper saying exactly the same thing has become hot international news, Mitra noted. He said this happened even though several American astrophysicists verified his prediction that such quasi-Black Holes must have strong magnetic fields unlike the real Black Holes, adding that even Harvard University issued a press release to this effect in 2006. A Black Hole, according to its proponents, results from gravitational collapse of a massive star after it runs out of fuel for nuclear fusion. A Black Hole is all vacuum except for an infinitely dense central point called singularity, Mitra said. As the theory goes, a Black Hole is surrounded by an imaginary boundary called Event Horizon that shuts everything within, allowing nothing - not even light - to escape. An object crossing the Event Horizon gets forever trapped and crushed at the singularity, destroying all the information about the object as well. This directly conflicts with the laws of quantum physics that say information can never be completely wiped out. This is the Black Hole information loss paradox. The Black Holes also pose a Firewall Paradox which arises from the claim that Event Horizon, under the quantum theory, must actually be transformed into a highly energetic region, or firewall, that would burn any approaching object to a crisp. Although the firewall obeyed quantum rules, it flouted Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, Mitra said. Hawking's latest paper attempts to resolve the Firewall Paradox by proposing that gravitational collapse produces only an Apparent Horizon but not an Event Horizon that is the hallmark of a true Black Hole. He said the absence of Event Horizons means there are no Black Holes in the sense they are usually visualized. Mitra said he has shown before that there can be no Event Horizon by using the classical theory without invoking uncertain quantum physics as Hawking has done. In fact, in a series of peer reviewed papers, Mitra has shown that no true Black Holes can ever form. The so-called Black Holes observed by astronomers are actually radiation pressure supported Eternally Collapsing Objects (ECOs). These balls of fire are so hot that even neutrons and protons melt there and whose outward radiation pressure balances the inward pull of gravity to arrest a catastrophic collapse before any Black Hole or 'singularity' would actually form. Incidentally, our Sun is also a ball of fire hot enough to melt atoms, Mitra noted. Thus, the realization that there can be no true Black Holes and the so-called Black Holes are actually ECOs resolve both the Information and Firewall paradoxes, Mitra said. Hawking has now arrived at the same conclusion from tentative arguments while our results are based on exact calculations and were published
Re: Indian physicist resolved Black Hole paradox much before Hawking
From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2014 2:34 PM Subject: Re: Indian physicist resolved Black Hole paradox much before Hawking On 7 February 2014 11:17, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: Perhaps, but also true that most ALS sufferers do not get such attention media adulation. Perhaps because they aren't world famous scientist? I'm not sure what you expect here! Which is what I was suggesting... namely that Hawkins got known first and foremost because of his work and not because of his ALS... though his ALS certainly makes him a compelling figure. I appreciate Mitra feeling bitter about this, but at least it should get his result more public awareness. I do find it very interesting, more so than any squabbling about who was first. Looks like Mitra has done a far better job anyway so that's what I'm really interested in. (Maybe now there will be an article for dummies like me in scientific american...) Also tbh I haven't really thought Hawking was doing much actual science for a long time, as an interested lay-person at least, despite him being called in on the odd well-publicised bet ... (plus his imaginary time idea seems to have dropped off the radar). He's good for the odd quote about the mind of God and fire in the equations... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Eidetic memory and the comp hypothesis
From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, February 7, 2014 7:09 AM Subject: Re: Eidetic memory and the comp hypothesis Thanks for the link Chris. It has also been discovered, some years ago, that glial cells are involved in chronic pain. Since then, I follow them closely. They do communicate chemically in some wavy way, and they do communicate to, and influence, neurons. I still tend to think that neurons play the key role in the information treatment, and probably in the basic loops needed for consciousness, but I would not been astonished, that glial cells would be important for surviving some long period of time. (Needless to say, for the UDA reversal, this is only a matter of making the substitution level lower, and this does not change the consequences.) I agree that it seems highly probable that most of the brain activities underlying the mind -- out of which we experience the spontaneously arising sense of self, the awareness of that self and all the other magnificent mysteries of consciousness -- are occurring primarily as phenomenon primarily rooted in the electro-chemical chirping, crackling activity occurring in our highly folded cortexual sheets and the hugely parallel neural/axonal networks. Though if indeed (as it appears) glial cells play a key role in cementing memories (and maybe in some chemically based manner perhaps even storing long term memories -- perhaps like an archival storage medium for (slow) chemically mediated recall mechanisms -- then, in fact, it would be impossible to describe the working of the brain/mind without factoring in and understanding their role(s). It seems to me that -- at least some large portion of -- the glial cells may play a role like the one I am conjecturing. Is the glial brain underlying the cortexual sheet is in fact a kind of chemical only -- and hence much slower by orders of magnitude -- processor that the brain/mind uses as a permanent archive for long term memories that adjacent populations of neurons use kind of like a hard drive or maybe an archival drive/tape backup? It certainly seems like these cells are playing some role; what if our brains have glial cell hard drives. I was not aware of the role these types of brain cells (comprising around 90% of the brains cells) also are somehow involved in mediating the experience of pain (what about other sensations and emotions?) -- that is interesting. In terms of information theory -- or comp in this case -- not all that much changes. It is more like an extension of the electro-chemical cortex and the operations it performs are chemically mediated and so are much slower than electrical switches. However I also agree that this would not qualitatively change the essential nature of the brain as a biological computer, albeit an incredibly complex and highly parallel one with vast numbers of neurons and even vaster numbers of vertices. Chris Bruno On 06 Feb 2014, at 07:59, Chris de Morsella wrote: Liz – The pace of what we are discovering about the brain makes everything we know about it a moving goal post; case in point the key role it now appears astrocytes or glial cells play in the formation of memories. Astrocytes account for around 90% of all brain cells. This indicates to my view of things that until we really do understand the actual mechanisms (and the second follow on ring of emergent meta-mechanisms that characterize and emerge within vastly parallel networks as well), it is too early to put hard upper boundaries on capacity. If we are just now discovering previously overlooked critical actors for the formation of memories; do we even really know that much about the physical mechanisms for memory in the brain? This is, as you may have guessed, a subject in which I am fairly interested; I believe a rigorous micro and dynamic network scale understanding of brain functioning is required in order to form a theory of consciousness, self-aware intelligence etc. I also feel we are getting tantalizingly close to a kind of gestalt moment when all the pieces will emerge naturally as one whole dynamic elegant theory that will win someone a Nobel prize and a grand understanding of the brain/mind and of ourselves emerges. Cheers, Chris From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2014 9:32 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Eidetic memory and the comp hypothesis This is a very interesting point. What is the estimated capacity of the human brain? I seem to recalls some 10^17 bits being mentioned somewhere, or at least that figure has stuck in my mind (but not having an eidetic memory, or much of a normal one, I can't say where from). On 6 February 2014 15:58, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: An aspect of my string cosmology
RE: Suicide Words God and Ideas
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 8:01 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Suicide Words God and Ideas The invention of language was obviously of great benefit to the species called Homo sapiens, but like all tools it is not perfect and sometimes the brain can waste a great deal of processing power spinning its wheels over questions of words rather than ideas. For example, a recent poll showed that 70% of people in the USA thought that if a dying patient agreed then doctors should be allowed to end the patient's life by some painless means; however only 51% thought that doctors should be allowed to help a dying patient who wanted to die commit suicide. Another example would be those who DON'T believe in a omnipotent omniscient intelligent conscious being who created the universe and is responsible for morality but DO believe in God. Well said John - and in this (if not on all things) we agree - language is an imprecise and sometimes tragically misleading tool, albeit one most powerful in helping our species build out the vast assemblage of the various human cultures. The importance of clearly communicating cardinal terms cannot be overstated. Words are symbolic vehicles, conveying meaning across the discontinuous gulf between minds. Not only must the minds in the communication chain, share an agreement of their symbolic meaning - in order for them to work as intended, but as you pointed out the choice of words used to convey a thought can have a profound effect on the outcome. One exercise I engage in is to parse what I read for words whose purpose is to color meaning rather than describe some fact. News reports are an excellent place to discover this treasure trove of the use of adjectives and coded phrases meant to trigger emotional responses and to generate firm opinions. Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Edging closer to nuclear fusion...
Let's check back in 50 years on how that turns out :) From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 2:57 PM Subject: Edging closer to nuclear fusion... apparently. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/feb/12/nuclear-fusion-breakthrough-green-energy-source -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Edging closer to nuclear fusion...
We all do use it already -- even as we burn the fossil fuel banked in coal seams and gas oil bearing formations, all of which ultimately exists because a long time ago some plant had done the work of transforming a minuscule portion of the energy of flux put out by our fusion energy source in the sky during that long ago era into hydrocarbons with a potential chemical oxidation energy stored in them. From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 3:25 PM Subject: Re: Edging closer to nuclear fusion... Yeah, exactly. Meanwhile we already have a fusion reactor up and running, should anyone want to use it. On 13 February 2014 12:10, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: Let's check back in 50 years on how that turns out :) From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 2:57 PM Subject: Edging closer to nuclear fusion... apparently. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/feb/12/nuclear-fusion-breakthrough-green-energy-source -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Edging closer to nuclear fusion...
The solar flux at earth orbit is on average (because the earth's orbit is not circular and the solar output is not constant) more or less 1370 W/m2; The Earth's radius is 6.378 X 10^6m; The Earth's albedo is around 0.3. So the total incident solar energy that is obstructed by the earth's disk and that is not reflected back out into space is solar flux * Area of earth's disk *albedo = 1370 W/m * 1.278 * 10^11 m2 * 0.30 albedo = 5.2499373183089.4 * 10^14 watts So according to my quick back of the envelope calculations planet earth receives a solar flux on average of well over500 Terawatts after factoring in the energy reflected back into space. And that is just the energy that is intersected by our planets disk... imagine how much energy a Dyson sphere could harvest. From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 4:25 PM Subject: Re: Edging closer to nuclear fusion... On 13 February 2014 12:44, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: We all do use it already -- even as we burn the fossil fuel banked in coal seams and gas oil bearing formations, all of which ultimately exists because a long time ago some plant had done the work of transforming a minuscule portion of the energy of flux put out by our fusion energy source in the sky during that long ago era into hydrocarbons with a potential chemical oxidation energy stored in them. Yes, sorry, I should have said exclusively, or more or less so. (I don't consider burning hydrocarbons to be a useful way to use sunlight, because of the by-products.) The Sun lavishes something like 10,000 times more energy on Earth than the entirety of the energy used by human civilisation, I believe? Certainly a lot more than we need, even if you knock off the amount used for keeping warm and so on (most of it goes back into space anyway, I think). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
Ground water contamination levels at the sampled well site of 54,000Bq/ liter NHK http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/english/news/20140213_22.html , Feb. 13, 2014: Record cesium level in Fukushima plant groundwater - [Tepco] says water samples taken from a newly-dug well contained the highest levels of radioactive cesium detected so far in groundwater at the site [...] the record levels suggest that the leakage point could be near the well. [...] 600 times the government standard for radioactive wastewater that can be released into the sea. It is more than 30,000 times the level of cesium 137 found in water samples taken from another observation well to the north last week. [...] [Tepco has] yet to determine where the leak originates. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer?
-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 1:56 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: How does acceleration curve space? Can anyone provide an answer? The event horizon due to acceleration is just relative to the one accelerated. I doesn't warp space, so there's no reason it should interact with anything. Then, would it be fair to say that the only thing special about the event horizon is this Hotel California effect? Last thing I remember, I was Running for the door I had to find the passage back To the place I was before Relax, said the night man, We are programmed to receive. You can check-out any time you like, But you can never leave! (Eagles) Cheers, Chris Brent On 2/13/2014 12:41 PM, LizR wrote: Acceleration does cause the formation of an event horizon, I believe, which might be considered to couple it with gravity (in an unexpected way). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Cool Cuttlefish footage
Will they have time or will they fall victim to the great extinction event that we have been causing (the extinction rate is currently 10,000 times the background level, and this is due to human factors). The ocean webs of life are collapsing across the globe n a most stark and alarming manner -- again thanks to our species. By the time we go over the Oduvai cliff (as the Doomerist hypothesis has us doing quite soon) how many life forms we we be taking with us over the edge and into extinction? I do not necessarily subscribe to the inevitability of our near term extinction and have had my fair share of discussions with Doomers - -and been blasted by some of them as being a cornucopian :) From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 12:36 PM Subject: Re: Cool Cuttlefish footage On 15 February 2014 08:47, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 2/14/2014 7:12 AM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: Some members of the list have expressed fondness or interest for cuttlefish, which is why I post this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgdVVU8tBTQ The documentary is a bit sensational/over the top at times, but I'm not bothered as I just care about the footage. They used to be prominent at a beach I had access to as a kid and they've been a favorite member of our fauna to me ever since. I don't think I have to spell out in too much detail why this might be relevant or fun and refer to: it thinks itself into different form, skin structure, color etc. Why are our bodies, nervous systems, and skin so dull in comparison? We're all worm and slug descendants on some level right? Why did we pass up such useful and amazing features? Stupid nature/evolution... I want that feature. No, really: I want that! Can anybody hook me up? PGC I find cuttlefish fascinating. They are social, relatively intelligent, can communicate, able to grasp and manipulate things. It seems like they were all set to become the dominant large life form (instead of humans). Give them time. According to the IPCC (and the Doomsday argument) humans are already on the skids, and doing nothing to change course. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of ghib...@gmail.com Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2014 2:02 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Thursday, February 13, 2014 3:01:26 PM UTC, cdemorsella wrote: Ground water contamination levels at the sampled well site of 54,000Bq/ liter NHK http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/english/news/20140213_22.html , Feb. 13, 2014: Record cesium level in Fukushima plant groundwater — [Tepco] says water samples taken from a newly-dug well contained the highest levels of radioactive cesium detected so far in groundwater at the site [...] the record levels suggest that the leakage point could be near the well. [...] 600 times the government standard for radioactive wastewater that can be released into the sea. It is more than 30,000 times the level of cesium 137 found in water samples taken from another observation well to the north last week. [...] [Tepco has] yet to determine where the leak originates. In general the dangers arsing from nuclear fission power are grossly exaggerated. It's far and away the best answer to greenhouse emissions, that is also realistic. If we'd been building nuclear power stations the fracking locomotive wouldn't be the unstoppable force that it has become. on Many ways the dangers are blown out of proportion.. Even catastrophic meltdown that blow the roof off and spread the love like Chernobyl, do not result in a tiny fraction of the disasters that the standard models predict. Ten's of thousands were predicted to die. In the end, just 40 deaths from Chernobyl, and most of those the people sent in to get control in the aftermath. Dude – even the Report of 2005 http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/chernobyl/pdfs/pr.pdf (by the IAEA, WHO, and UNDP, agencies that cannot by any stretch of the imagination be described as hostile to the advancement of nuclear power) put the Chernobyl ultimate death toll at 4000 – a figure that is one hundred times bigger than the 40 deaths you believe are attributable to this atomic disaster. The 4000 figure has been challenged and criticized as being far too low and that over the decades the extra cancer deaths ultimately caused by this disaster have been far higher. For example: “Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment” published by the New York Academy of sciences; authored by Russian biologist Dr. Alexey Yablokov, former environmental advisor to the Russian president; Dr. Alexey Nesterenko, a biologist and ecologist in Belarus; and Dr.Vassili Nesterenko, a physicist and at the time of the accident director of the Institute of Nuclear Energy of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus; put the extra cancer deaths attributable to the Chernobyl disaster at almost one million – a figure that is 25,000 times greater than the 40 deaths you seem to believe caps the death toll for Chernobyl. I believe you are ignoring many thousands of horrible cancer deaths that were triggered by this disaster; and even the IAEA agrees that many thousands of people died from radiation induced cancers. To claim that only 40 people died as a result of the Chernobyl disaster is an act of spreading propaganda; it is un-scientific. There have been revolutions in station design since plants like fukishima were built, and that disaster isn't shaping up to the dire predictions either. What most of all this derives out of, are long standing questions about the level of risk associated with exposure to radiation at low doses up to somewhere below the 200 mark. There's no firm evidence of substantial risk. There's plenty of evidence for genetic protection. There's a whole plethora of statistics we could reasonably expect if low dose exposure was anything like the risk that still sits there in the model. Airline cabin crew should have higher frequency cancer for all that time so near space for one example. They don't. Conversely there are some major natural radiation hotspots in the world. You'd expect those areas to produce more cancer and radiation poisoning related disease. But the opposite is true. People exposed to dramatically higher doses of radiation (inside the low dosage spectrum), actually become lower risks. There seems to be a triggerable genetic response when levels increase. I'm over-compensating in the other direction a bit here. Not because I love the bomb, but if you only knew the power of the dark side. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 7:15 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On 20 February 2014 00:20, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: They may never have provided any electricity in the first place. I have read, at length, some nuclear engineering papers, concerning accelerator driven reactors, subcritical thorium, and bluntly, they are like fusion reactors, they don't exist. There is research in a couple of places like the UK and Belgium, maybe India and China, but its been over-sold, as we don't have solid working models to evaluate. The closest working reactors would be Canadian CANDU reactors. Taking this attitude, we would never have discovered powered flying machines, or invented agriculture. Assuming the things would work in theory, as far as we know, then we need to at least build a prototype before deciding it can't be done. The MSRE MSBR experimental molten salt reactors operated at Oak Ridge for almost ten years. These were LFTR reactor types, and as far as I know the only LFTR reactors ever actually built. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
Based on reading the white papers on the LFTR design proposals (that I have been able to see) they all seem to incorporate a fail-safe (lower melting point) plug that will melt if the reactor begins to overheat (and well before it melts down) and the liquid salt/fuel mix will rapidly drain into a dispersed catchment area in which all reactions will come to a very rapid stop (by the liquid salt fuel mixture getting physically spread out and also potentially dampened down by neutron absorbing casing materials) LFTR reactor designs have been tested (a long time ago at Oak Ridge) and these types have the potential to burn up over 99% of the fertile material (e.g. the Thorium) as it is transmuted into U233 and the decay products. Of all the GenIV breeder types LFTR seems to me to be the variant with the best safety profile and resource availability profile (lots of recoverable Thorium). However even if a big country like the US went all out to develop this electric energy generation technology -- the question remains how many years (decades more realistically) would it take to develop a reference design that has been engineered, tested etc. and has had all the kinks worked out (at the pilot plant level) and then to build out the LFTR infrastructure (from mining, refining, to re-refining, to the plants themselves and the waste processing and long term storage of the wastes that are not burned up in the breeder (medium term waste can still present half lives of a hundred years or so) I am not sure what the energy landscape of our world will be in twenty to thirty years -- but based on the peaking of all liquid fuels and of high grade coal as well it is going to have to be very different than the current fossil fuel based electric energy generation infrastructure we all depend on. Because the lead times are so long (at least 20-30 years) it is hard to predict how far the per unit cost of the market leader in solar PV will be at that point. If it continues to fall along the trend lines for decreasing unit costs that have prevailed for the last four or five decades then it may not even make sense to invest in them as Solar PV will become the low cost supply. Chris From: John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 11:52 AM Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 5:50 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Would this have happened if Japan had been using subcritical reactors with thorium fuel? If it were a Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR) and the cowardly operators saw the Tsunami coming and ran for the hills and completely abandoned the plant then the liquid Thorium fuel (Thorium dissolved in un-corrosive molten Fluoride salts) would get hot, and that would expand the liquid, and that would cause the fuel to get less dense, and that would cause the nuclear reaction to slow down. Then a freeze plug at the bottom of the reactor would melt and the liquid fuel would drain out by gravity (no pumps would be needed) into a holding tank and the reaction would stop completely and the reactor would enter a safe mode. All this is assuming that the operators were completely incompetent and never lifted a finger to help the situation. And because the liquid Fluoride salt is not under pressure as water is in the Fukushima plant leaks would be far less likely and much less catastrophic even if they did occur. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb On 2/21/2014 2:27 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: I am in agreement but I am guessing humankind does not yet possess a working LTFR that could power a large city. Nor, is a MSR (molten salt reactor) to accomplish the goodies we all need, abundant and comparatively safe. Like fusion, like solar, it needs development, and beyond a few bits of work here and there, little is happening. Human kind did possess a LFTR for a few years at Oak Ridge National Laboratories. It was a research reactor and was not used to produce electrical power. It was rejected as the powerplant for nuclear submarines because the Oak Ridge director had Adm Rickover thrown out of the lab for interfering with his directives. Rickover, who was famously arrogant, contracted with Westinghouse to build a powerplant using their technology. And that's how the world ended up with uranium fission power reactors. Thanks for the interesting back story on the Oak Ridge LFTR program; the why of how that program got de-funded and shut down was always a little murky. Chris There are a few companies pursuing development of LFTRs. One is proposing to do the actual development in Brazil to avoid the anti-nuclear political activists in the U.S. There are many reasons why nuclear power is dead in the water. The sector would have never existed without massive government subsidies. the cost overruns in nuclear facilities are legendary. The reason they are not getting built has less to do with political activists and a more to do with the negative economic profile, especially once one factors in the ultimate costs of long term (and perhaps absurdly long term) waste sequestration. Additionally, when one looks at the global recoverable uranium-235 reserve picture - not the rosy scenario in the red book (the quoted source for these figures and which has been shown to be unrealistically optimistic) - it becomes clear that there is no future for single pass through reactors, and that the world is nearing peak recoverable uranium. Naturally this is different for breeder types, such as LFTR (which IMO is the best option of all the breeder proposals, both for the relative abundance of the needed resources and for the inherent passive safety features - as compared to the hellish example of what can go wrong with say a Mark II type reactor (Fukushima and all across this country as well Mark II are ubiquitous bad designs (at the time of their release by GE I recall that two of the chief engineers on the design team resigned in protest because their reservations about this design were ignored). However realistically - the lead time to bring working LFTR reactors to market and to build out enough of them to begin to make an impact on the global (or some important regional) energy market is long and should be measured in decades at least. Decades from today is as soon as the first LFTRs could begin to come online. By that time - they will need to compete with solar PV and the per unit costs for PV that are achieved over the next two or three decades. If one projects the future per unit cost for PV based on extrapolating current long established trend lines the economics for LFTR seem questionable - IMO. Chris Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: Turning the tables on the doctor
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 11:37 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Turning the tables on the doctor I wouldn't ride in the damn thing! -- Larry Niven, The theory and practice of teleportation (from memory, I may not have got that quote 100% right) Certainly would not want to be a beta tester for it J On 22 February 2014 14:39, David Nyman da...@davidnyman.com wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdxucpPq6Lc -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: Exxon CEO Joins Lawsuit Against Fracking Project Because It Will Devalue His $5 Million Property
Ahhh. the hypocrisy of it all. It's actually funny in a macabre way. http://ecowatch.com/2014/02/21/exxon-ceo-joins-lawsuit-concerned-fracking-de values-property/ Exxon CEO Joins Lawsuit Against Fracking Project Because It Will Devalue His $5 Million Property As ExxonMobil's CEO, it's Rex Tillerson's job to promote the hydraulic fracturing enabling the recent oil and gas boom, and fight regulatory oversight. The oil company is the biggest natural gas producer in the U.S., relying on the controversial drilling technology to extract it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark There are many reasons why nuclear power is dead in the water. I think the main reason is that reactors got too big too fast and their design has been frozen for nearly half a century. They found a nuclear reactor design that worked well in submarines and figured if they just scaled it up a few hundred times it would work well in commercial power plants too, but it didn't work out quite that way. Freeman Dyson said the real problem is that reactor design isn't fun anymore because nobody is allowed to build even a small one if it is significantly (or even slightly) different from what has already been built, so the most creative people go into areas other than nuclear power. I agree with you there. The GE Mark II design (which is unfortunately quite common) is the spawn of that bad engineering. Remember however that was the era when they were toying around with atomic airplanes and of course the Orion project, so it fits right in with the mindset prevailing during the initial pre-Cuban phase of the Cold War. In addition I think the early experiments at Oak Ridge with LFTR were side-lined because it did not fit well with the requirements of the Cold War. The LFTR fuel cycle does not support (i.e. help scale up) the military need for highly enriched U-235. the sector would have never existed without massive government subsidies Neither would wind farms or big solar energy power plants. And what do you make of the government putting a huge tariff on Chinese solar cells to protect domestic producers which makes photovoltaics much more expensive in the USA? There is no comparison. The nuclear sector has enjoyed direct and indirect subsidies of a scale that dwarfs the sum total of all subsidies ever given to wind + solar + geothermal + tidal + wave. I purposely leave out ethanol biodiesel, which has always been a welfare program for Big Ag (the EROI of corn ethanol for example is less than one; it is actually an energy sink - you get less than it took to make it) Topically just in the news - and which very clearly makes my point -- Last Wednesday, the Obama administration announced $8.3 billion in public loan assistance to three nuclear power producers. That is a huge and brand new subsidy on top of the fifty or more years of subsidy that has preceded it. For comparison the loan guarantee to the bankrupt solar PV company Solyndra was in grand total $535 million; this is less than one fifteenth the amount of this brand new loan guarantee to the nuclear welfare queen. The right-wing blogosphere could not stop shouting about the Solyndra loan guarantee for years (and they still harp on it); I do not hear a peep of protest from these same fiscal conservatives about this new massive subsidy of nuclear. If Solar PV had enjoyed even a fifth of the subisdies that nuclear has enjoyed we would already be living in a Solar era. the lead time to bring working LFTR reactors to market and to build out enough of them to begin to make an impact on the global (or some important regional) energy market is long and should be measured in decades at least. Decades from today is as soon as the first LFTRs could begin to come online. That would certainly be true if there is no sense of urgency to get the job done, but we got to the moon in less than 9 years once we decided we really really wanted to go there. There is no scientific reason it would take decades to get a LFTR online, but there are political reasons. How many Apollo V rockets did we build for all that dough? It would take many trillions of dollars to retool our energy systems; again there is no comparison between the moonshot Cold War race and deploying a radically different electric energy generation infrastructure. The logistics alone mushroom out; these things take time and nine years is far too optimistic - IMO. There is more to it than just the science/engineering of LFTR and politics, there is also the economic dimension. capital allocation, scale out of the required industrial base and resource constraints that are also at play. Decades from today is as soon as the first LFTRs could begin to come online. By that time - they will need to compete with solar PV and the per unit costs for PV that are achieved over the next two or three decades. Finding a good inexpensive solar cell is not enough, even more important is finding a cheap and reliable way to store vast amounts of electrical energy. And because solar energy is so dilute environmentalists will whine about the huge amounts of land required. And some applications are just not going to work, you'll never see a solar powered 747 or fighter jet. Dilute sources of power actually match quite well with how power is actually consumed for the most part. Most electric power is consumed by the vast number of dispersed (dilute) small consumers.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 1:21 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating Solar cells are getting cheaper and easier to use (e.g. flexible plastic ones). It should be possible to stick them anywhere you want, e.g. on buildings or cars. This would mean at least some solar power could be harvested using existing infrastructure. As usual the technology is there, or almost there, but this needs political or commercial will to achieve. One idea I like is to engineer road surface blocks that double as solar collectors. to turn the road surface itself into an energy harvesting medium. It is not as outlandish at it may seem at first. The PV layer would be beneath a tough layer of relatively clear roughened glass (good traction), and the blocks would be built to last for the useful life of the embedded PV. Personally I'd like to see a solar farm that uses the energy it receives from the Sun to power machinery that sucks CO2 and water from the air and turns them into petrol. (Then you really could run a 747 on solar power :) If battery energy density improves by a factor of around ten - lithium-air or zinc-air variants are getting so close in the lab at least -- you could have all electric jumbo jets, running on electric turbines. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb On 2/24/2014 11:24 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote: That would certainly be true if there is no sense of urgency to get the job done, but we got to the moon in less than 9 years once we decided we really really wanted to go there. There is no scientific reason it would take decades to get a LFTR online, but there are political reasons. How many Apollo V rockets did we build for all that dough? It would take many trillions of dollars to retool our energy systems; again there is no comparison between the moonshot Cold War race and deploying a radically different electric energy generation infrastructure. Except nuclear power is not radically different, it's just using a different heat source to make steam for turbines. The infrastructure is essentially the same. True. in that nuclear power, is basically boiling water to produce hot high pressure steam. It is essentially the same from the stage of having produced high pressure steam to spin a turbine to make electricity, but the entire logistical tail is vastly different - and of course the nature of the boilers is essentially untested (sure there may still be some data from the old Oak Ridge experimental LFTR reactor that operated for some years in Oak Ridge during the 1960s, but that is all there is) The reactors themselves will need to be designed, tested, verified, stress tested, systems tested, material fatigue tested, and finally built from scratch. LFTR reactors do not exist, there are no blue prints to build them from. It is unknown how various proposed materials will actually perform, in the reactor core environment - over the years of operational life. How many years do you think it would take - if it was a national priority? 10, 20, 30? And finally - just to underline my point -- fusion reactors are also essentially water boilers - that does not make them the same as coal thermo-electric plants and they are not buildable with our current technology.. Though ITER is trying. There are fundamental technological hurdles that remain. for fusion certainly - and, I would argue for LFTR reactors as well -- even though in the end it is all about boiling water. Chris Brent. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
There is a whole sector of biofuels devoted to various interesting microorganisms -- some that have also been genetically engineered - to harness them in order to produce chemicals, including fuels and important pre-curser chemicals (Butanol being one) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24085385 Microalgae are another group of photosynthetic autotroph of interest due to their superior growth rates, relatively high photosynthetic conversion efficiencies, and vast metabolic capabilities. Heterotrophic microorganisms, such as yeast and bacteria, can utilize carbohydrates from lignocellulosic biomass directly or after pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis to produce liquid biofuels such as ethanol and butanol. Although finding a suitable organism for biofuel production is not easy, many naturally occurring organisms with good traits have recently been obtained. From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 3:22 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On 26 February 2014 12:05, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 2/25/2014 2:52 PM, LizR wrote: On 26 February 2014 11:18, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 2/25/2014 1:23 PM, LizR wrote: The great thing about using an energy grid is you can plug in new components (i.e. different types of generators - nuclear etc) and everything continues to work the same way downstream. This is why I'm keen on the idea of extracting CO2 from the air and making petrol, if possible. No change is required to the energy infrastructure, as there would be with say hydrogen or electric cars, but it's carbon neutral. We'd get a closed cycle in which the atmosphere was just a temporary reservoir for the materials needed to make the fuel. Presumably we'd eventually be able to extract CO2 at a rate that even reduced the amount of GHGs in the air. That's essentially what the research on hydrocarbon producing algae and bacteris is trying to do. Well, that's good. I wonder if there is any more efficient way of doing it (or do we have to wait for nanomachines which can grab passing molecules and stick them together?) Dunno, but nano-machines are what algae and bacteria are - and self manufacturing to boot. So I'd try for some genetic engineering to improve their efficiency, rather than trying to make nanobots from scratch. Yes. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Its only a pipe dream if it doesn't work. Its all lies and exaggeration if a technology if it does not. For decades, people all over the world have worked on energy systems to replace the dirty sources that we have trouble with, regarding air and water contamination. Many progressive billionaires and their kept politicians have promoted solar, but it cannot yet power a single city on Earth. I am not saying this is impossible, but the means of affordably making and storing electricity, is not enough to power, say, even one quarter of Auckland, for example. There are always articles on technical improvements, and I totally support all RD, but if we cannot supply large cities with electricity on a 7 x 24 x 365 basis, and until solar can, its a crock. The problem is the progressives world wide, as an ideology, want solar to be the source-whether it supplies power of not. This, is a totalitarian quality, and as such, is civilizational threatening. I suppose that depends on your definition of work well now doesn't it. Solar PV cells produce electricity from light. In what way do they not work? They work as advertised. I notice you put dirty [electricity energy sources] in quotes. pretty funny - you were joking right? Or did you buy into the myth of clean coal? The global installed capacity for solar PV is growing at breakneck speeds - regardless of what you may believe. Cumulative global installed capacity of solar PV reached roughly 65 gigawatts at the end of 2011; newly added solar PV capacity for this year alone is forecast to be between 40 and 45 GW of new extra added capacity to the already installed base. Cumulative global installed photovoltaic capacities have doubled every two years on average since 2004. The prices for PV keeps coming down as well; in fact it has dropped an amazing 99% in the past quarter century. The price for installed power systems is also rapidly falling; it fell by a range of 6 to 14 percent, or $0.30 per watt to $0.90 per watt, from 2011 to 2012 according to the sixth edition of Tracking the Sun, an annual PV cost-tracking report published this week by the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. I am going to go out on a limb here and point out that the facts pretty much demonstrate that you do not know what you are talking about. Chris One thing, possibly worth considering, are reactors based on Canadian Slowpoke reactors, used for basic research. They supply small amounts of kilowatts, so we'd need lots of them, and what the money cost would be is unknown by ignorant me. I do know that these are fail safe in operation. I don't know if they can be used as a target for terrorists, teenagers, criminals, etc. What I have seen is that they could be buried in steel reinforced concrete, and made inaccessible. Would this make it all too expensive? Possibly. If solar can't and uranium or thorium should not be for safety issues, then where else can we turn? Certainly shale gas, and possibly methane hydrates, which exist in amounts, should we dare go after it, would be enough energy to supply our species for 2000-1 years. There is the methane release issue involved with this. My sense of things is that it is not AGW we should fear, or it's dishonest, descendent, Climate Change, but our true enemies, pollution, and energy starvation. Think, the 80's Road Warrior scenario. Easier to watch then to live, I reckon. -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Feb 25, 2014 4:23 pm Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating The great thing about using an energy grid is you can plug in new components (i.e. different types of generators - nuclear etc) and everything continues to work the same way downstream. This is why I'm keen on the idea of extracting CO2 from the air and making petrol, if possible. No change is required to the energy infrastructure, as there would be with say hydrogen or electric cars, but it's carbon neutral. We'd get a closed cycle in which the atmosphere was just a temporary reservoir for the materials needed to make the fuel. Presumably we'd eventually be able to extract CO2 at a rate that even reduced the amount of GHGs in the air. All a pipe dream no doubt. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 7:19 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating Point taken. But I know that the progressive billionaires do advocate switching off our current dirty, in exchange for promises of clean. Promises, only, that is. Hydroelectric, isn't really solar, its gravity, so we can call it gravity power. We should never subsidize nuclear, fossil fuels, or solar, because they should stand or fall on their own. Its not the politics of it, its the physics of it. Right now people are not using solar as a primary source of electricity because they cannot, even though a majority would love to have it. It doesn't provide enough and it cannot do 7 x 24. Nuclear has proven a disaster, the way its conceived, hence my urging to switch to Canadian Slowpoke reactors. But lets face it, it will likely never happen. Shale gas has become the default power as a result of no other alternatives. What do you suggest and how much time do we have to replace the dirty and old, since, I take you support AGW? So, what do we do? The shale gas and oil (kerogen) plays in the Eagle-Ford, Bakken, Marcelus formations (to name the big American plays) is definitely a boom for the drillers who are getting rich off all that sucker money pouring into this sector.. It has also been a huge PR win for the Gas sector with people believing that it will provide energy for a long time.. Smile. For those, instead, who play close attention to the rates of depletion and the return on Capex (capital expenditure) it is proving to be a monumental bust. Depletion rates in fracked fields are much higher and the onset of depletion is much faster than it is for traditional non-fracked gas (and oil) deposits. Already the Eagle-Ford is showing abundant evidence of this - for those who look beyond the glossy - happy face -- PR spin put out by the sector, and the earlier Bakken formation wells are also following on the same depletion curves. As soon as the breakneck pace of drilling slows the house of cards is going to fall as reality can no longer be swept under the rug by huge numbers of new wells coming online. Did you know that energy now accounts for fully one third of all global capital spending - the lion's share of it for gas oil. The global technology sector by comparison accounts for 7% -- http://www.businessinsider.com/capex-spending-by-industry-2014-2 Chris -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Feb 25, 2014 7:29 pm Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On 2/25/2014 4:15 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Its only a pipe dream if it doesn't work. Its all lies and exaggeration if a technology if it does not. For decades, people all over the world have worked on energy systems to replace the dirty sources that we have trouble with, regarding air and water contamination. Many progressive billionaires and their kept politicians have promoted solar, but it cannot yet power a single city on Earth. I am not saying this is impossible, but the means of affordably making and storing electricity, is not enough to power, say, even one quarter of Auckland, for example. There are always articles on technical improvements, and I totally support all RD, but if we cannot supply large cities with electricity on a 7 x 24 x 365 basis, and until solar can, its a crock. The problem is the progressives world wide, as an ideology, want solar to be the source-whether it supplies power of not. This, is a totalitarian quality, and as such, is civilizational threatening. Let's review that: Since solar power (doesn't that include hydroelectric?) can't provide 24/7/365 power to a major city - it's worthless and we should just keep subsidizing the fossil fuel industry (including using the military as necessary) while they endanger the future of civilization; because actually trying to provide sustainable energy is an evil plot by unnamed progressive billionaires. It is to laugh...or cry. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 7:23 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating Hydro IS solar. How do you think the water gets up those hills and into the lakes?! It must be by anti-gravity. Governments having subsidised and otherwise helped out fossil fuels and nuclear for years, I believe, a level playing field would be to subsidise solar to the same extent they've been subsidised so far. As I pointed out earlier - nuclear power just got a huge $8.3 billion doll out of new public assistance - a figure that dwarfs any assistance to solar and wind put together. In a truly level playing field the world would be seeing a lot more PV a lot more quickly. On 26 February 2014 16:18, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Point taken. But I know that the progressive billionaires do advocate switching off our current dirty, in exchange for promises of clean. Promises, only, that is. Hydroelectric, isn't really solar, its gravity, so we can call it gravity power. We should never subsidize nuclear, fossil fuels, or solar, because they should stand or fall on their own. Its not the politics of it, its the physics of it. Right now people are not using solar as a primary source of electricity because they cannot, even though a majority would love to have it. It doesn't provide enough and it cannot do 7 x 24. Nuclear has proven a disaster, the way its conceived, hence my urging to switch to Canadian Slowpoke reactors. But lets face it, it will likely never happen. Shale gas has become the default power as a result of no other alternatives. What do you suggest and how much time do we have to replace the dirty and old, since, I take you support AGW? So, what do we do? -Original Message- From: meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Feb 25, 2014 7:29 pm Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On 2/25/2014 4:15 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Its only a pipe dream if it doesn't work. Its all lies and exaggeration if a technology if it does not. For decades, people all over the world have worked on energy systems to replace the dirty sources that we have trouble with, regarding air and water contamination. Many progressive billionaires and their kept politicians have promoted solar, but it cannot yet power a single city on Earth. I am not saying this is impossible, but the means of affordably making and storing electricity, is not enough to power, say, even one quarter of Auckland, for example. There are always articles on technical improvements, and I totally support all RD, but if we cannot supply large cities with electricity on a 7 x 24 x 365 basis, and until solar can, its a crock. The problem is the progressives world wide, as an ideology, want solar to be the source-whether it supplies power of not. This, is a totalitarian quality, and as such, is civilizational threatening. Let's review that: Since solar power (doesn't that include hydroelectric?) can't provide 24/7/365 power to a major city - it's worthless and we should just keep subsidizing the fossil fuel industry (including using the military as necessary) while they endanger the future of civilization; because actually trying to provide sustainable energy is an evil plot by unnamed progressive billionaires. It is to laugh...or cry. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 9:57 AM Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 10:22 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Hydro IS solar. And solar IS nuclear. Then Hydro is also nuclear. Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 9:39 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 1:53 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Well let's see, my car has 306 horsepower, one horsepower is equal to 746 watts so my car needs 228,276 watts. On a bright day at noon solar cells produce about 10 watts per square foot, so my car would need 22,827 square feet of solar cells, that's not counting the additional air resistance caused by the 151x151 foot rectangle mounted on the car's roof. And how do I get to work at night or on cloudy days You're car engine needs to generate that 306hp when it's going about 150mph. My car can't go 150mph or even come close to it, my car uses 306 horsepower when it needs to accelerate to highway speed in the on-ramp of a expressway or when I need to pass a slower car on a 2 lane road. In normal highway use it's probably making about 30hp. So now you need to make the solar cells adjustable so that the giant square welded to the roof of my car can shrink gown from 151x151 feet to 48x48 feet. However air resistance still might be a bit of a problem and I'm still going to have to put a WIDE LOAD sign on the back of the car. Solar PV cells can't power rocket ships either - so what? You raise a straw man argument. No one is suggesting that, but you who have raised it - with the suggestion that because PV cannot DIRECTLY power your vehicle, that it is therefore of no value whatsoever as a power source. Could your car run - again directly -- on coal. or nuclear energy? By your same logic these energy sources are therefore worthless. As I said.. A classic straw man argument. Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 9:54 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:40 AM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: The prices for PV keeps coming down as well; in fact it has dropped an amazing 99% in the past quarter century. That's very nice, but even if the price dropped to zero it wouldn't be enough to completely take over from nuclear and fossil fuel because it would still be too dilute and too unreliable and unpredictable for many, perhaps most, applications. So say you. and yet just this year alone - 2014 - it is projected that between 40 to 50 Gigawatts of new solar PV capacity will be installed on a place called planet earth. another way of picturing the huge amount of solar capacity this represents is that this is well over 300 square kilometers of solar PV collection surface. What you don't seem to get is that it is taking over and will increasingly take over as the most important source of electric generation. The prices will continue to fall - and though in the world you seem to live in the cost of something means little or nothing - in this world cost drives decisions. You harp on dilute. well I have news for you - the food you eat, that you need in order to survive, it is a dilute source as well, and yet - we have managed somehow to grow food. So what if solar is dilute - as you put it. Does the appliance in your house, sucking electrons down from the grid and dumping them to ground care what created the current? You make much of something that does not really matter in the long run. In the near term there is going to be dislocation of vested industries and outmoded ways of doing things, but after five or so decades people will wonder how the world ever functioned without ubiquitous solar PV. The grid will adapt, becoming adaptive, and beginning to act more like a true network; battery (and other utility scale energy storage systems) will - and are in fact evolving. Some of the new utility scale flow batteries coming to market that use environmentally benign and low cost reactants are promising. All electric cars - which were I live are becoming quite common - are also driving [pardon the pun] the evolution of high power density batteries, and in addition are becoming a nascent distributed power storage network that in its aggregate could scale up to as big as the all-electric fleet grows. Solar PV - IMO - is poised for a new wave of next generation multi-junction, multiple band gap, layered cells that can exploit the solar flux at many more wave-lengths, including down into the infrared range (meaning they would still produce some power - even on hazy and light cloudy days). -Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
It produces 4X the energy it needs just from the solar PV on the roofs of its buildings.. Isn't it amazing what you can accomplish with such dilute sources of energy. I include the link because the pictures are pretty cool, and illustrate what a solar city could look like. http://inhabitat.com/sonnenschiff-solar-city-produces-4x-the-energy-it-needs / What can I say - I have an architecture kick, especially when it is sustainable and low footprint. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 10:01 AM Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany Can you do the same with London in the UK? Yes Can you produce 4 times more than it consumes Tokyo? Yes Can you do this at night, and can you do this during times of rain and snowstorms? Electric energy can be stored. Utility scale electric energy storage is advancing very rapidly. So, yes. The article wasn't clear. A coal plant or a uranium plant can do quite a bit of this also, and transmit the excess electricity to other towns and cities, on a 7 x 24 basis. If, for any reason, we cannot do this with solar, then..? Also, what is the cost per kilowatt. I have heard that solar has made great progress in the last several years with with efficiency and cost-price. The cost per kilowatt -- for complete installed systems -- is starting to get close to parity with the cost for electricity from coal. In ten years from now solar will be far less expensive than coal electricity. -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 4:07 am Subject: RE: The solar example of a town in Germany It produces 4X the energy it needs just from the solar PV on the roofs of its buildings…. Isn’t it amazing what you can accomplish with such dilute sources of energy. I include the link because the pictures are pretty cool, and illustrate what a solar city could look like. http://inhabitat.com/sonnenschiff-solar-city-produces-4x-the-energy-it-needs/ What can I say – I have an architecture kick, especially when it is sustainable and low footprint. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
even if the price dropped to zero it wouldn't be enough to completely take over from nuclear and fossil fuel because it would still be too dilute and too unreliable and unpredictable for many, perhaps most, applications. So say you. and yet just this year alone - 2014 - it is projected that between 40 to 50 Gigawatts of new solar PV capacity will be installed And it wouldn't be 1% that big without tax breaks and solar had to compete against other energy sources on merit alone. A case of the talking point that refuses to die. Sure solar PV benefits form tax breaks; news flash - so does oil, gas, coal, nuclear, hydro, ethanol, wind.. You name it. Selectively harping on about the tax breaks (feed in tariffs. and all forms of subsidy) that solar and wind enjoy; while conspicuously ignoring the vastly larger subsidies given to nuclear, oil, gas or coal is not being fair with the facts. As I pointed out earlier the nuclear sector in the US just got a more than eight billion dollar loan guarantee from the feds, without which that project in Georgia would never be able to get funding. Can we please keep it honest? You harp on dilute. well I have news for you - the food you eat, that you need in order to survive, it is a dilute source as well Food energy is not all that dilute, a 1000 calorie jelly doughnut has about as much chemical energy as a hand grenade. False analogy.. The doughnut is the end product not the source. That calorie bomb's dough was made from wheat that had to be grown in a field somewhere; the oil it is saturated with also was squeezed from seeds that had to be grown somewhere; as was the sugar it is covered with. As I said, you present a false; analogy; by that token I should speak of the awesome all electric acceleration from 0-60 mph in 3.7 seconds of the Tesla roadster - whose battery packs had been charged from solar PV sources. The Tesla is an equivalent all electric bomb that compares very favorably with your doughnut (I know which one I would rather have). Either compare source to source; or end product to end product. So what if solar is dilute So it takes a great deal of land to produce anything worthwhile, so environmentalists will start screaming bloody murder that it's harming some desert lizard few have ever heard of. You don't seem to like environmentalists do you? I gather seeking to preserve for future generations the benefit of a living planet is something you find offensive and worthy of derision. Nice man. As I previously pointed out - practically every metro area on the planet has enough viable areas located within its urban fabric (such as south facing roofs, walls, road, parking lot and other non-green/water surfaces) to provide for all of its electricity requirements 24X7X365 from solar PV alone (if adequate energy storage of some form is available). We are very far from this, of course, and the current grid could absorb somewhere between 25% - 35% of wind/solar electric energy without needing any major retrofits or improvements - and that includes any major new sources of energy storage. In reality energy has always been a basket of sources - and will continue to be so. I can foresee natural gas turbines existing far into the future - utilized as spinning reserve and powered increasingly by synthetically produced biogas. What will happen and is happening is that solar PV is going to capture a growing share of this mix. The continuing rapid decline in its per unit cost will guarantee this. The grid will adapt, becoming adaptive, and beginning to act more like a true network; battery (and other utility scale energy storage systems) will and are in fact evolving. That is one hell of a lot of hand waving! Imagine how big and how expensive a battery would have to be to power your big screen living room TV for 36 days, or your iPhone for 20 years; well one gallon of gasoline has enough energy to do that and it only costs about $4. Can you find a $4 battery that can do that? You seem to misunderstand the requirements for utility scale battery systems, which are quite different form the unique requirements of a car or portable electronic devise (in which energy density is very much critical) Utility scale energy storage batteries are stationary installations. If you are going to argue something it helps to clearly understand the requirements of the system one is arguing about. Either we are talking about iPhones or we are talking about grid scale electric energy storage systems (which by the way can be many things, such as pumped storage for example - Japan has huge pumped storage capacity for example) -- so which is it? Lithium batteries are the most energy dense batteries in use today and also the most expensive, they can store .72 megajoules per kilogram, gasoline stores 44 megajoules per kilogram; so gasoline is 61 times more energy dense than the best batteries and is far far far cheaper. I'm not saying batteries can't
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
Well if you can store 61 times more energy, that just means there's room for improvement in the existing batteries... Good news, if nature was able to do it so can we I hope. Zinc-air batteries, which combine atmospheric oxygen and zinc metal in a liquid alkaline electrolyte to generate electricity with a byproduct of zinc oxide; and when re-processed – that is re-charged - the process is reversed and oxygen and zinc metal are regenerated. These battery types are attractive, because zinc is cheap and abundant and because they have much higher energy density than lithium-ion batteries – the current high density leaders; Zinc air batteries ware also non-flammable unlike lithium ion (which is nice). Zinc air offers about twice the gravimetric density (Wh/kg) and three times the volumetric density (Wh/L) of Li-ion technology. Lithium air has a theoretical specific energy of 11,140 wh/kg (lithium metal is around 45 Mj/kg) – you could fly an all-electric turbine jet with that kind of energy density. Le 28 févr. 2014 00:50, LizR lizj...@gmail.com a écrit : On 28 February 2014 07:47, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: Lithium batteries are the most energy dense batteries in use today and also the most expensive, they can store .72 megajoules per kilogram, gasoline stores 44 megajoules per kilogram; so gasoline is 61 times more energy dense than the best batteries and is far far far cheaper. Are you talking about the real costs here or just the cost at the pump (which is of course subsidised massively by ignoring its environmental effects) ? I mean the real cost MAY be cheaper but you have to factor in saving the Earth... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: Is information physical?
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:01:51PM -0500, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Not to be a dick, but is not information or data perforations, and pulses, in mater and energy? This is how we recognize information from background noise, correct? Is there a third state of reality that is not matter or energy? Only when interpreted by an observer. An electrical circuit has only voltages and currents, not bits. To an observer, a voltage on a data line might be interpreted as 1 if it is greater than 3V, and zero if it is less than 1V. In between those two thresholds, the voltage might be determinate, but the information is not. The third state, as you call it, is a semantically different picture where things are described in terms of whether some physical state is the same as, or different from, some other physical state, according to the interpretation of an observer. From that, comes bits, and all the other information-based quantities. Perhaps one could say it is a meta-system that exists upon an underlying system (more like a truly vast assemblage of such discreet systems). The information exists only for those observers able to interpret the meaning of the current state of this set of nodes comprising the system. An observer who ignored, or was ignorant of the meaning encoded by the pattern would perceive no information. Only the sub-set of observers who could interpret the meta-significance of the particular ordering and sequence of states would be able to access this meta-system existing on top of a (potentially dynamic) pattern of states encoded in some underlying system. Chris -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 3:42 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On 28 February 2014 06:43, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 4:50 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Why bother with all these other power sources when you have a fusion reactor in the astronomical backyard? Because the energy density decreases with the square of the distance and the fusion reactor is 93 million miles away, and because the energy drops to zero for at least half the time. It still delivers thousands of times more energy to earth than human civilisation uses. Let's do a quick back of the envelope calculation. Human civilisation uses approx 150 x 10^15 watt/hours per year according to wikipedia The Sun delivers about 1000 W/m^2 on average at Earth's orbital distance (1360 actually but obviously some is scattered, etc) So treating the Earth as a disc for purposes of intercepting sunlight, the total possible insolation available is around 40 x 10^15 W Or around 320 x 10^18 watt/hours per year That's about 2000 times the energy requirements of our civilisation. It can be knocked down a lot by clouds, falling on the sea, running the weather, inefficiencies in collection, etc, of course, but I'd say there's still a bit of room for ramping up how much solar we use. Besides which, solar is and will be part of a mix of energy sources. Energy supply will never be provided from a single source. So the argument that unless it could provide 100% of all of the energy needed it is of zero value and interest is specious. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
If it's all math, then where does math come from?
Personally the notion that all that exists is comp information - encoded
on what though? - Is not especially troubling for me. I understand how some
cling to a fundamental material realism; after all it does seem so very
real. However when you get right down to it all we have is measured values
of things and meters by which we measure other things; we live encapsulated
in the experience of our own being and the sensorial stream of life and in
the end all that we can say for sure about anything is the value it has when
we measure it.
I am getting into the interesting part of Tegmark's book - I read a bit each
day when I break for lunch - so this is partly influencing this train of
thought. By the way enjoyed his description of quantum computing and how in
a sense q-bits are leveraging the Level III multiverse to compute every
possible outcome while in quantum superposition; a way of thinking about it
that I had never read before.
Naturally I have been reading some of the discussions here, and the idea of
comp is something I also find intuitively possible. The soul is an emergent
phenomena given enough depth of complexity and breadth of parallelism and
vastness of scale of the information system in which it is self-emergent.
Several questions have been re-occurring for me. One of these is: Every
information system, at least that I have ever been aware of, requires a
substrate medium upon which to encode itself; information seems describable
in this sense as the meta-encoding existing on some substrate system. I
would like to avoid the infinite regression of stopping at the point of
describing systems as existing upon other and requiring other substrate
systems that themselves require substrates themselves described as
information again requiring some substrate. repeat eternally.
It is also true that exquisitely complex information can be encoded in a
very simple substrate system given enough replication of elements. a simple
binary state machine could suffice, given enough bits.
But what are the bits encoded on?
At some point reductionism can no longer reduce.. And then we are back to
where we first started.. How did that arise or come to be? If for example we
say that math is reducible to logic or set theory then what of sets and the
various set operations? What of enumerations? These simplest of simple
things. Can you reduce the {} null set?
What does it arise from?
Perhaps to try to find some fundamental something upon which everything else
is tapestried over is unanswerable; it is something that keeps coming back
to itch my ears.
Am interested in hearing what some of you may have to say about this
universe of the most simple things: numbers, sets; and the very simple base
operators -- {+-*/=!^()} etc. that operate on these enumerable entities and
the logical operators {and, or, xor}
What is a number? Doesn't it only have meaning in the sense that it is
greater than the number that is less than it less than the one greater
than it? Does the concept of a number actually even have any meaning outside
of being thought of as being a member of the enumerable set {1,2,3,4,. n}?
In other words '3' by itself means nothing and is nothing; it only means
something in terms of the set of numbers as in: 234. n-1n
And what of the simple operators. When we say a + b = c we are dealing
with two separate kinds of entities, with one {a,b,c} being quantities or
values and {+,=} being the two operators that relate the three values in
this simple equation.
The enumerable set is not enough by itself. So even if one could explain the
enumerable set in some manner the manner in which the simple operators come
to be is not clear to me. How do the addition, assignment and other basic
operators arise? This extends similarly to the basic logic operators: and,
or, xor, not - as well.
Thanks
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 12:23 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: Well if you can store 61 times more energy, that just means there's room for improvement in the existing batteries... Good news, if nature was able to do it so can we I hope. Zinc-air batteries, [...] offers about twice the gravimetric density Who cares about gravimetric density? Evidently you don't; that much is clear. The automobile companies that are moving towards electric vehicles care - and care a lot. Just because you don't give a fig does not mean that your opinion is universally shared. Increasing the storage potential per unit of mass - say as wh/kg for example - is critical in order to extend the range of electric vehicles. (Wh/kg) and three times the volumetric density (Wh/L) of Li-ion technology. And per weight that's about one thirtieth as much energy as gasoline can store, and they tend to stop working after about 3 years. Internal combustion (ICE) motors are only between 15% to 25% efficient - so only a small fraction of the potential energy stored in the gasoline is transmitted to the wheel as useful work. Electric motors are around 80% efficient. So to compare the energy in the battery with the potential energy in the gasoline is an unfair comparison - which I am sure you are aware of (would hope so at least); but you do it, in any case, because it suits the point you are arguing. Lithium air has a theoretical specific energy of 11,140 wh/kg (lithium metal is around 45 Mj/kg) That's about the same as gasoline, and although no machine ever operates at its theoretical maximum if and when Lithium air batteries ever become practical and move out of the laboratory it will change the world. But there are huge technological challenges that must be overcome before that can happen, larger than what it would take to put a LFTR online although probably not as large as what it would take to put a fusion reactor online. The advanced battery field is moving very fast and the problems are being solved - often in parallel. Lithium air batteries would store more usable work per unit of mass than gasoline because of the inefficiency of combustion engines - even modern gas turbines are around 50% efficient. It may surprise you but I wish the US would start up an LFTR program. in fact, I wish the 8+ billion dollar loan guarantee now earmarked to fund those nuclear white elephants in Georgia was instead - much more wisely IMO - being used to kick start an LFTR program. Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
If it's all math, then where does math come from? Strange to say, elementary maths just appears to be a fact. That is, it is a fact that 1+1=2. Somehow I do not find that satisfying; in what way and by what evidence does this occur? Especially - as I had posited if math is the fundamental thing - even more fundamental than the emergent material universe. I could see this logic in a pre-existing universe replete with 10 to a very large number of atoms, but if math is to be the superstructure underlying everything then I - speaking for myself - am not satisfied by saying it just is a fact. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
Or it comes from our conceptualizing the world as consisting of distinct objects and counting them, c.f. William S. Cooper The Origin of Reason and Lakoff and Nunez Where Mathematics Comes From. In that case math would emerge from our conscious minds -- growing out of our making sense of the world. Is math the fundamental basis of reality, or is it an emergent phenomena? Chris Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR On 1 March 2014 04:59, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: It does. You cannot fake electricity. You cannot fake electric current. If you are depending on solar power for 20% of your electricity supply, and the rest for coal, because coal is reliable on a 7 x 24 basis, you can only rely on solar for a slim fraction of electricity. You haven't solved the problem in a technical manner, all one is doing is employing solar for a fraction of total electricity consumption, to make ones self feel better. This is not engineering, it is ideology- a faith movement to make one feel better, without providing clean power to power one's civilization. How long must we wait for miracle power sources, if the shadow of Climate Change is overwhelming us all? It is politics and not health, and not engineering that is driving this issue, right? I don't see what you're saying here. Indeed, you appear to be contradicting yourself. If solar provides 20% of your power, it provides 20% of your power. There is nothing faith based about that, assuming it's a fact (e.g. about 70% of New Zealand's power is provided by hydro, on average - that's not faith, or a miracle, or a conspiracy, it's just a fact). If solar can provide X% of your power, on average, then that means only 100-X% has to rely on fossil fuels. Hence you can reduce your fossil fuel usage by that amount, and provide that much more of a distance between civilisation and any future effects of pollution, climate change, and resource depletion. Sorry, what don't you understand here? Another thing he does not understand is the concept of marginal value. If renewables contributed say one third of the power mix the marginal impact would be very large. It would mean aging, dirty coal fired plants could be retired more quickly than they could be absent this contribution. They would provide a resilience and stability to the grid - by lessening the exposure to interruptions in the supply o fuels from distant regions. Localized roof top solar especially will also lessen the load that the grid needs to carry. the grid, in the US and other industrialized nations is already pretty much at full capacity and it is very hard to increase this capacity. Rooftop solar provides grid stability services (an important value, ask anyone who lived through the great blackout of 2003 when NYC went dark); it does so by offloading demand from the grid by being able to supply a portion of that demand straight from the rooftop. Solar power also coincides with peak demand - it maps very nicely onto it. Some are making much about the need for 24 hours of power a day - but they neglect to mention that in fact there is very little demand for electric power in the wee hours of the morn - in fact this is a huge current and on-going problem, and at night wind power in Europe is on occasion even driving the spot wholesale price for electricity into negative territory.. Electric producers have to pay to put the power onto the grid. So much for the argument of this vital necessity that solar power be able to continue to be able to generate power - to supply the voracious appetite for electricity prevailing during the wee morning hours. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
Personally the notion that all that exists is comp information - encoded
on what though? - Is not especially troubling for me. I understand how some
cling to a fundamental material realism; after all it does seem so very
real. However when you get right down to it all we have is measured values
of things and meters by which we measure other things; we live encapsulated
in the experience of our own being and the sensorial stream of life and in
the end all that we can say for sure about anything is the value it has when
we measure it.
I am getting into the interesting part of Tegmark's book - I read a bit each
day when I break for lunch - so this is partly influencing this train of
thought. By the way enjoyed his description of quantum computing and how in
a sense q-bits are leveraging the Level III multiverse to compute every
possible outcome while in quantum superposition; a way of thinking about it
that I had never read before.
Naturally I have been reading some of the discussions here, and the idea of
comp is something I also find intuitively possible. The soul is an emergent
phenomena given enough depth of complexity and breadth of parallelism and
vastness of scale of the information system in which it is self-emergent.
Several questions have been re-occurring for me. One of these is: Every
information system, at least that I have ever been aware of, requires a
substrate medium upon which to encode itself; information seems describable
in this sense as the meta-encoding existing on some substrate system. I
would like to avoid the infinite regression of stopping at the point of
describing systems as existing upon other and requiring other substrate
systems that themselves require substrates themselves described as
information again requiring some substrate... repeat eternally.
It is also true that exquisitely complex information can be encoded in a
very simple substrate system given enough replication of elements... a simple
binary state machine could suffice, given enough bits.
But what are the bits encoded on?
At some point reductionism can no longer reduce And then we are back to
where we first started How did that arise or come to be? If for example we
say that math is reducible to logic or set theory then what of sets and the
various set operations? What of enumerations? These simplest of simple
things. Can you reduce the {} null set?
What does it arise from?
Perhaps to try to find some fundamental something upon which everything else
is tapestried over is unanswerable; it is something that keeps coming back
to itch my ears.
Am interested in hearing what some of you may have to say about this
universe of the most simple things: numbers, sets; and the very simple base
operators -- {+-*/=!^()} etc. that operate on these enumerable entities and
the logical operators {and, or, xor}
What is a number? Doesn't it only have meaning in the sense that it is
greater than the number that is less than it less than the one greater
than it? Does the concept of a number actually even have any meaning outside
of being thought of as being a member of the enumerable set {1,2,3,4,... n}?
In other words '3' by itself means nothing and is nothing; it only means
something in terms of the set of numbers as in: 234... n-1n
And what of the simple operators. When we say a + b = c we are dealing
with two separate kinds of entities, with one {a,b,c} being quantities or
values and {+,=} being the two operators that relate the three values in
this simple equation.
The enumerable set is not enough by itself. So even if one could explain the
enumerable set in some manner the manner in which the simple operators come
to be is not clear to me. How do the addition, assignment and other basic
operators arise? This extends similarly to the basic logic operators: and,
or, xor, not - as well.
Thanks
Those kind of questions are more less clarified. You cannot prove the
existence of a universal system, or machine, or language, from anything less
powerful, but you can prove the existence of all of them, from the
assumption of only one. I use elementary arithmetic, because it is already
taught in school, and people are familiar with it.
Sure. keep it simple; I am all for the KISS principle - an American
programmer's vernacular which stands for keep it simple stupid or the
more abrasive version keep it simple stupid - either way KISS
I am all for distilling away intervening complexity and orthogonal aspects,
in order to drill down into a problem space and abstract out the essential
qualities of interest.
Even as simple as:
0, 1
00, 01, 10, 11
000, 001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, 111
Incredible software is built from this simple base operating with an equally
spare simple set of basic logic gates.
The TOE extracted from comp assumes we agree on the laws of addition and
multiplication, and on classical logic. From this you can prove the
existence of the
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 10:34 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 6:42 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: Why bother with all these other power sources when you have a fusion reactor in the astronomical backyard? Because the energy density decreases with the square of the distance and the fusion reactor is 93 million miles away, and because the energy drops to zero for at least half the time. It still delivers thousands of times more energy to earth than human civilisation uses. Yes but economically the total amount of energy, or of anything else for that matter, is not important, the important thing is the amount per unit volume. Only 174,000 tons of gold has been mined in all of human history and right now in seawater there is 69 thousand times as much, 12 billion tons. And yet nobody bothers to extract gold from seawater because the concentration is so dilute (about 5 parts in a trillion) that it would not be economical to do so. But plenty of people are bothering to extract electrons from the photons. diffuse as they may be. 40 to 50 gigawatts are being added just this year. At some point don't the facts on the ground begin to speak for themselves? Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Edgar L. Owen
Chris,
For a computational universe to even exist it must be consistently
logico-mathematical. If it weren't the inconsistencies would cause it to tear
itself apart and thus it couldn't exist.
However it is a fact that our own human created computational systems, can and
do incorporate random inputs (in fact sometimes relying on them) and function
increasingly well in noisy environments. And this is in spite of our
fundamental computer chip architecture being highly fault intolerant – but the
fundamental logic is much easier because of this very high signal to noise
ratio.
To build a computer with current chip architecture approaching the complexity
of a human brain you would need a power flux measured in the GWs – the human
brain is trillions of times more efficient than our modern computers.
This argues for the brain itself as a guiding template for the understanding if
evolved computational systems. And if there is one thing that pops out when
studying the brain it is just how very noisy it is…. Continuously crackling
with neuro-electric activity. We are only beginning to seriously attempt to
emulate the brain and to understand its error correction routines, to
understand quorum based algorithms etc.
When I cast around for an example of computationalism in action I am drawn to
the human brain as an exemplar, template what have you. Human made computers
are not nearly as evolved; I predict that in time there is going to be a
radical shift in chip architecture to much lower energy levels to flip a gate
(inevitably also vastly lowering signal to noise) that will be based on massive
parallelism and quorum decisional algorithms to clean the signal up… to discern
the signal in the forest of noise.
It is what we excel at… the human brain. It is the by far the best exemplar of
computationalism that we have available to us.
This is where the math comes from. If a computational universe exists, and ours
does, it must be structured logico-mathematically.
You assume that math proceeds from a computational universe, but then how do
you accomplish computations without math?
But this does NOT men all human H-math exists, it just means that a fundamental
logico-mathematical structure I call R-math (reality math) exists. Just the
minimum that is necessary to compute the actual universe is all that is needed.
I prefer to use shared language as much as possible. What exactly do you mean
by reality math? Define it in a more rigorous manner. What are its fundamental
elements and operators? Is it simple binary arithmetic operated through relays
of the seven or so basic logic gates {AND, OR, NOT, NAND, NOR, XOR, XNOR} ?
If you want to coin a term “R-math” show some rigor and define it in terms of
math. What subset of math is R-math?
Beyond the fuzzy “minimum that is necessary”, which I get.
All the rest is H-math, and we can't assume that H-math is part of R-math. In
fact it is provably different.
Show me your proof then. And please, if you could do so using the language of
math.
The big mistake Bruno makes is assuming that H-math is R-math. It isn't. H-math
is a generalized approximation of R-math, which is then vastly extended far
beyond R-math.
I do not see how you arrive at this conclusion that Bruno assumes that the
superset of all possible math (which is what I am assuming you are intending by
your personal jargon H-math) “is” the minimum necessary set of math (by which
I suspect you intend to mean when you use this term you have coined -- R-math)
Is, is such a generic word; it is hard to pin it down to any concrete meaning
in terms of the statement you just made hear. You say Bruno assumes H-math “is”
R-math (to use your jargon, which I personally find distracting and
unnecessary)… How so? What exactly, precisely, concretely, in detail do you
mean when you say “is”?
If your “is” includes “emerges from” in the embrace of its meaning then sure…
and I do as well in that case. Complex systems emerge from simpler underlying
systems; or looking at it the other way complex systems are reducible to being
fully explained in terms of simpler systems.
Look at nature – the untold numbers of molecules all made from just 92 elements
(leaving trans-uranic elements aside); all elements all baryonic matter is made
from just six kinds of quarks and two kinds of leptons. All the colors of the
rainbow all the waves on the radio dial – all photons. The incredible tapestry
of life – from an alphabet of four letters. All our digital culture based on
bits.
Complexity emerges.
If that is what you mean by “is” then include me as well.
If you mean something else then help me out and substantively define it in
specific terms. Pin it down to a clear and unambiguously stated proposition.
In the computational
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Nevertheless, it does seem to be. That is, 17 is a prime number regardless of whether anyone knows it is, or even knows what numbers are, or indeed whether anyone is even alive (e.g. it was prime in the first instants of the big bang - maths has been used to work out what happened in the early universe, with observable consequences now). There's a lot of hand waving going on to deny this, but I haven't seen a knock down argument (or even a suggestion of one) to indicate otherwise. Couldn't one argue that 17 (and all primes) are artifacts of the ontology of math; that they necessarily arise from and within it. Does the seeming fact that we cannot have math without primes; therefore imply that math - for lack of better words - just is? That is quite a leap - IMO. Chris On 1 March 2014 18:16, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: If it's all math, then where does math come from? Strange to say, elementary maths just appears to be a fact. That is, it is a fact that 1+1=2. Somehow I do not find that satisfying; in what way and by what evidence does this occur? Especially - as I had posited if math is the fundamental thing - even more fundamental than the emergent material universe. I could see this logic in a pre-existing universe replete with 10 to a very large number of atoms, but if math is to be the superstructure underlying everything then I - speaking for myself - am not satisfied by saying it just is a fact. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 12:23 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: If it's all math, then where does math come from? On 01 Mar 2014, at 06:16, Chris de Morsella wrote: If it's all math, then where does math come from? Strange to say, elementary maths just appears to be a fact. That is, it is a fact that 1+1=2. Somehow I do not find that satisfying; in what way and by what evidence does this occur? Especially - as I had posited if math is the fundamental thing - even more fundamental than the emergent material universe. I could see this logic in a pre-existing universe replete with 10 to a very large number of atoms, but if math is to be the superstructure underlying everything then I - speaking for myself - am not satisfied by saying it just is a fact. But do you agree with 1+1=2? I agree that math is internally consistent and that within mathematical ontology it is self-consistent. Furthermore it seems to crop up in reality again and again. Patterns, equations, such as say the Fibonacci series manifesting in so many unrelated places; the universe in its reduced symbol set of smeared quarks and leptons; its constants and various cardinal values and states such as spin, color, charge etc. - it does all seem very binary and mathematical. I however remain curious, where 1 came from, and even before 1, the null set. the set of nothing at all. The null set is a lot more than nothing. It takes a great leap to get from nothing to the null set. At this most reductionist of levels; is this where everyone gives up, perhaps because it is unknowable. I can see the logical progression from 1+1=2 to an ever inflating infinite forest of numbers with infinite overlays of dynamism operating over layer and layers of stochastic boundaries. Because the rest is sunday philosophy in my opinion. Of course, in my theory 1+1=2 is just a theorem. The interesting things is that Chris believes (or not) in 1+1=2 is also a theorem. Sure. an emergent phenomena; don't really have any existential issues with my being, being emergent.. In fact I rather like the idea of emerging into being. It fits with the brains massive parallelism and lack of any central operating system (that we have found). I emerge; therefore I am. Chris Bruno Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: Who cares about gravimetric density? Evidently you don't; that much is clear. The automobile companies that are moving towards electric vehicles care - and care a lot. Why? They care about weight and how much energy it can store, but I don't see why they'd care how dense it was. Well OK if it had the density of styrofoam there could be a problem finding a place to put 200 pounds of it in a small car, but that is not a realistic issue; as long as the battery was reliable and cheap and stored lots of energy for its weight I don't see why car makers would much care if it was as dense as aluminum or as dense as lead. Gravimetric density is the measure of unit of potential energy per unit of weight; while volumetric density measures unit of potential energy per unit of volume. While both are measures of energy density; they are not inter-changeable and are measuring different things. Both are important. To give you an example hydrogen gas has a very high gravimetric density, but a very low volumetric density. Weight essentially determines how much power a car will need; the more a car weighs the more energy it will require to move it along. If a battery system has twice the gravimetric density as another type of battery it can store twice as much energy per kilogram of mass. Can't you see how important this is for automobile manufacturers - or for that matter for the makers of all the mobile electronic devices becoming so ubiquitous nowadays.. The smartphones, tablets, digital cameras, music players and so on. Hope this clears up any confusion on your part on the specific meaning of these two related means of measuring energy density. The advanced battery field is moving very fast I disagree. Nearly all electronic components are astronomically better than they were 50 years ago, but batteries are the exception, they are only slightly better. That was the case up until recently, but the need for better batteries is huge. Just the market for powering portable devices itself is huge and growing. Whereas before battery RD spending languished and was stuck in the slow lane, for the last ten to fifteen years RD spending has really ramped up on it and the results of all of this effort is moving through the RD pipeline towards market. But I agree it has moved frustratingly slow compared to the pace in say chip transistor density. Energy density is critical for transportation and portable applications; it is much less of a factor for fixed large scale energy storage facilities. What matters for these is of course COST, scale, durability (how many cycles before degradation becomes a factor) and metrics of this nature. Costs keep coming down -- EOS Energy Storage, for example, intends to launch its zinc-air battery next year with a price of $200-$250/kWh, which includes the cost of the inverters to go between DC and AC power. This is starting to close in on the cost for gas turbines, which are the current default means of providing spinning reserve for the grid. It may surprise you but I wish the US would start up an LFTR program. in fact, I wish the 8+ billion dollar loan guarantee now earmarked to fund those nuclear white elephants in Georgia was instead - much more wisely IMO - being used to kick start an LFTR program. Well, we agree on something. And I would rather they had spent 8 billion dollars on research to improve photovoltaic cells and batteries rather than build more reactors based on designs from the 1960s; even the most promising ideas can go south and this matter is too important to place all our bets on just one vision. We do agree on this. Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 2:00 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating Since this thread is about Fukushima, can I just mention that if all the power stations in the world could somehow switch to using renewables while all vehicles in the world (bar a tiny few) continued to use fossil fuels, that would STILL be a big boost for the environment. With power stations you don't need to worry about the same factors (energy density etc) but you do need to worry about other things - load balancing, etc - which is why non-renewable sources are unlikely to go away completely for power stations (unless we get something like a world-wide power grid, which I don't suppose is very feasible). But they could still do a lot better than they are now. A mix of renewables and gas turbines (which themselves could increasingly be fueled by algae bio-gas sources). Gas turbines achieve 50% efficiency, are relatively clean and are able to be spun up or spun down quite rapidly making them the best choice for spinning reserve - along with hydro, which can also take on the role of spinning reserve. LFTR could provide a portion of baseload power that coupled with a much larger energy storage capacity (that acts to decouple supply from demand and smooth it all out) and the available spinning reserve could ensure grid stability 24X7X365 Some - varying from place to place - mix of renewable sources + baseload sources + spinning reserve + energy storage capacity will gradually supplant the current power generation mix dominated by large dirty unsustainable coal fired thermo-electric and an aging fleet of increasingly scary reactors (such as the one in Florida where they have just discovered that its high pressure steam tubes are worn up to 30% for example) a fleet of nukes that are operating well past their design specs - routinely getting relicensed, with SFP getting filled far beyond original intended capacity - by tight packing the spent fuel. Speaking of baseload power sources; there is another baseload source that has a massive potential to scale, but also is saddled with some potentially serious problems - of the kind that is a terrible PR nightmare. I speak of engineered dry hot rock geothermal, using a similar fracking approach to engineer a steam permeable reservoir in a deep volume of hot dry rock. It would inject high pressure water/poppant slurry into the micro-factures the very high pressure fluid creates in the rock mass, but without all the toxic solvents, surfactants etc. present in the witches brews the gas companies are pumping down dissolved in the fracking fluid used by the kerogen and gas fracking plays. It has been tried a few times and famously in Basil seems to have triggered a fairly noticeable tremor - which ended that experiment immediately. For some reason the earth tremors are acceptable and little mentioned when it comes to fracking for gas or kerogen, but become large point headlines for dry rock geothermal. It is a problem, but perhaps it is not that much of a problem in many geologic formations. A much improved understanding of how the forces and stresses at work in the deep hot bottom of the crust dynamically behave and what effects fracking will have could address this. If this issue can be addresses this form of geothermal energy has a pretty big upside potential for supplying baseload power - it gets very hot beneath our feet a few miles deep. and good deep rock formations are very widely available. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 3:18 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating Occupy was a Soros funded org liz. It started with a Canadian mag call Add Busters, and is Soros owned. It was, what the dems called an astro-turf organization, created to react to the losses in the 2010 elections, due to us Tea Baggers. It was the idea that the real masses were out in the streets against the capitalists, but the protestors walked past Soros's Manhattan townhouse. It was both creepy and phony. As for the second amendment simply look to the ugliness that is happening in the Ukraine right now. The ruling class is frightened of armed yokels for some reason. I call BS on what you just said. Clearly you are a Teabagger.. with an Ayn Rand rattled brain. Your entire movement is a Koch brothers operation; a case of throwing stones in a glass house. Not that I'm advocating violence, of course, but they might be more amenable to changing their ways if, say, some protestors occupied Wall Street... Oh wait, they already did! How did it go? -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 6:45 pm Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On 28 February 2014 07:11, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Why trust any of these billionaires?? Why trust the Koch's if you don't trust Soros (like me)? Let us call the US system what it is-a plutocracy. Run from the law firms on K-street in Washington, DC. Technically, its a corporatism form of government. Because somebody likes NOVA is no reason to embrace the Ruling Class, axiomatically. Well, you have kept the right to bear arms in your constitutin specifically so you can do something about having oppressive rulers. Not that I'm advocating violence, of course, but they might be more amenable to changing their ways if, say, some protestors occupied Wall Street... Oh wait, they already did! How did it go? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John, because those in power say that Global Warming is imminent, and the solution is to switch to wind and solar, and shut off the dirty electrical sources. The problem is these sources cannot yet do it. But the progressives demand this anyway. It should not rationally matter what energy source we use, as long as it works, but we now have ideology in play. News flash – global warming IS imminent – it does not matter whether you believe so or not, blinded by your ideology. The data speaks for itself. -Original Message- From: John Mikes jami...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sat, Mar 1, 2014 2:51 pm Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany Spudboy and Liz: I wanted to ask 'why the closed mind FOR solar?' when I detected the original title about Germany going for it. Still a closed mind to assign the rest to coal (fossil). All that with Liz's example of NZ (hydro). No Windfarms? no Geotherm? In our capitalistic ways profit is the biggest driving force. No gov't bribe can override it. Today the fossils are supported (polluting allowances, tax-structures, mining support, help for distribution grids, etc. and no definite adequate treatise for the cost of solar. (Especially on a 7/24 basis). One side-remark: I failed to realize in descriptions of hybrid-vehicles the amount of OIL etc. necessary to produce the electricity for battery recharging plotted against the saving in gasoline-based fuel...Could we 'read' beyond our nose? JM On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:58 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Chris, if this is all true and available today, or very, soon, Japan, which experienced the core meltdown at Fukushima, has not pursued a crash program of PV farms.?all over to replace nuclear. I read energy stuff all the time, as you must, and have seen a PV farm at sea, proposal. But I don't see this as more than the normal RD. I hope you are correct. There's a radiation leak, in the American Southwest, at the plutonium waste storage facility. -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 3:39 pm Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany _ From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 10:01 AM Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany Can you do the same with London in the UK? Yes Can you produce 4 times more than it consumes Tokyo? Yes Can you do this at night, and can you do this during times of rain and snowstorms? Electric energy can be stored. Utility scale electric energy storage is advancing very rapidly. So, yes. The article wasn't clear. A coal plant or a uranium plant can do quite a bit of this also, and transmit the excess electricity to other towns and cities, on a 7 x 24 basis. If, for any reason, we cannot do this with solar, then..? Also, what is the cost per kilowatt. I have heard that solar has made great progress in the last several years with with efficiency and cost-price. The cost per kilowatt -- for complete installed systems -- is starting to get close to parity with the cost for electricity from coal. In ten years from now solar will be far less expensive than coal electricity. -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 4:07 am Subject: RE: The solar example of a town in Germany It produces 4X the energy it needs just from the solar PV on the roofs of its buildings…. Isn’t it amazing what you can accomplish with such dilute sources of energy. I include the link because the pictures are pretty cool, and illustrate what a solar city could look like. http://inhabitat.com/sonnenschiff-solar-city-produces-4x-the-energy-it-needs/ What can I say – I have an architecture kick, especially when it is sustainable and low footprint. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 3:38 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany You need to power all civilization, once the leaders shut down all the dirty power. What can we replace it with. What do we have we have ready to go. The leaders all global Warming, so what can we do? They say its imminent. Who are these leaders you seem so worked up about? Is it the secret illuminati council of thirteen. who are these sinister leaders who believe global warming is imminent? Do you realize how off the wall you sound? -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, Feb 28, 2014 5:11 pm Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany On 1 March 2014 04:59, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: It does. You cannot fake electricity. You cannot fake electric current. If you are depending on solar power for 20% of your electricity supply, and the rest for coal, because coal is reliable on a 7 x 24 basis, you can only rely on solar for a slim fraction of electricity. You haven't solved the problem in a technical manner, all one is doing is employing solar for a fraction of total electricity consumption, to make ones self feel better. This is not engineering, it is ideology- a faith movement to make one feel better, without providing clean power to power one's civilization. How long must we wait for miracle power sources, if the shadow of Climate Change is overwhelming us all? It is politics and not health, and not engineering that is driving this issue, right? I don't see what you're saying here. Indeed, you appear to be contradicting yourself. If solar provides 20% of your power, it provides 20% of your power. There is nothing faith based about that, assuming it's a fact (e.g. about 70% of New Zealand's power is provided by hydro, on average - that's not faith, or a miracle, or a conspiracy, it's just a fact). If solar can provide X% of your power, on average, then that means only 100-X% has to rely on fossil fuels. Hence you can reduce your fossil fuel usage by that amount, and provide that much more of a distance between civilisation and any future effects of pollution, climate change, and resource depletion. Sorry, what don't you understand here? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 10:30 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 4:07 AM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: It produces 4X the energy it needs just from the solar PV on the roofs of its buildings…. Isn’t it amazing what you can accomplish with such dilute sources of energy. I include the link because the pictures are pretty cool, and illustrate what a solar city could look like. http://inhabitat.com/sonnenschiff-solar-city-produces-4x-the-energy-it-needs/ What can I say What I can say is that governments can get people to build anything no matter how ridiculous if the bribe to do so is big enough. Germany has the highest electricity prices in Europe, partially because they're shutting down their nuclear plants but mostly because 50% of the average consumer's electric bill goes into subsidizing solar energy. So far the German consumer has been forced to subsidize the solar cell industry to the tune of 100 billion euros (128 billion dollars). So what did they get out of those 128 billions dollars worth of solar cells? They reduced the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere enough that by the end of this century they will have delayed global warming by about 23 hours. Clearly you have it in for feed-in tariffs; I dislike the fact that we Americans subsidize wars for oil. I don’t know where you are getting your figures; according to the Wiki on German feed-in tariffs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed-in_tariffs_in_Germany the figure is: €0.0056 per kWh (3% of household electricity costs) – which is it 3% or 50%; Wikipedia or John Clark? Again from the same wiki entry the [2012] total level of subsidy for all subsidized sources, including wind, solar, geothermal, biowaste fermentation, hydro, etc. was €2.4 billion. How do you get this $250 billion dollar figure for solar PV. The entire feed-in tariff subsidy for ALL sources in 2012 is less than 1% of the figure you quote; which indicates that there may be some problems with the figure you are using. The clean renewable power offset achieved by this feed-in tariff program is estimated to have resulted in 87 million fewer tons of carbon dioxide by 2012; the difference of burning 40 million tons of coal. Your derision does not lessen this achievement. Chris Even the Germans are starting to get fed up with this nonsense and say they will pull the plug on solar subsidies by 2018. If so then, unless there are major technological breakthroughs, you can expect the solar industry to crash in 2018. By 2018 the global per unit price for solar PV will have fallen by a factor of 4 – it will have become the low cost leader for electric power generation; yet John Clark is confident it will collapse. You are free of course to be confident on whatever you choose to be confident in, but in order to be convincing you need to more than announce your confidence. Over the past 35 years of trend lines, On average, solar power improves 14% per year in terms of energy production per dollar invested. In 2013 solar PV unit cost was on average around $0.74 per Watt of capacity. By 2018 using this long established cost trendline for solar PV it is possible to project that it will likely fall to somewhere around $0.37 per Watt of capacity by 2018. You expect the global solar PV sector to collapse in 2018 when it will be able to sell its product for $0.37 / Watt of capacity or $370 per kilowatt. An energy source that just requires a south facing insolated surface to be mounted on – inside a module unit; an energy source that does not require the on-going purchase of increasingly expensive fossil fuel. Is this the reason you are confident that it will die? That it will be bar none the low cost electric energy source; that it will require no fuel and will not emit (beyond the embedded carbon footprint in its manufacturing distribution chain) CO2; that it will help lighten the load on national grids, which across the world operate on the margin of collapse. John you seem like a smart guy, but on this subject you are not thinking clearly – IMO. Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list
RE: The Dalai Lama's Ski Trip
From The Dalai Lama http://www.slate.com/articles/life/culturebox/2014/02/dalai_lama_at_a_santa _fe_ski_resort_tells_waitress_the_meaning_of_life.single.html 's Ski Trip: The Slate article is a pretty funny read this is its final passage; which I think brings a certain perspective to everything so seems appropriate for this list. Chris Please. She spoke with complete seriousness. What is the meaning of life? In my entire week with the Dalai Lama, every conceivable question had been asked-except this one. People had been afraid to ask the one-the really big-question. There was a brief, stunned silence at the table. The Dalai Lama answered immediately. The meaning of life is happiness. He raised his finger, leaning forward, focusing on her as if she were the only person in the world. Hard question is not, 'What is meaning of life?' That is easy question to answer! No, hard question is what make happiness. Money? Big house? Accomplishment? Friends? Or . He paused. Compassion and good heart? This is question all human beings must try to answer: What make true happiness? He gave this last question a peculiar emphasis and then fell silent, gazing at her with a smile. Thank you, she said, thank you. She got up and finished stacking the dirty dishes and cups, and took them away. http://www.slate.com/articles/life/culturebox/2014/02/dalai_lama_at_a_santa_ fe_ski_resort_tells_waitress_the_meaning_of_life.single.html -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 6:14 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany On 2 March 2014 14:01, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 3:38 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany You need to power all civilization, once the leaders shut down all the dirty power. What can we replace it with. What do we have we have ready to go. The leaders all global Warming, so what can we do? They say its imminent. Who are these leaders you seem so worked up about? Is it the secret illuminati council of thirteen. who are these sinister leaders who believe global warming is imminent? The Elders of Zion? Lol.. Quite possibly. By the way, here is some scientific evidence, in case you're interested. Unfortunately, when has something like scientific evidence ever stood in the way of an ideologues opinion? Chris http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus Inline images 1 http://climate.nasa.gov/system/content_pages/main_images/Temp_anomaly.jpg -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 1:31 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: If it's all math, then where does math come from? On 3/1/2014 12:28 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 Mar 2014, at 07:04, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2014 9:22 PM, LizR wrote: Nevertheless, it does seem to be. That is, 17 is a prime number regardless of whether anyone knows it is, or even knows what numbers are, or indeed whether anyone is even alive (e.g. it was prime in the first instants of the big bang - maths has been used to work out what happened in the early universe, with observable consequences now). There's a lot of hand waving going on to deny this, but I haven't seen a knock down argument (or even a suggestion of one) to indicate otherwise. To deny what? That 17 is prime? That's a tautology. It's our theory that the world consists of countable things - whether it really is, is questionable. Well, in the comp theory, there are no countable things, and non mechanically countable things, etc. Both in the math, the physics, the theology, etc. Arithmetic doesn't include countable things, aka numbers. I think you're slipping into mysticism, Bruno. Brent ~ are you saying that arithmetic is the operation (with potential ordering grouping) that takes numeric input and produces numeric output? I find it hard to conceive of math without also contemporaneously envisioning enumerable entities. Chris Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Should I correct my statements to make them ideologically acceptable to progressive minds, everywhere? Will I get a cookie if I do? No, you won't get a cookie, but not making an ass of yourself is its own reward. Question: How much a percentage of the U.S. gross annual income, should the U.S. tithe to the United Nations, as they see fit? It's an idea that's being circulated around by your pal GS, for a number of years. Are random angry man quotes a regular part of your style? Where in left field did this come from? How much of your mind do you waste on this kind of anger? Do we have enough time to replace the dirty power sources with solar, and will solar work well enough to produce the wattage necessary, or do you feel we should drastically cut back on consumption of electricity, to save the Earth? If we do not have enough time society will collapse; it has before. It Is not a matter of what you feel or what I feel; both you and I happen to live on a rock orbiting a star. The rock we live on has limits. It is the limits of our physical reality that are going to dictate to us - whether we like it or not; whether we agree or disagree. regardless. the reality of physical limits is already kicking in right now. For example if you follow the capital expenditure (Capex) trends of the fossil fuel extraction sectors, as I do and have been doing for years you will notice two trends. Trend one the amount of fossil energy extracted per unit of capital is rapidly decreasing; the oil gas coal sectors are sucking down larger and larger portions of the total global Capex. and recently it looks like the oil sector is slowing expenditures. If you want to disbelieve in the reality of physical limits on our small blue green dot then there is not much I can do to help you. Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: 01-Mar-2014 20:01:11 + Subject: RE: The solar example of a town in Germany From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com? ] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 3:38 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany You need to power all civilization, once the leaders shut down all the dirty power. What can we replace it with. What do we have we have ready to go. The leaders all global Warming, so what can we do? They say its imminent. Who are these leaders you seem so worked up about? Is it the secret illuminati council of thirteen. who are these sinister leaders who believe global warming is imminent? Do you realize how off the wall you sound? -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, Feb 28, 2014 5:11 pm Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany On 1 March 2014 04:59, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: It does. You cannot fake electricity. You cannot fake electric current. If you are depending on solar power for 20% of your electricity supply, and the rest for coal, because coal is reliable on a 7 x 24 basis, you can only rely on solar for a slim fraction of electricity. You haven't solved the problem in a technical manner, all one is doing is employing solar for a fraction of total electricity consumption, to make ones self feel better. This is not engineering, it is ideology- a faith movement to make one feel better, without providing clean power to power one's civilization. How long must we wait for miracle power sources, if the shadow of Climate Change is overwhelming us all? It is politics and not health, and not engineering that is driving this issue, right? I don't see what you're saying here. Indeed, you appear to be contradicting yourself. If solar provides 20% of your power, it provides 20% of your power. There is nothing faith based about that, assuming it's a fact (e.g. about 70% of New Zealand's power is provided by hydro, on average - that's not faith, or a miracle, or a conspiracy, it's just a fact). If solar can provide X% of your power, on average, then that means only 100-X% has to rely on fossil fuels. Hence you can reduce your fossil fuel usage by that amount, and provide that much more of a distance between civilisation and any future effects of pollution, climate change, and resource depletion. Sorry, what don't you understand here? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 12:44 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
On 01 Mar 2014, at 07:16, Chris de Morsella wrote:
Personally the notion that all that exists is comp information – encoded on
what though? – Is not especially troubling for me. I understand how some cling
to a fundamental material realism; after all it does seem so very real. However
when you get right down to it all we have is measured values of things and
meters by which we measure other things; we live encapsulated in the experience
of our own being and the sensorial stream of life and in the end all that we
can say for sure about anything is the value it has when we measure it.
I am getting into the interesting part of Tegmark’s book – I read a bit each
day when I break for lunch – so this is partly influencing this train of
thought. By the way enjoyed his description of quantum computing and how in a
sense q-bits are leveraging the Level III multiverse to compute every possible
outcome while in quantum superposition; a way of thinking about it that I had
never read before.
Naturally I have been reading some of the discussions here, and the idea of
comp is something I also find intuitively possible. The soul is an emergent
phenomena given enough depth of complexity and breadth of parallelism and
vastness of scale of the information system in which it is self-emergent.
Several questions have been re-occurring for me. One of these is: Every
information system, at least that I have ever been aware of, requires a
substrate medium upon which to encode itself;
If you agree that 1+1=2, then you can prove that universal numlbers exists, and
those will defined the relative implementations of computational histories.
We have top start from some theory, in all case. And the TOE that we can
derived from comp are just the minimal part common to basically all scientific
theories.
Then we can explain even why we cannot explain where our beliefs in the number
comes from. The theory of Lakoff presumes implicitly numbers, and much more.
information seems describable in this sense as the meta-encoding existing on
some substrate system. I would like to avoid the infinite regression of
stopping at the point of describing systems as existing upon other and
requiring other substrate systems that themselves require substrates themselves
described as information again requiring some substrate… repeat eternally.
We can start from:
0 ≠ s(x)
s(x) = s(y) - x = y
x+0 = x
x+s(y) = s(x+y)
x*0=0
x*s(y)=(x*y)+x
We don't need more. Just definitions.
What about sets {0,1…n}? Isn’t the conceptual entity of the set necessary in
order to map orders of operation for example grouping operations of lower
precedence to ensure they are performed first for example; or for ordering
enumerable or at least identifiable entities into groups that have some set of
characteristics.
Also are you arguing that the ≠ = comparators suffice? What about “”? A
lot of algorithms (sorting for example) are implemented in terms of the “”
comparator, that would seem very difficult to do without.
It is also true that exquisitely complex information can be encoded in a very
simple substrate system given enough replication of elements… a simple binary
state machine could suffice, given enough bits.
But what are the bits encoded on?
Elementary arithmetic is enough. But the two axioms Kxy=x + Sxyz = xz(yz) too.
I am unfamiliar with this axiom.
At some point reductionism can no longer reduce…. And then we are back to where
we first started…. How did that arise or come to be? If for example we say that
math is reducible to logic or set theory then what of sets and the various set
operations?
Math is not reducible to a theory. machine's math is already not reducible to a
theory. Nor are machine's knowledge.
Computationalism refutes reductionism of most conception we can have on numbers
and machine.
What of enumerations? These simplest of simple things. Can you reduce the {}
null set?
What does it arise from?
In this case you can reduce it to number theory.
Your point seems to be that we must start from something non trivial, and you
are right on this. My point is that if we believe that the brain is a sort of
machine, then arithmetic is not just enough, but more is non sensical or
redundant at the basic level.
Given enough parallelism and depth of recursion; given a vast enough networked
system, it is amazing what emerges. I agree in principal that all that is
really required is some very basic computationally self-catalyzing system and
the rest emerges.
Perhaps to try to find some fundamental something upon which
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Speaking of which, Heinlein would have loved this: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap140302.html I grok that One of the best words ever invented* - IMO -thank you Heinlein. Chris *from Stranger in a Strange Land On 2 March 2014 19:45, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 March 2014 19:35, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Robert Heinlein, with whom he shared a house for a while, made a bar bet with him that he couldn't create a religion after Hubbard had remarked that was the way to get *really* rich. Ah, thank you, I have to rely on 30 year old memories of what I was told by various SF writers, often when we were all rather drunk. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 11:14 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany On 3/1/2014 10:59 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Speaking of which, Heinlein would have loved this: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap140302.html I grok that One of the best words ever invented* - IMO -thank you Heinlein. I think it was suggested by the poems of Piet Hein. Piet Hein (16 December 1905 - 17 April 1996) was a Danish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_people scientist, mathematician, inventor, designer, author, and poet, often writing under the Old Norse pseudonym Kumbel meaning tombstone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_stone . His short poems, known as gruks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grook or grooks (Danish: gruk), first started to appear in the daily newspaper Politiken http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politiken shortly after the Nazi occupation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Denmark in April 1940 under the pseudonym Kumbel Kumbell.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piet_Hein_%28scientist%29#cite_note-1 The poems contained anti-nazi meanings which could only be grasped intuitively by the Danish. Interesting; always thought it originated from that book. So then is grok steganography? Chris Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 9:22 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: If it's all math, then where does math come from? On 3/1/2014 7:54 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 01:03:39PM -0800, meekerdb wrote: On 3/1/2014 12:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 28 Feb 2014, at 23:58, meekerdb wrote: On 2/28/2014 2:32 PM, LizR wrote: If it's all math, then where does math come from? Strange to say, elementary maths just appears to be a fact. That is, it is a fact that 1+1=2. Or it comes from our conceptualizing the world as consisting of distinct objects and counting them, c.f. William S. Cooper The Origin of Reason and Lakoff and Nunez Where Mathematics Comes From. That makes sense, but only by negating computationalism. I don't see that it is inconsistent with saying yes to the doctor - though it may be inconsistent with other parts of your argument like the UDA. Brent I don't see that it negates COMP either. And in response to Chris's original observation, why couldn't minds and phenomena emerge from numbers, and simultaneously, numbers emerge from the mind. Such would an example of Hofstadters strange loop. IIRC, you (Brent) have suggested virtuous (or vicious) cycles at the base of everything at times in the past too? Yes, except I conceive of a virtuous circle of explanation...and reject the idea that there is an base. An interesting view. Recently I have been toying with retro-causality as a potential mechanism for self-manifestation without any need of ultimate origin or any primal causation. Chris Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 11:37 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: If it's all math, then where does math come from? On 2 March 2014 20:28, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: Yes, except I conceive of a virtuous circle of explanation...and reject the idea that there is an base. An interesting view. Recently I have been toying with retro-causality as a potential mechanism for self-manifestation without any need of ultimate origin or any primal causation. IMHO you need some sort of logical explanation. Otherwise retrocausality is like eternal inflation - you can use it to explain where the universe comes from, but you still need to explain the origin of the laws of physics that allow it to happen. (This is why I find Max Tegmark's mathematical universe stuff appealing.) I agree that it does not reach the level of an explanation, but am toying with how it could be a mechanism by which something could seemingly arise from nothing at all. If - as you point out the laws of physics (or math perhaps if physics itself is emergent) need to exist a priori that allow retro-causation to occur. Seriously I am very much agnostic on all of this, and feel like a blind person trying to understand a sunset, but, at the same time and in the same breath, I am fascinated by where these meanderings on the edge of the beginning can go, from time to time. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR On 2 March 2014 21:05, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: I agree that it does not reach the level of an explanation, but am toying with how it could be a mechanism by which something could seemingly arise from nothing at all. If - as you point out the laws of physics (or math perhaps if physics itself is emergent) need to exist a priori that allow retro-causation to occur. Fair enough. The upshot (I think) would be that whatever exists is a 4 (or more) dimensional structure which is in a sense free-floating - whether it's one universe, a self-generating universe or an infinite and eternal universe, it effectively comes from nothing (except whatever causes it to exist in an atemporal manner). Yes.. A higher dimensional manifold, a dynamic topography, intrinsic and auto-catalyzed, primally causal; yet uncaused. In combination with the dynamism of computationalism (and Darwinian evolution): All that ever was, will be or can be emerges from some simplest minimal set of arithmetic axiomic entities operating over and on enumerable and set entities. and in doing so, unleashing the dynamically self-feeding, recursive process of self-emergence - now imagine emergence with the addition of retro-causation feedback auto-catalyzing the process. This is speculative, of course, and enjoyable.. For some at least LOL Chris . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: If it's all math, then where does math come from?
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 12:13 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: If it's all math, then where does math come from? On 01 Mar 2014, at 11:53, Chris de Morsella wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruno Marchal Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 12:23 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: If it's all math, then where does math come from? On 01 Mar 2014, at 06:16, Chris de Morsella wrote: If it's all math, then where does math come from? Strange to say, elementary maths just appears to be a fact. That is, it is a fact that 1+1=2. Somehow I do not find that satisfying; in what way and by what evidence does this occur? Especially - as I had posited if math is the fundamental thing - even more fundamental than the emergent material universe. I could see this logic in a pre-existing universe replete with 10 to a very large number of atoms, but if math is to be the superstructure underlying everything then I - speaking for myself - am not satisfied by saying it just is a fact. But do you agree with 1+1=2? I agree that math is internally consistent 1+1=2 is quasi-infinitely more simple than math is internally consistent. I have few doubt that 1+1=2 makes sense, and is true, but a term like math does not denote a theory for which consistent can make sense. and that within mathematical ontology it is self-consistent. Furthermore it seems to crop up in reality again and again. Patterns, equations, such as say the Fibonacci series manifesting in so many unrelated places; the universe in its reduced symbol set of smeared quarks and leptons; its constants and various cardinal values and states such as spin, color, charge etc. - it does all seem very binary and mathematical. I however remain curious, where 1 came from, and even before 1, Don't confuse the null set and the number 0. I don't believe in set. Finite set theory is equivalent to Peano Arithmetic (even more equivalent than Turing equivalent). But usual set theory have much stronger axiom, like the axiom of infinity. Finite sets are useful tools and help sequence ordering of operation as well as ordering of inputs and outputs. Infinite sets make it more interesting and useful. The set provides the means of attributing things and finding things via attributes; i.e. a member of the class of things that has these attributes. Relating things and remembering the relationships amidst dynamic change is what sets provide. Naturally all manner of more specialized containers can emerge Say ordered set for example. By un-bounding collections it makes them useful universal entities. the null set... the set of nothing at all. The null set is a lot more than nothing. Yes, with the set theoretical principles of reflexion and comprehension, you can get almost all sets from the null set. In some ways all other possible sets naturally emerge from the null set; in a way as all numbers emerge from the bit The bit, if infinitely replicated can express any number; if you can get this infinitely self-auto-replicating bit off and running like inflation then the universe is in business. It takes a great leap to get from nothing to the null set. At this most reductionist of levels; is this where everyone gives up, perhaps because it is unknowable. I can see the logical progression from 1+1=2 to an ever inflating infinite forest of numbers with infinite overlays of dynamism operating over layer and layers of stochastic boundaries. OK. But the point is that we can't prove the existence of null set, or of the umber 0. We can't prove this from logic alone (= failure of Russell and Whitehead logicism). Yes, I agree, I can only imagine how Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorem must have hit Russell and Whitehead like a ton of bricks. Chris Because the rest is sunday philosophy in my opinion. Of course, in my theory 1+1=2 is just a theorem. The interesting things is that Chris believes (or not) in 1+1=2 is also a theorem. Sure... an emergent phenomena; don't really have any existential issues with my being, being emergent In fact I rather like the idea of emerging into being. It fits with the brains massive parallelism and lack of any central operating system (that we have found). I emerge; therefore I am. OK, I have no problem with this too. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Platonist Guitar Cowboy Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 4:51 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement comes to mind. It's seen as a silent, gradual but finalizing invasion of Europe/US sovereignty by large corporate interests, according to Le Monde as example. Harmonization of for example environmental and health standards entail the imposition of the lowest, market friendliest standards for all... Otherwise of course, this whole thing will not make sense according to the most powerful lobbies. Not just large US corporations, but the UK's financial industry is pushing hard for the lowering of standards as well. Labor unions in Europe will have to scale back demands and expectations, because we need lower standards across the board, to harmonize. Apparently, Europe's standards in way too many areas, including agriculture, food production, industrial waste, hydraulic fracturing, or limiting corporate interests' legal power to sue for losses due to balance sheet losses, consumer protection etc. are way too high/strong. If you're some large fossil fuel based corporation, you should be able to sue governments and taxpayers more effectively for their irresponsible market behavior in developing more sustainable technologies, because this costs jobs and slows real growth and profit. Germany will be interesting to watch in this regard, because popular opinion/protest is mobilizing against much of this, but government and the ever present German guilt over the war, puts the country in no position to say (dictate...) much, even if many politicians are convinced by sustainability concerns, via their records. So no say there. Especially not to allied interests of large corporations and US/UK savior alliance, that saved the world AND them from themselves. Germany is said to have sent lightweight obedient to the negotiations, and at this point you can't expect more from a country who's head of state has her phone bugged and manages a Spying among friends is not good statement, as consequence. Media is fed bits and pieces of transparency in EU, as in some US lobbyist going your food safety standards are way too high... why not dip your chickens in Cl before packaging to save on all these stupid costs of keeping farms clean you impose etc. (as if you could eat from the floor of an EU farm...), but members from European Parliament are barred from seeing the actual texts being negotiated, that lobbyists are said to be actively penning, helping us to harmonize properly. And guess what? The European Centre for International Political Economy, that should ideologically be favoring this endeavor, predicts GDP growth of 0-point something percent! This relies on you giving faith to lower customs means increased growth, which is quite blue eyed. If you don't buy this, according to the authors of the study, then indeed, GDP growth will increase only by 0.06 percent... from 2029 onwards though. So a family of four will increase its income per member by around 4.54 Euros a month, in about a ten year span. Not hard to see who has the upper hand here and where things are headed concerning this. Uhm...lower standards for the growth. But we really want/have to test our luck to not even produce that growth, don't we? PGC You are so right about the race to the bottom. The race so good for short term profit; so foolish for long term preservation. With leadership like this, one could ask: who needs enemies. Chris On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 11:45 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Heh, understood Liz, thanks, but I wasn't offended, merely, puzzled. No, a 6000 year old Earth is not what I see either. I would just warn you, or surprise you, that even lots of Phd's get 'bought-off' by being on the 'right side' of politicians who provide employment in academia, and the rich that fund the pols. I also just wanted to focus on when the climate whammy will happen, and we can do about? -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 5:09 pm Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany On 3 March 2014 05:33, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Hmm. Show me how I disinformed? Oh! By disagreeing. Ah! But what are the facts? What is the behavior of pols and billionaires? Where's the panic over inundating waters? No crash programs? I guess its easy to be lied to, if one is bought off by ideology in the first place. The cause and effect part of the brain must go to sleep. Hang on, spudboy, if I read you right you are taking personally a comment I made about the behaviour of certain organisations who want to give a spurious scientific front to their already-decided views. Unless you're a member of the Discovery institute or something, that wasn't directed at you
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 7:39 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany On 3 March 2014 15:33, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: You are so right about the race to the bottom. The race so good for short term profit; so foolish for long term preservation. With leadership like this, one could ask: who needs enemies. Ain't that the truth. Of course Karl Marx had something to say about the war between us and our (so called) leaders way back when. He also said a few things about making enough rope. this global race to the bottom will - IMO -- finally prove him correct on this point. It is unsustainable on so many levels in the long term and yet it seems unstoppable in the short term. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The solar example of a town in Germany
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 8:26 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany On 3/2/2014 8:20 PM, Chris de Morsella wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 7:39 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The solar example of a town in Germany On 3 March 2014 15:33, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: You are so right about the race to the bottom. The race so good for short term profit; so foolish for long term preservation. With leadership like this, one could ask: who needs enemies. Ain't that the truth. Of course Karl Marx had something to say about the war between us and our (so called) leaders way back when. He also said a few things about making enough rope. this global race to the bottom will - IMO -- finally prove him correct on this point. It is unsustainable on so many levels in the long term and yet it seems unstoppable in the short term. Aren't you thinking of Thomas Malthus? The last capitalist we hang shall be the one who sold us the rope. Is the quote I was referring to. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: With power stations you don't need to worry about the same factors (energy density etc) but you do need to worry about other things And one of those other things you need to worry about is dimwitted and hypocritical environmentalists who don't want power stations of ANY sort built, ANYWHERE regardless of if they are renewable or non-renewable: I am curious how my comment above that energy density is of lesser importance in fixed site utility scale batteries than it is in batteries for automotive/transport and portable electronics applications triggered your tirade against environmentalists. How did we go from the importance of energy density as a factor in weighing the merits of various battery systems designed for the utility market; to shouting from the pulpit? Land development issues are always going to be litigious in this country. That litigation is occurring should not surprise anyone; that is how the process works here. *At the urging of environmentalist groups Sen. Feinstein of California has tried to put 500,000 acres of solar drenched land in the Mojave desert off limits to any solar development. *Environmentalists tried everything they could think of to block a 2.1 billion dollar solar plant in Ivanpah California. * The same people are trying to block a 680 million dollar solar plant in Owens Valley. * They were successful in killing a solar power station in Fresno County California that would have supplied enough greenhouse free energy to power 75,000 homes. * Environmentalists are trying their best to stop Obama from extending permits to build wind farms from 5 years to 30 because they kill little birdies. *And to quote directly from their website: The Sierra Club opposes geothermal leasing or development in the following areas: 1. Lands included in or adjacent to federal, state, or local park systems or in wildlife refuges and management areas; 2. Areas known to provide habitat for rare or endangered species; 3. Areas designated as valuable for archaeological remains; 4. Units of the National Wilderness preservation System; 5. Units of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System; 6. Units of the National Trails System; 7. Areas reserved by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture for ecological, scenic, natural, wildlife, geological, educational, historical, or scientific value, including Primitive Areas, Roadless Areas, Natural Areas, and Pioneer Areas; 8. Areas of de facto wilderness under study by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture for reservation as part of one of the preservation systems listed above; and 9. Areas of de facto wilderness which are the subject of intensive study by recognized citizen groups or coalitions, resulting in formal proposals to the agencies and/or Congress for reservation as part of one of the preservation systems listed above. As I said the prefers solution to the energy crises according to some is to freeze to death in the dark. That is your own personal opinion, and as always you are a highly opinionated man - and the extremes - and liberal use of pejorative adjectives -- in which you phrase your statements suggests that when it comes to the environment your opinions are filled with ideologically driven emotional content and are not the product of a reasoned level headed thought process. Really man, what does this tirade have to do with energy storage systems for the grid? It's so out of left field; it is a non-sequitur into cable news shout shows. Chris John K Clark - load balancing, etc - which is why non-renewable sources are unlikely to go away completely for power stations (unless we get something like a world-wide power grid, which I don't suppose is very feasible). But they could still do a lot better than they are now. A mix of renewables and gas turbines (which themselves could increasingly be fueled by algae bio-gas sources). Gas turbines achieve 50% efficiency, are relatively clean and are able to be spun up or spun down quite rapidly making them the best choice for spinning reserve - along with hydro, which can also take on the role of spinning reserve. LFTR could provide a portion of baseload power that coupled with a much larger energy storage capacity (that acts to decouple supply from demand and smooth it all out) and the available spinning reserve could ensure grid stability 24X7X365 Some - varying from place to place - mix of renewable sources + baseload sources + spinning reserve + energy storage capacity will gradually supplant the current power generation mix dominated by large dirty unsustainable coal fired thermo-electric and an aging fleet of increasingly scary reactors (such as the one in Florida where
RE: [foar] Amoeba's Secret, by Bruno Marchal available from Kindle store
Thanks. I will look for the paperback version towards the end of this month. Chris From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 12:16 AM To: f...@googlegroups.com; everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [foar] Amoeba's Secret, by Bruno Marchal available from Kindle store Please let me know when the hard copy is available, as I would like a physical version (ironic, I suspect, given the subject). On 4 March 2014 19:43, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: Hi everyone, Just want to let everyone know that the English translation of Buno Marchal's The Amoeba's Secret is now available from Amazon's Kindle store. See http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00IRLEKPA The Amoeba's Secret was written when Bruno received the prestigious Prix Le Monde de la Recherche Universitaire for his PhD thesis, only for the prize to be mysteriously revoked, and the book not published. The original French version exists only as a manuscript available from Bruno's website. The Amoeba's Secret remains one of clearest explanations of Bruno's UDA and AUDA arguments, and provides a lot of historical background motivating him to formulate and study these issues in this way. Now, after about 4 years of effort, Kim Jones and I have finally finished the translation of this book into English. For those of you who prefer their books hard, the paperback version will probably be available towards the end of March. I need to see a physical copy of what Amazon produces before approving it for general sale. I have jigged things so that hard copy purchases are entitled to a free Kindle version fo the book, so you can have the best of both worlds. Cheers -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Fabric of Alternate Reality group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foar+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com mailto:foar%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . To post to this group, send email to f...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foar. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 4:40 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On 5 March 2014 09:56, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: according to a study today out in New Scientist, a researcher has estimated that OTEC power,even with 3% efficiency, can produce 4000 times our current consumption. It may even be affordable. We may have a good way out. What's OTEC? Oops silly me, Il'l look it up.OK. It's solar, via the oceans. Nice. I've looked at OTEC in the past, as you said it is essentially harvesting stored solar energy stored in the warm surface layer above the thermocline. There are however some formidable engineering issues dealing with salt corrosion, oceanic storms and such. They tried to build one - a ship based unit -- decades ago; I believe corrosion and other such problems were too costly. One place they are using OTEC is Hawaii - maybe the only place that I know of. There is an installation (or at least was operating a few years back) where they were pumping up the deep cold water onto an on land installation. They were able to use this quite cold water for air-conditioning concurrent production of some fresh water - the cooled air loses a lot of its water vapor as dew. I am not sure that this unit was producing electric energy as much as off-loading the air-conditioners load that would have otherwise been sucking electricity down from the grid. do perhaps indirectly in the form of negawatts (e.g. negative watts) The biggest energy source we have available in fact is energy efficiency. In the US buildings consume the lion's share of total energy consumed, far more than the transportation sector for example. By just doing wide spread insulation retrofits, putting in double and triple pane glass, and by using energy efficient lighting - I have seen estimates that almost half the energy currently used could instead be saved (reserves would then last longer giving us more time to figure out an answer). This is by far the most significant thing we can do; this is the low hanging fruit. It is not sexy and is low tech for the most part, but it is by far the most effective action our society can take at this juncture, given the very poor energy efficiency base line of our nations built structures. Chris The trouble is, New Scientist solves the world's problems regularly, as well as discovering the secret of life the universe and everything and a cure for cancer every other week. I bet most of their gosh wow stories never get off the drawing board. I hope this one does. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 7:39 AM Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: The biggest energy source we have available in fact is energy efficiency. I am certainly in favor of energy efficiency, only a fool would not be, but it is not the solution to our energy problem because when a commodity like energy becomes cheaper people simply use more of it. If somebody invented a gadget that doubled the fuel efficiency of jetliners it would not cut in half the amount of fuel that airlines use because people would fly more often and airplanes would hold fewer people due to their larger more comfortable seats. That is a failure of the markets. If energy efficiency marginally lowers the rate of consumption of fossil (and other) energy resources thus increasing the available current supply -- because we almost exclusively rely on these short term market price signals to determine consumption/production -- demand will tend to rise. This is well known paradoxically in effect punishing virtue and rewarding a self centered I-don't-give-a-damn mentality of consuming every resource as fast as possible. Over the long term this will lead to our species discovering what the meaning of going over a cliff really is in the hardest of hard terms -- up to and including species extinction. Energy and all other non-renewable and critical resources should be taxed and taxed heavily -- IMO. This is the other side of encouraging conserving these critical and non-renewable resources. Take phosphate for example -- the world is running out of the economically recoverable sources -- mined principally from just three sources: in Morocco (land seized by Morocco actually) , Florida, and if I recall somewhere in Russia. There is no incentive to conserve this vital resource and global supplies seem to have already peaked. Phosphorous is a critical ingredient of fertilizers. Relying on market signals alone to determine how -- and at what pace -- finite resources are consumed is a recipe for disaster. The market will encourage us to burn through these resources as fast as we can, which is precisely what our species is doing. Not the wisest course of action though, and a clear example of how the market mechanism is sending our civilization over the cliff. By the way, have you noticed that politicians are always urging us to conserve energy but they don't seem to find it necessary to command us to conserve angular momentum? Is there any real point here; or is this a political rant freebie? Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 2:05 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: There are over 7 billion people on the planet, never before in the history of the Earth has a large animal (over 50 pounds) of the same species been that numerous or even come close to it. To keep all of those people alive other animals are going to suffer, to keep them not only alive but happy and prosperous its inevitable that other species will suffer even more. But there's no rule that there have to be 7 billion people (and going to 9). It's not a rule it's a fact that there are already 7 billion people on this small globe and the number of individuals who have volunteered to make that number one less for the good of the environment is rather small. And just like most people I have nothing personally against the Prairie Mole Cricket, but if it comes down to a decision between him and me and only one of us can stay then I choose me. Yes, but it is also a fact that demographers have been surprised because they expected hundreds of more millions of humans to be here now on earth, but that are not here - as expected from their extrapolations of the population explosion - due to the phenomenal decline in the total fertility rate in much of the world, albeit, with some tragic exceptions. China for one - with typical Stalinist draconian measures the one child policy (but did they have a choice?). In fact if you look at the demographic pyramid of China you quickly realize that it is not a pyramid - it is a column with a narrowing base of young and an aging bulge that is getting on in the years. Many important countries have now established some very low TFR Brazil for example, much lower than the US TFR and has been lower for a decade or so. On the downer side you have a country like Nigeria with clearly unsustainable population growth. When I hear people speak of 700 million Nigerians I laugh then I cry because I know there is no way on this earth that Nigeria can sustain those numbers. So something has to give and that something will be collapsing population levels through war, pestilence, extreme brutal impoverishment, starvation and ethnic cleansing pogroms. It is the worst kind of future imaginable and is the only kind of future realizable with TFR of Nigerian levels. There are some surprising success stories on the TFR front. Iran for example, not a country you would think of as being a leader in lowering their fertility rate. In fact this is what happened when the Theocracy kicked the US stooge dynasty - installed in a US run coup in 1953-54 period (and Americans wonder why Iranians don't like us) - but I digress - and admit I was surprised never expected a Muslim Theocracy to be so enlightened (just look at our religious rights attitude toward birth control and family planning) In any case the Iranian Shia regime actively promoted a lowering of the birth rate from somewhere in the stratosphere like 7 where it had been under the Shah (who entertained megalomaniac ideas for Aryan Iran) all the way down to 1.8 or thereabouts where it is now. This got me into investigating the issue of woman's rights under the Shia clergy dominated regime that rules there and has ruled there for so long. I was surprised. And in learning I realized that Iran did in fact fit the pattern, for countries that experience low TFRs. The critical factor IMO - more than wealth, technology, etc. is the level of social and economic equality enjoyed by woman in some particular society. Where woman have few or no rights fertility levels are high; where woman have more equal social, legal and economic standing, where they are educated and can vote and drive a car (which woman cannot do in Saudi Arabia to cite one kingdom of intolerance). What I found is that in Iran is that in spite of all the outward impressions one might have the actual situation for woman in Iran is a lot better than it is in most Muslim countries. For example in Iran there are more woman with university degrees than there are men, for example. The long and short of this is that the world can rapidly lower its TFR to below the replacement level of 2.1, much of the industrialized world already has and important developing nations principally of course China, but also sizeable countries such as Brazil have very low TFRs - lower than US TFR. This will not solve the medium problem, because of demographic momentum - and some places seem hopeless to me and I shudder to imagine the fate of the people in those places. As a species we have clearly mismanaged our world; we have been I a race to burn shit up as fast as possible and unfortunately it is a race our species seems to have won. We have already burned through the easy half of all the oil that there will ever be, and by far most of that has happened in the last fifty years. Let that sink in - the liquid fossil fuel
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:17 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating This is certainly one subject on which I totally agree with you, Chris. And if we do hit the wall, we'll be back in the Middle Ages - for good this time, or at least until some extinction level event finishes us off - something that would have been trivial to avoid if we'd grown up and become a star faring species. Don't get me started lol.. We could have gotten off this planet and learned to begin to live off the land up there - the resource base of the moon and the NEOs, being the first off world - low delta velocity -- treasure troves of every resource we would need in order to build a truly scalable micro-gravity industrial base.. in a halo orbit around the earth-luna L1 or L2 la grange points. But instead we opted to burn it all up in the zero sum game of the Cold War and turned our backs on space. Now I doubt we have the available extra resources we would need in order to get off planet and build an space based industrial base. At the crucial moment our species displayed a definite lack of vision and a misplaced priorities. We are dumb apes after all. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 10:48 AM Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 3:43 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: they seem to mostly have a religious belief in free market capitalism, despite there never having been such a thing Actually there has been, the black-market. Really I am laughing out loud -- for real. John I would love to see you try to get into the hard drug distribution black market -- and find out (hopefully not getting killed in the process) just how un-free the global black market is. It is a global oligopoly dominated by a few trans-national drug gangs and if you think that this is an exemplar of free market -- I have to really question what your idea of freedom is. Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 11:55 AM Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.comwrote: I am certainly in favor of energy efficiency, only a fool would not be, but it is not the solution to our energy problem because when a commodity like energy becomes cheaper people simply use more of it. If somebody invented a gadget that doubled the fuel efficiency of jetliners it would not cut in half the amount of fuel that airlines use because people would fly more often and airplanes would hold fewer people due to their larger more comfortable seats. That is a failure of the markets. The free market is only good at supplying people with the things they want, it has no opinion about what people should want. If there is a failure at all it is a failure in human nature; the first concern of the people of 1914 was not our well being and they would not have impoverished themselves to help us; likewise I say let the people of 2114 fight their own battles. Yeah I have heard that dogma -- again and again -- as if repeating it makes it become true. There is no such thing as a free market to begin with -- that is a silly Libertarian illusion - -a required notion -- for this ideology. But like all faith based ideologies -- it has no corresponding exemplar in the real world -- and the example you gave of the black market is truly laughable -- go try to compete with a drug gang and you will rapidly discover just how un-free the black market is. I fully expected you to champion the selfish self centered me now position -- it is consistent with your beliefs after all. But it remains what it is -- a short sighted cop out and abdication of your responsibility as a sentient being. Energy and all other non-renewable and critical resources should be taxed and taxed heavily So you think it likely that people will not voluntarily use less energy but will vote for politicians who force then to do so. I don't. Most people WILL voluntarily use less energy -- it is the minority of A-holes who think only of themselves that necessitates measures to prevent these self centered A-holes from becoming all out resource pigs. Take phosphate for example -- the world is running out Yeah yeah yeah, people are always screaming that the world is running out of X, but they forget that as technology improves new and better ways to produce X are found and so are substitutes for X. In 1980 pessimistic economist Paul Ehrlich (author of The Population Bomb ) made a bet with optimistic economist Julian Simon. Ehrlich thought we were about to run out of chromium, copper, nickel, tin, and tungsten so the price would skyrocket. On paper on September 29 1980 they bought $200 worth of each metal. If the inflation-adjusted prices of the 5 metals rose in the next 10 years Simon would pay Ehrlich the combined difference. If the prices fell, Ehrlich would pay Simon. Ehrlich lost the bet, after 10 years every one of the 5 metals was cheaper after 10 years and on September 29 1990 Ehrlich gave Simon a check for $576.07. Yadda Yadda Yadda -- So what -- bad predictions were made in the past by some people. Fact remains that global liquid fuel production has peaked -- sometime in the last decade. The fact remains that recoverable reserves of coal, natural gas, uranium and all other fossil supplies are not increasing; in spite of the happy PR spin put out by the Gas sector lobbyist groups. You should also read a book by William Stanley Jevons called The Coal Question, here are some quotations from it: You should read a book called Limits to growth published in the 1970s. We are on course to hit those limits -- in spite of all the Libertarian hot air - -the only resource that seems to be in infinite supply. Are we wise in allowing the commerce of this country to rise beyond the point at which we can long maintain it? I must point out the painful fact that such a rate of growth will before long render our consumption of coal comparable with the total supply. In the increasing depth and difficulty of coal mining we shall meet that vague, but inevitable boundary that will stop our progress. Our progress is to be checked within half a century, yet by that time our consumption will probably be three or four times what it is now The interesting thing is that this book was written in 1865. By the way, have you noticed that politicians are always urging us to conserve energy but they don't seem to find it necessary to command us to conserve angular momentum? Is there any real point here; or is this a political rant freebie? It's a serious physics question and it has an answer. Both are equally valid laws of nature so why do you think politicians beg us to conserve energy
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com Chris, not to be disagreeable, but the tech either works or it does not, is either clean or its not, is abundant or it isn't, is affordable or it ain't. We need it all to work in a newtonian sense, or its useless. Fuel efficiency has been promoted by greens, as an ideological thing. It has its thermodynamic limit. It is like the hypercar of 25 years ago, promoted by Amory Lovin. Everything that wasn't kevlar, was aluminium. Everything that was not magnesium, was fibreglass, but was light. So light, that a passing 18 wheeler, driving in the next lane, would blow it off the road. Unsafe at any speed. Good on fuel though. No talking can replace physics. You seem confused - In reality macroscopic systems are not an either or proposition. A system does not either work; or not work This is not how reality operates. Things work poorly or better perhaps. One system may be more efficient than another or be able to achieve a better outcome than another -- it will be marginally preferable. If you do not understand how marginal performance is the key to understanding complex systems then there is nothing I can do to help you out here. It is not black/white world... more like many shades of grey. Fuel efficiency has been promoted by a lot of people and organizations; and you neatly obfuscate by side stepping the point -- not talking about automobile fuel efficiency, but the efficiency with which we heat, cool and light our buildings (both residential, industrial and commercial) -- This is a case of apples and oranges. Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 4:43 pm Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 7:39 AM Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: The biggest energy source we have available in fact is energy efficiency. I am certainly in favor of energy efficiency, only a fool would not be, but it is not the solution to our energy problem because when a commodity like energy becomes cheaper people simply use more of it. If somebody invented a gadget that doubled the fuel efficiency of jetliners it would not cut in half the amount of fuel that airlines use because people would fly more often and airplanes would hold fewer people due to their larger more comfortable seats. That is a failure of the markets. If energy efficiency marginally lowers the rate of consumption of fossil (and other) energy resources thus increasing the available current supply -- because we almost exclusively rely on these short term market price signals to determine consumption/production -- demand will tend to rise. This is well known paradoxically in effect punishing virtue and rewarding a self centered I-don't-give-a-damn mentality of consuming every resource as fast as possible. Over the long term this will lead to our species discovering what the meaning of going over a cliff really is in the hardest of hard terms -- up to and including species extinction. Energy and all other non-renewable and critical resources should be taxed and taxed heavily -- IMO. This is the other side of encouraging conserving these critical and non-renewable resources. Take phosphate for example -- the world is running out of the economically recoverable sources -- mined principally from just three sources: in Morocco (land seized by Morocco actually) , Florida, and if I recall somewhere in Russia. There is no incentive to conserve this vital resource and global supplies seem to have already peaked. Phosphorous is a critical ingredient of fertilizers. Relying on market signals alone to determine how -- and at what pace -- finite resources are consumed is a recipe for disaster. The market will encourage us to burn through these resources as fast as we can, which is precisely what our species is doing. Not the wisest course of action though, and a clear example of how the market mechanism is sending our civilization over the cliff. By the way, have you noticed that politicians are always urging us to conserve energy but they don't seem to find it necessary to command us to conserve angular momentum? Is there any real point here; or is this a political rant freebie? Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group.To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.to post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 3:43 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: they seem to mostly have a religious belief in free market capitalism, despite there never having been such a thing Actually there has been, the black-market. Really I am laughing out loud -- for real. John I would love to see you try to get into the hard drug distribution black market -- and find out (hopefully not getting killed in the process) just how un-free the global black market is. It is a global oligopoly dominated by a few trans-national drug gangs and if you think that this is an exemplar of free market -- I have to really question what your idea of freedom is. But that's the point - this is exactly where unfettered free markets lead, it's called monopoly capitalism and it's the natural end result if FMC (play Monopoly and you'll get the general idea). Which is precisely why markets need to be regulated by society; and I do agree markets left to themselves degenerate into monopolies. Markets are NOT self-regulating as these Ayn Rand Libertarian infested folks very loudly like to believe. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com Chris, at some point we must ask basic questions, such as, do the toilets flush, and do the lights come on? We are not, I believe, speaking here about Bruno's UDA, versus Tegmark's MUH, but how well our civilizations flourish or fail? If we have the clean tech to replace the dirty tech, and can afford it, and it can produce the megawatts, then there is no argument here. My only question to the Greens is: Does it do all of the above, and can you provide evidence? To the earth and the real world we inhabit, it actually matters not at all, how much we debate whether or not the toilets will flush or the lights will come on. The physical limits of our planet have been reached, or will soon be reached. Some things to consider: the extinction rate is already 10,000 times the average background rate; ocean food webs are collapsing all over the world in a drastic manner; the rates of desertification, deforestation, loss of top soil, loss of soil fertility, loss of aquifers are all proceeding at rates that should alarm anyone who actually looks at these trends. Vital resources -- such as oil for example -- have already peaked (the world will never produce as much oil as it did in the 2005-2010 period... those days are over and super giant mega fields are all in decline (including the biggest of them all: Ghawar, according to Simmons (with whom I corresponded over the years with until he died a few years ago) -- the Saudis jealously guard their production/reserve stats on the level of a state secret, but it is telling that in spite of the various price spikes that have happened and will continue to occur they have been unable to up their output in order to promote their stated goal of price stability. -- instead we must live under the distorting effect of wild price swings, because there is no swing supplier anymore i.e. oil has peaked ) All fossil energy supplies are at or are nearing peak production and because of tertiary and other advanced techniques employed to squeeze as much out as possible as fast as possible, once fields go into decline their rates of decline are very rapid. Take for example the Cantarell super giant field off the coast of the Yucatan and one of the worlds biggest fields ever discovered. Production peaked at 2.1 million barrels per day in 2003; falling to 408,000 barrels per day by 2012, which is less than 20% of what it had been producing at peak in under ten years after decline set in. There are no more super giant fields remaining to be discovered (except perhaps in the Arctic Ocean basin or in Antarctica and in extreme deep water deposits (such as the one discovered in Brazil) but in such cases there exist extreme challenges in getting the oil out -- just ask Shell Oil (Deep Water Horizon disaster). Brazil in fact has not been able to develop its super giant at nearly the level it had hoped to as another example. In all cases the EROI (or energy returned on energy invested) of extracting this hard to get oil -- or for mining tar sands, or fracking shale deposits as well is rapidly falling leaving ever smaller margins of surplus energy -- for all other needs. The EROI of oil extraction has fallen into the single digits from 100:1 in the early days of the Texas and Saudi mega fields; if it falls much further it will not be able to generate enough surplus energy to maintain technological industrial civilization. Does it matter what you desire? Or what John Clark thinks? Not really, not to the earth and to the hard facts of Limits to Growth. Do yeast in a barrel wonder when they have reached peak sugar whether they should perhaps slow down -- only to be shouted down by the various John Clark yeast analogues that there is plenty of sugar and to keep on consuming sugar as fast as they can. Does believing there is plenty of sugar change the outcome for those yeast in that barrel when the supply of sugar begins to run out? We are like yeast and the earth is our barrel. You can argue with me till you run out of breath, but the facts remain the facts. Oil has peaked and many other energy and other resources are close on its heels. The cornucopean world view is a form of self delusion. If we want to have a hope in hell of avoiding the worst collapse our species has ever experienced since the time of the Toba super volcano that erupted some 70,000 years ago and is thought to be linked to the genetic bottleneck event written into our mtDNA, then we had better get our collective shit together pronto. We won't, of course because loud voices will keep shouting that there is nothing to worry about and that all of this is just the ranting of greens -- yeah drill baby drill and what has that got us? P.S. If you want to argue the stats of the shale gas and oil (kerogen) plays I have the facts that prove that this is all a huge bubble that cannot be
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of meekerdb Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 9:39 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On 3/6/2014 10:40 AM, John Clark wrote: On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:22 PM, ghib...@gmail.com wrote: you said somewhere you weren't bothered about the 0.8C rise to date That's right, the Human race has never been more numerous, longer lived, better educated or richer than it is today so global warming seems to have caused little harm and may even have been helpful. That shouldn't be a big surprise, after all we don't know what the perfect temperature to maximize human happiness is, but I doubt it's exactly .8C less than it is right now. I didn't catch whether you are concerned about the projections by 2100? No I am not at all concerned by the 2100 projections, I say this for 5 reasons: 1) I have little confidence in long term climate models. Anybody reading them would think CO2 is the most important greenhouse gas, but it isn't, water vapor is. CO2 is more important because it accumulates in the atmosphere. Water vapor has more effect as an amplifying feedback because it stays roughly in equilibrium with ocean surface temperature. And they can't answer one important question, if the world's temperature increases will that create more clouds or fewer clouds? It's a very simple question with profound consequences because clouds regulate the amount of solar energy that runs the entire climate show. Increased temperature means more water evaporates from the sea, but it also means the atmosphere can hold more water before it is forced to form clouds. So who wins this tug of war? Nobody knows, its too complicated. Water vapor is a far more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2 and unlike CO2 it undergoes phase changes at earthly temperatures, it can be a solid a liquid or a gas which makes it astronomically more complicated than CO2 which is always just a gas, at least on this planet. Perhaps you are unaware that recent work has made headway in answering precisely that cloud cover question. I cite the abstract of the study published in Nature. It comes to conclusions you probably do not want to hear, so I am confident you will find some way of doing so. Spread in model climate sensitivity traced to atmospheric convective mixing http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v505/n7481/full/nature12829.html Steven C. Sherwood, Sandrine Bony Jean-Louis Dufresne Equilibrium climate sensitivity refers to the ultimate change in global mean temperature in response to a change in external forcing. Despite decades of research attempting to narrow uncertainties, equilibrium climate sensitivity estimates from climate models still span roughly 1.5 to 5 degrees Celsius for a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, precluding accurate projections of future climate. The spread arises largely from differences in the feedback from low clouds, for reasons not yet understood. Here we show that differences in the simulated strength of convective mixing between the lower and middle tropical troposphere explain about half of the variance in climate sensitivity estimated by 43 climate models. The apparent mechanism is that such mixing dehydrates the low-cloud layer at a rate that increases as the climate warms, and this rate of increase depends on the initial mixing strength, linking the mixing to cloud feedback. The mixing inferred from observations appears to be sufficiently strong to imply a climate sensitivity of more than 3 degrees for a doubling of carbon dioxide. This is significantly higher than the currently accepted lower bound of 1.5 degrees, thereby constraining model projections towards relatively severe future warming. Chris It's complicated, but not beyond study and empirical studies indicate clouds tend to increase warming: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/330/6010/1523 A Determination of the Cloud Feedback from Climate Variations over the Past Decade A. E. Dessler Estimates of Earth's climate sensitivity are uncertain, largely because of uncertainty in the long-term cloud feedback. I estimated the magnitude of the cloud feedback in response to short-term climate variations by analyzing the top-of-atmosphere radiation budget from March 2000 to February 2010. Over this period, the short-term cloud feedback had a magnitude of 0.54 ± 0.74 (2σ) watts per square meter per kelvin, meaning that it is likely positive. A small negative feedback is possible, but one large enough to cancel the climate's positive feedbacks is not supported by these observations. Both long- and short-wave components of short-term cloud feedback are also likely positive. Calculations of short-term cloud feedback in climate models yield a similar feedback. I find no correlation in the models between the short- and
RE: Vehiculus automobilius
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Craig Weinberg Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 8:46 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Vehiculus automobilius If the doctor became more ambitious, and decided to replace a species with a simulation, we have a ready example of what it might be like. Cars have replaced the functionality of horses in human society. They reproduce in a different, more centralized way, but otherwise they move around like horses, carry people and their possessions like horses, they even evolve into new styles over time. Bees fly around like bats, but no one confuses bees for bats. The first popular name for the automobile in fact was the horseless carriage, which is the negation of the horse… a carriage sans horse. The carriage evolved into the car, but the radical change was from the grass fed hooved external motive force – i.e. the horse(s) – to the ICE engine… electric motors came early as well… then later diesel and gas turbines. So what if both fill a locomotive niche? One is not the other; that is a rather forced analogy – IMO. Notice, however, that despite our occasional use of a name like Pinto or Mustang, no horse-like properties have emerged from cars. They do not whinny or swat flies. They do not get spooked and send their drivers careening off of the road. They did not develop DNA. Certainly a car does not perform as many complex computations as a horse, but neither does it need to. The function of a horse really doesn't need to be very complicated. A Google self-driving car is a better horse for almost all practical purposes than a horse. Just for fun let me argue that they do.. in the abstract. A horse requires fuel just as a car does; its fuel is hay grass (maybe oats and a few apples), but fuel never the less… the horse has an onboard chemical plant to extract the useable energy content – including elaborate symbiotic relationships with the microorganisms in its various stomachs and gut; it has an intricate fuel distribution network delivering highly available oxygen for catalyzed reaction with fuel to produce the energy to power the muscles to move the hooves that move the horse that moves the carriage. A car externalizes the refining process – but who knows maybe one day we will develop hay munching cars (probably not too fast though) – but it also clearly requires fuel. Both the horse and the car produce waste products as a result of performing the useful work they are being used for. Both a horse and a car increase entropy. There are legions of potential parallels that can be teased out between horse and car. But to what end; in my current case a bit of idle fun perhaps. As for your assertion of better.. that depends on a lot of factors. Perhaps the Google self driving car might be better in a urban commute situation – along urban freeway systems and arterial roadways. But what about for a travers of the Andes mountain chain from south to the Panama canal, which means of locomotion do you think has the better chance of ever even making it from the cold of Tierra del Fuego (odd name for such a cold dismal damp place) zig zagging along mighty Andean ranges, through deep roadless canyons, jungle, desert, swamp and mountains. I don’t know about you, but in that case I am going for the horse. As always, whenever one says the word “better”… well better depends doesn’t it. Chris Maybe the doctor can replace all species with a functional equivalent? We could even do without all of the moving around and just keep the cars in the factory in which they are built and include a simulation screen on each windshield that interacts with Google Maps. With a powerful enough artificial intelligence, why not replace function altogether? Have you ever entertained the thought that maybe you are not actually moving around, but rather what is really going on is that you are – to coin a word – informationing around. What if space and time, and hence moving, past, future are all emergent phenomena of our sensed reality. Consider how if the VR machine is deep enough – with layer upon layer of code operating on other code, which is built on code built on code – in an infinite regression of emergent complexity, of emergent nuance, of emergent whatever qualia you choose… all of it, reality and self in reality as well – emergent from an information manifold.. the multiverse Schrödinger equation. What seems impossible to synthesize, often can become synthesizable given more subtle tools. I understand your feelings on the matter of the soul being something that cannot arise from mere programs operating with numbers… there is no f(x) that produces the soul. But when the f(x) regresses and we begin to have deep enclosures as in: p(o(n(m(l(k(j(h(g(f(x)) when any one of the computational nodes can become self-referent (given some termination
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, March 7, 2014 1:20 PM Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: Really I am laughing out loud -- for real. John I would love to see you try to get into the hard drug distribution black market Just curious, is there any particular reason you think I haven't already done so? Well, you are alive and -- I assume are not writing your posts from a federal prison somewhere. hopefully not getting killed in the process Thank you for your concern. You seem innocent of how the drug cartels operate and just how violent they are. It [the Black Market] is a global oligopoly I know. dominated by a few trans-national drug gangs I know. if you think that this is an exemplar of free market I do. Then who would ever want to live under a free market system if as you admit the transnational drug gangs are an exemplar of a well evolved free market? I have to really question what your idea of freedom is. The ability to buy anything if the seller and buyer can agree on a price. A strange notion of the meaning of freedom. Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com extinction rate is already 10,000 times the average background rate; Chris, this is an artificial rate, as useless, except to Greens, as events cause extinctions, not averages. Spudboy - or whatever your real name is; perhaps you don't realize it but everything is caused by events - so that is a meaningless statement. Every year, since the dawn of life on earth species have been going extinct and species have been coming into existence. Perhaps you are not aware of just how many species of life exist on this planet. There is nothing artificial, nor unusual about graphing the rate of extinction over time. all manner of phenomena are graphed over a time axis. That you find this strange and even more seem to be implying that it is some kind of trick by evil greens really makes me question your most basic understanding of math and statistics. It's akin to saying of we added all the average dick lengths on Earth, it'd reach 2/3rds to the Moon. An interesting topic, but unhelpful. Wrong! The rate of extinction - which is the number of species going extinct in a given unit of time can be graphed so that we can compare past rates with the current rate - which is 10,000 times what the rate has been on average (as far as we can tell from studying the geologic, fossil and DNA records) That you see no value in having a yardstick seems more likely due to the ideological blinders you have covered your eyes with than with anything else. It is either that or you are surprisingly ignorant of some very basic math. I recommend you learn more about statistics and how it works before making silly declarations like you just did. Estimates of resources magically increase when money is involved. The shale gas that was paltry in the US 10 years ago is now something the Greens scream about, and Obama fears, (that's ideology for you). Again you do not know what you are talking about. you are sadly misinformed. I could argue it with you, but I do not even think you could understand the evidence given your poor display of understanding of basic statistics.. So why bother. Suffice to say that the Shale gas and oil plays, besides doing great and irreparable harm to our earth are in fact just bubbles that will soon burst (and in fact already show signs of doing just that) - it is all spin, PR and BS, pulling in all that sucker money - the essence of any bubble. The insiders are making huge killings no doubt, and they are probably already pulling their money now if they have not already. The drillers made a killing for a few years, some people made good salaries, again for a while. But if anyone - who understands numbers and statistics (which I fear may exclude you) - carefully examines certain key metrics such as rates od decline; how many years of peak well production before the decline sets in; capital cost per unit of product; energy return on energy invested (EROI) - for all the formations, but especially for the most mature formation - the Eagle-Ford in Texas. What one will discover - if one looks and I do challenge you to look - is that the boom is unsustainable and that after investing huge numbers of billions of dollars in what are capital sinkholes that the long term payback for that capital will never occur, because the assumptions for fracked gas and shale oil were exceedingly optimistic - based on historic production data from traditional gas oil fields. Fracked fields begin going into depletion very rapidly - and wells need to be re-fracked as well (which changes the economics considerably) And when decline sets in the rate of decline is much higher than it is for traditional fields. Again I challenge anyone to look for themselves. Recently there is growing evidence that there is a building pullback in the capital expenditure - at the upstream end of the project pipelines - so it takes years to play out. The return on capital expenditures or in finance jargon CAPEX - in terms of the market value of the produced product versus how much capital expenditures were needed in order to develop, refine and deliver the product are really very bad, and in general has been rapidly falling for all energy CAPEX as a rule. again you can look these things up. So say whatever BS you have been fed to say - hey it's a free country right? LOL - but the real world hard numbers tell a very different story from the politically useful fantasy you have been sold. Its just that the Atlantic plays that Petrobas was counting on, were nuked by US shale gas and oil development. You really have no idea do you. Those projects are at the extreme edge of what is technically possible - the deep water field off of Brazil is under 2 km of water then another 5 km of salt rock if I recall. And at great expense they have drilled some wells and the results have been shall we say disappointing - they are getting
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Friday, March 07, 2014 10:36 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: _ Energy and all other non-renewable and critical resources should be taxed and taxed heavily So you think it likely that people will not voluntarily use less energy but will vote for politicians who force then to do so. I don't. Most people WILL voluntarily use less energy If most people can use less energy, and most people want to use less energy, then why don't most people use less energy; why isn't energy consumption going down? Perhaps the fact that in just one year 2012, more than $500 Billion was spent globally on advertising of one form or another, and this is not an outlier year. When a half a trillion dollars is spent to encourage people to consume goods and services.. to feel impulse needs, to experience desire, sexual desire you don't think that that has an effect? On what planet is that? The incessant propaganda of materialism has been drenching our mind space - as evidenced by how much more we spend globally (and in this country as well) on pushing product than we do on all sectors of education combined. Of course it has an effect, especially considering that this mass media messaging has been going on for more than a hundred years, if we start the mass media era with Marconi and radio. And without cheap energy how are we going to fix nitrogen from the air to fertilize the plants that 7 billion people eat. Permaculture has demonstrated high yield sustainable practice. We won't have cheap nitrogen; agriculture is going to have to get off of its petro-chemical addiction; a terrible addiction that has led to wide spread mono-cropping (a biologically insane practice) that is made possible by slathering phenomenal quantities of various petro-chemical products - from the pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, to the fertilizers. When money and the profit motive took over our land through the - self afforded right to print money that a private cartel of anglo-american, but also franco-german banking cartels have given for themselves. The degree to which a few money center banks can leverage their real assets is not only insane it is clearly not based on any real substance and stinks of criminality and naked ugly greed. When the power of money took over the land of this earth the rate of rape of the land of this earth increased dramatically, and now comes the hangover. No. you will certainly shout the party must go on. I know, I feel ya, but it won't because it can't. Every single sector of modern life depends on petroleum products - even when this is not apparent. Agriculture is one of those places. The natural soil fertility has been poisoned to death by the poisons of Monsanto and Bayer, soil under onslaught by mono crop industrial profit motive driven agriculture that views land in the same manner as it views any fungible resource. Money rules right? Global oil production has peaked; the argument about it is over. This has been masked by the shale oil (kerogen) and gas plays, and by the Canadian tar sands national sacrifice zones, which are bringing - very temporary - supplies online, but conventional oil production has peaked globally and has entered into inexorable decline. There are no new Ghawar fields on planet earth; petroleum geologists are good, and they know where to look. Some new fields will be discovered of course in places like the Arctic that once were covered in ice, or in very deep water fields, but there is nothing left like Ghawar that had in the beginning an energy return of as much as 100 times invested energy. The signs are clear. For example the recent massive tax breaks that were given to the oil sector by the state of Alaska and sold to the public as a measure that would lead to a big increase in production. well. where is the new production? All of this at a juncture in history when hundred of millions of aspiring people are trying to join the material land they see on TV and at the malls; which means that the global gap between demand for oil and supply is going to hit the global economy like a jack hammer - IMO. Because as soon as things anemically begin to recover the demand for oil increases - and there is no swing supply. The Saudis do not have it. Ghawar is sucking up salt water now.. more and more. What this means is that the global spot market price for oil spikes, driving up the cost of everything - at all levels of production and distribution, sending the global economy into a tail spin once again - more social dislocation. We have entered the era of jettisoning countries - ask any Greek. It is becoming like a game of musical chairs, a very gruesome game of musical chairs. The global
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Friday, March 07, 2014 10:56 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: You seem innocent of how the drug cartels operate and just how violent they are. I not only know they're very violent I know why they're violent. If government made chocolate bars illegal the demand for chocolate bars would not end and organizations would come into existance to fill that demand. And the underground Hershey candy company and the underground Nestles candy company couldn't sue each other in the courts and so would have no way to settle disputes except through baseball bats and machine guns. Come on man nobody is going to kill someone else over a bar of chocolate.. there are no chocolate deals gone bad. There are plenty of Meth deals that have gone bad. But sure in principal agree - and think government should get out of regulating our personal lives. I think government has a role to play in enforcing correct labeling and ingredients (according to labeling) that it should publish standards and issue warnings. But not enforce monopolies - as it does with medical dental practice, and the drug sector for example. Then who would ever want to live under a free market system if as you admit the transnational drug gangs are an exemplar of a well evolved free market? There is no disputing matters of taste so you could say if you wished that markets, and therefore people, shouldn't have too much freedom; but you can't say that the Black Market isn't a free market. Yes I can, I just did. A black market degenerates into a cutthroat cartel, which is the antithesis of freedom. There is no freedom in a market dominated by ruthless criminality. Don't let those colored sunglasses blind you. But sure, as you said; it's a matter of tastes. Not my choice; I think there are much better flavors than your free market. that Ayn Rand blood stew smothered in a rich topping of greed. Chris de Morsella John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
If only we all thought like you, the world would be fixed, eh? Or, if the climate change doesn't fit all the models, that have been proposed by the IPCC, then all we have to do is wait? Come on spudboy – or whatever your real name is – do you really believe your own emotional outburst? It’s a managed “free” country and you are free to utter whatever nonsense you choose. Go ahead an believe the world is flat for all I care; or that some bearded Duck Dynasty looking Patriarch sitting on a cloud in the sky made the Universe in six days some 6000 years ago. If you want to be an idiot – go right ahead. But when you utter idiocy you should expect it to be challenged and – even brutally deconstructed. If you can’t take it then don’t dish it out, is my advice. If this emotional outburst, is the extent of your reply, it is clear you have nothing of substance to say in response to my point by point deconstruction of all the silly sound bites you have swallowed hook line and sinker from your Tea Party (Koch brother funded) sources. Grow up buddy. Chris From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com? ] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com extinction rate is already 10,000 times the average background rate; Chris, this is an artificial rate, as useless, except to Greens, as events cause extinctions, not averages. Spudboy – or whatever your real name is; perhaps you don’t realize it but everything is caused by events – so that is a meaningless statement. Every year, since the dawn of life on earth species have been going extinct and species have been coming into existence. Perhaps you are not aware of just how many species of life exist on this planet. There is nothing artificial, nor unusual about graphing the rate of extinction over time… all manner of phenomena are graphed over a time axis. That you find this strange and even more seem to be implying that it is some kind of trick by evil greens really makes me question your most basic understanding of math and statistics. It's akin to saying of we added all the average dick lengths on Earth, it'd reach 2/3rds to the Moon. An interesting topic, but unhelpful. Wrong! The rate of extinction – which is the number of species going extinct in a given unit of time can be graphed so that we can compare past rates with the current rate – which is 10,000 times what the rate has been on average (as far as we can tell from studying the geologic, fossil and DNA records) That you see no value in having a yardstick seems more likely due to the ideological blinders you have covered your eyes with than with anything else. It is either that or you are surprisingly ignorant of some very basic math. I recommend you learn more about statistics and how it works before making silly declarations like you just did. Estimates of resources magically increase when money is involved. The shale gas that was paltry in the US 10 years ago is now something the Greens scream about, and Obama fears, (that's ideology for you). Again you do not know what you are talking about… you are sadly misinformed. I could argue it with you, but I do not even think you could understand the evidence given your poor display of understanding of basic statistics…. So why bother. Suffice to say that the Shale gas and oil plays, besides doing great and irreparable harm to our earth are in fact just bubbles that will soon burst (and in fact already show signs of doing just that) – it is all spin, PR and BS, pulling in all that sucker money – the essence of any bubble. The insiders are making huge killings no doubt, and they are probably already pulling their money now if they have not already. The drillers made a killing for a few years, some people made good salaries, again for a while. But if anyone – who understands numbers and statistics (which I fear may exclude you) – carefully examines certain key metrics such as rates od decline; how many years of peak well production before the decline sets in; capital cost per unit of product; energy return on energy invested (EROI) – for all the formations, but especially for the most mature formation – the Eagle-Ford in Texas. What one will discover – if one looks and I do challenge you to look – is that the boom is unsustainable and that after investing huge numbers of billions of dollars in what are capital sinkholes that the long term payback for that capital will never occur, because the assumptions for fracked gas and shale oil were exceedingly optimistic – based on historic production data from traditional gas oil fields. Fracked fields begin going into depletion very rapidly – and wells need to be re-fracked as well (which changes the economics considerably) And when decline sets in the rate of decline is much higher than it is for traditional fields. Again I challenge anyone to look for themselves.
RE: [foar] Amoeba's Secret, by Bruno Marchal available from Kindle store
I am waiting for Russell to give the thumbs up on the print version - I still prefer print for some things like books. Cheers, Chris From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Platonist Guitar Cowboy Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2014 3:59 PM To: f...@googlegroups.com; everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [foar] Amoeba's Secret, by Bruno Marchal available from Kindle store On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: Hi everyone, Just want to let everyone know that the English translation of Buno Marchal's The Amoeba's Secret is now available from Amazon's Kindle store. See http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00IRLEKPA The Amoeba's Secret was written when Bruno received the prestigious Prix Le Monde de la Recherche Universitaire for his PhD thesis, only for the prize to be mysteriously revoked, and the book not published. The original French version exists only as a manuscript available from Bruno's website. The Amoeba's Secret remains one of clearest explanations of Bruno's UDA and AUDA arguments, and provides a lot of historical background motivating him to formulate and study these issues in this way. Now, after about 4 years of effort, Kim Jones and I have finally finished the translation of this book into English. For those of you who prefer their books hard, the paperback version will probably be available towards the end of March. I need to see a physical copy of what Amazon produces before approving it for general sale. I have jigged things so that hard copy purchases are entitled to a free Kindle version fo the book, so you can have the best of both worlds. Great job by you guys, congratulations! Didn't get to reply timely, but please... time?! I'll have to not buy it, just to restore correctness for there to be some dissent, which is dumb, because I want it. Sometimes sacrifice is the best next move. Glad to be of service, gentlemen. PGC Cheers -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Fabric of Alternate Reality group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foar+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com mailto:foar%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . To post to this group, send email to f...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foar. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Liz, you are doing the same thing, Chris does, which, when confronted with someone who disagrees with their world view, hurls snarky accusations. This is not a good thing, but I do admit, yourself, Chris, and me, are, at times, ruled by our amygdala, our limbic systems. This is part of being a human being as well as a primate. In this case, I don't wish to hand even more power over to people who rule us, who win votes by giving out goodies, to the underclasses, and getting pay-off by billionaires, like George Soros, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett the 3rd, their world views are sometimes..hostile to what we middle classes know as our best interests. Hence, the neo-Stalinist tag, in response to Chris' Duck Dynasty accusation, was me getting down to the level of insults back to him. Your Adolf accusation is enjoyable to me, and I shall be happy to tell you why (intentionally snarky as it was). Spudboy - or whomever you really are - if you recall you compared graphing the average extinction rate to adding up the average penis length to see if it measured up to the moon. I demolished your argument - with facts and by showing how utterly stupid it was. It is not a political world view - which I believe you believe everything amounts to - but rather it is a numeric ratio arrived at based on the best scientific evidence for past extinction rates that we have. And you compare it to penis size, and suggest that it is some evil green political thing? What kind of response DID you expect from me. The fact that you have nothing factual or reasoned to say in response, besides retreating into the polemic of your Tea Party shell leads me to conclude that this is how you operate. Keep to the facts. I demolished every single one of your assertions and backed up what I argued with statistics and facts. You have not responded to my fact based deconstruction of the Tea Party talking points you foolishly believe, but instead have chosen to feel hurt. But on the fact of the matter - on the assertions you made - you have nothing to say, which I take to mean as a tacit admission on your part that you have nothing intelligent to say on the matter and feel that it is better for your cause to turn this into the kind of fact free discussion that is rooted instead in ideology. and the putative ideology (Stalinism) you decide others MUST be followers of when they disagree with your views. Idiotic, childish behavior is what this amounts to. Stick to the facts. You want to argue that the Shale gas and oil play are going to turn America into the Saudi Arabia of tomorrow - then by all means try to do so AND I will again demolish your foolish assertions with hard physical based statistics. with the cold water of reality. I am still waiting for a response on that and take your silence to mean that you have nothing intelligent to say on it and that your knowledge of energy matters is ankle deep. I remember the old, Heimat show, and thought it was so-so, but it was a late 80's show/early 90's and was ok. Many of my relatives went up those smokestacks, so there's that. Chris hurls crap, so I hurl it back, this is an old primate tradition, and I hope you appreciate it. Turning the other cheek is not always a wise thing to do, so I likely, shan't. Again, the statist neo-Stalinist thing I am cool with, since as you've pointed out, the progressive mind-set likes to hurl the adolf slander, so I decided to go forward with my counter-accusation. My counter-accusation happens to be spot-on, unlike Chris's dig that I was Pappy whatever, from Duck Dynasty, which of course would then go to a KKK thing, and from there, to jackboots, and einsatz gruppen. The neo-stalin thing is accurate in the case of state worship, the imposition of dictatorship for the excuse of problem-solving, and the rule by party members and the super rich. This I have trouble with, but as a micron, fear not, I have no influence, or power to alter anything in Chris's favor, or against him. I don't like attaching ideology to technology, though, but I suppose it can't be helped? Screw Duck Dynasty - it is a stupid reality TV show with a publicly loud mouthed racist, homophobic bearded arsehole who calls himself the patriarch as its star. Did I compare you to him? No, actually I did not, you seem to have problems comprehending what you read - I have noticed - I believe (not worth it to me to go back and actually look) I made some snarky comment that this is a free country and you are free to believe any BS you want including that the earth is flat or that the world was created by a Duck Dynasty looking patriarch on a cloud six thousand years ago. You certainly do seem to believe in a lot of fact challenged notions, a few of which I had just carefully deconstructed - and you have had nothing to say about that. very telling IMO. Is not a stretch Grow
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 10:34 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: I not only know they're very violent I know why they're violent. If government made chocolate bars illegal the demand for chocolate bars would not end and organizations would come into existence to fill that demand. And the underground Hershey candy company and the underground Nestles candy company couldn't sue each other in the courts and so would have no way to settle disputes except through baseball bats and machine guns. Come on man nobody is going to kill someone else over a bar of chocolate Of course they will! Chocolate is a multibillion dollar industry and there is a very strong demand for it that will not disappear just because some pinhead in government passes a law against it. Legal or illegal whenever there is a demand for product X, prostitution, drugs, pirate DVDs, pornography, chocolate bars or whatever, there will always be people willing to cater to that demand if the price is right. John we are going to have to disagree on that. A heroin junkie will do almost anything to get their next fix. so will an alcoholic for that matter (and if you had said alcohol I would have, of course very much agreed with you), but Chocolate? Come on man be serious. I know it is a multi-billion dollar industry and that sure a black market for it would spring into existence - and at some level criminality would take control. But at the street level - you will never find chocolate junkies mugging little old ladies or prostituting themselves for a few dollars (like crack whores do) to get the bar of chocolate they crave. Just imagining this scenario brings me to fits of laughter. There are no chocolate deals gone bad. Absolutely untrue, there are plenty of chocolate deals that go bad and when they do the parties involved sue each other, that's why the big candy companies have hundreds of lawyers on their payrole. But because Meth dealers are selling a product that somebody in government has deemed illegal they do not have that option and must resort to what Clausewitz euphemistically called diplomacy by other means, that is to say they make the other party an offer they can't refuse. Sure, in principal we agree - but then on the other hand Methamphetamines and Chocolate have very different effects on the people who become addicted to them. The meth head will do almost anything - and they do - they murder, they steal, they prostitute themselves the whole shebang; chocolate addicts are not going to start going out and committing street crime in order to get their fix. And this IS the difference. Again if you had used the example of alcohol; I would have agreed that the alcoholic would break into a car to steal a stereo to hawk in order to by their black market possibly adulterated bottle of moonshine. I think government has a role to play in enforcing correct labeling and ingredients I pretty much agree with perhaps a few caveats. Think of it as a reporting function. But not enforce monopolies - as it does with medical dental practice, and the drug sector for example. Agreed. A black market degenerates into a cutthroat cartel True, but the blackness of the market has nothing to do with the nature of the commodity being transacted, it's black because somebody in government decided to make it black. Tobacco has killed many orders of magnitude more people than Meth and all other illegal drugs put together, but the market for tobacco is not black because somebody in government decided that particular drug is not illegal; so when tobacco deals go bad they don't machine gun each other, they sue each other. Basically I agree. but come on man, Chocolate? The image of the crazed methhead needing a fix - has some basis in reality. that will never translate into a chocolate-head behavioral analogue. Other legal drugs (including Tobacco) are much better examples. But essentially, in broad strokes I think we are more or less in agreement on this matter. The government has no business legislating morality or intruding into the bedroom or the personal lives and habits of people. Most of the people currently in prison in this country are in prison for non-violent drug offenses - mostly intent to sell raps. It is a travesty of justice and has imposed a massive social and human cost on us all. It is stupid policy. Chris John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit
RE: The way the future was
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of ghib...@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 10:31 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The way the future was On Saturday, March 8, 2014 9:09:32 PM UTC, Liz R wrote: On 9 March 2014 00:18, ghi...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: this is what the Clash predicted http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkyCrx4DyMk I stumbled on itconsidering it's meant to be Punk, I was surprised how good it is. Good vocals What on earth do you mean? Of course punk is good (I think of the Clash as one of the less good examples myself, London Calling is definitely so-so imho). Siouxsie and the Banshees (listen to Once upon a time for the best tracks), the Pretenders (especially their first album), Ian Dury and the Blockheads, the Stranglers, the Go-gos, X-ray spex ... to name but a few ... all good musicians liberated by the new wave ... or going back earlier we have the Velvet Underground, arguably the proto-punks (or maybe proto-Goths...or indeed proto-almost-everything-that-the-Beatles-weren't-proto), not to mention the wonderful Iggy Pop and I guess Blondie and Sonic Youth, to take two ends of the spectrum. And the Flaming Lips. And then you can look at all the bands and individuals influenced by punk, from Grunge to House to Grindcore to Black Metal to whatever the kids are listening to now (Lorde, mainly, it seems, who went to the same school as my son :) Don’t forget the original punk song – IMO – Pushing too Hard by the Seeds – first released as a single way back in 1965. Definitely a precursor to Grunge and Punk. I would also mention the Thirteenth Floor Elevators (Rocky Erickson’s first band – before they locked him up in an insane asylum in Texas for having some Marijuana seeds in his car) and tortured him with electro shock therapy. The Stooges (Iggy Pops original band) and the MC5 another hard core Detroit band form the same era – also are influential deep roots of Punk Grunge and Metal as well. Jimi Hendrix bears mentioning too – he took the guitar to a new place (it is a tragedy that he died so soon) Chris This is looking at the first ever copy of I.D. magazine tee hee. That might not be a comprehensible point to make.it's just that I remember seeing what must have been an earlier issue at the time...looked like a load of paper stapled together. Each page was made up of a rack of snapshots of people photographed on the street just for catching the eye for being different. The quality of everything from the paper, the print, the picture quality, staples, even the people In the shots most dimensions wasn't necessarily better than dirt. But it was about one dimension of the person in the picture, only. Authenticity. To a peer...another young person. Doesn't mean anything in the scheme of things..not meant to ei itther. But it was very important at the timewho was authentic. Looks have always mattered a lot, because in the end everything was always about getting laid. But being a looker and a scuzzbucket wouldn't get you in for long. Being authentic and scuzzbucket would. Being authentic and ugly as shit would get you in. Obviously being authenatic and drop dead gorgeous was to be the best. That was me and you. Although I have very little good to say about Malcolm McLaren he did arguably launch a whole new musical experience with the Sex Pistols, a type of music which had until then only been underground (Rezillos? B52s ?) but bubbled to the surface when Rotten et al appeared on prime time TV swearing away. The world was never the same. Yeah what a tosser. But it's definitely a case of not knowing what would have been the same/different had he not walked the earth. Happy days! Happy memories. Being different, dressing different, making your own music, writing your own lyrics. It's something kids marv el ad,t when a band does it today. It was the norm back in the day. A lucky time that way. Black music was something to marvel at, so diverse, so experimental, so leading the way. It just vanished , I hope it comes back one day. Simon Cowell says the average quality is higher than ever, but a sausage factory does that Yes indeed. But I see that spark in Lorde and even dear Lady Gaga. To quote Lorde, not verbatim, She had to do a photoshoot (being famous now and all that) and the photographer kept saying 'Smile!' and after a while she said, 'I got here because I did my own thing, and I'm not smiling because you tell me to!' - and she didn't, and we have photos to prove it. PS And she's on the cover of Rolling Stone wearing a Cramps T-shirt! That girl is definitely my hero now, even if I didn't like her music - I thought the Cramps were only for weirdos like me. (In a couple of years she WILL be playing Morticia Addams, either on film or in real life.) I don't know much of her music
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
Yah. Its way too late. You have gotten me reflecting on the old saying by Tip Oneil, who said All politics is local. I would paraphrase this and say all politics is personel. I can observe two things, despite my diminished capacity. One is that the climate is not behaving at all like you been stating. Two, eventually fair amount of people will tire of the ruling classes to the rule of autocrats. Because you observe weather and confuse it with climate Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 7:47 AM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating I understood, what you were going for, but I hit back on old, Chris, because he changed the conversation to invective-which I am ok with. No big deal, but I hit back. Secondly, the nice guys, the progressives world-wide, tend to become more and more oppressive as time goes by. Use a problem like AGW, and make into a reason for making a dictatorship. This is what Stalin did. Thirdly, the progressives worldwide like to cast the Nazi aspersion at conservatives, so rather than waste energy, I counter-punch with the Stalin thing. I am Hitler, they are Stalin. It pisses them off so that is a good, if only for my limbic system. Also, it has a point, which is the government is a god or godwin, as you like it. I think, many times this is a bad, bad, thing, and I'd like to avoid that, if possible. Being conservative (pragmatic) I look for results. I prefer technology over government and government management (dictatorship). One of the interesting thing we could all reflect on, is the capacity to use molten salt, as an alternative pumped storage, for night and cold winters. Rugged, less expensive, re-usable, and makes solar and wind storable, ahead of batteries, and fuel cells-not that I am against them, being pragmatic. They already use molten salt for large CSP - -example the Luz project in So Cal. It is one of the arguments that CSP (Concentrated Solar thermal Power) has going for it. These plants operate using molten slat as the medium in any case so storing it off in insulated tanks makes sense. In this manner it can produce power even at night. On the other hand the peak power demand curve peaks during the afternoon to early evening time frame - very little power is actually needed during the middle of the night. Still waiting for you to respond factually to my deconstruction of your statements regarding the extinction rate being 10,000 times the background rate. Or regarding the highly optimistic future energy supply scenarios you believe in and proposed as being based in fact. Much easier for you to ignore that and focus on - the alleged invective and hurt I caused your sensitive conservative soul. I take your silence as a tacit agreement or an inability on your part to form a cogent response - other than branding me as a Stalinist, which fits right in with your Tea Party mode of discourse. If you believe it pisses me off - and that this is good, which makes me gather that therefore this is your main objective - it kind of reflects back on you and on your motives. Are you here to piss people off? Or just people who do not buy into your fanatical and fact free agenda? Chris I don't really think you are a Nazi, thank Godwin - but then you should not call disagreers Stalinists, because it is at best a caricature. As were my satirical comments, but I did it intentionally. -Original Message- From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Sun, Mar 9, 2014 5:17 pm Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating On 10 March 2014 01:39, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Liz, you are doing the same thing, Chris does, which, when confronted with someone who disagrees with their world view, hurls snarky accusations. Actually I was satirising the paragraph of yours I quoted, which mentioned Stalin at least 3 times. I don't really think you are a Nazi, thank Godwin - but then you should not call disagreers Stalinists, because it is at best a caricature. As were my satirical comments, but I did it intentionally. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Since I have been on the list longer then you I ask are you here to enforce progressive ideology? If you're pissed off, that's not my fault, that is your own. I was just elucidating to Liz on her comments to me. I am aware of technology, but it has to work well and the costs, affordable. No hurt incurred, but I refuse to hang back and take it. I refute your extinction rate of 1, by being aware that this is a figure whipped up by proggies to gain more control over the rest of us. Sometimes the theatre is on fire, but most of the time it isn't. The question is knowing when. Alarmism is an excuse to grab more power. Some people like freedom more. Though you may feel that I am pissed off – or perhaps that is your desire. I am more bored than anything if you want to know the truth. Attempting to converse with a sloganeer is a wearisome pointless affair. I seriously doubt that you are aware of science, engineering, math or technology – in any profound way, beyond a casual Popular Science level and the ideological slop you get from your Tea Party fellow travelers. You have displayed surprising ignorance of basic statistics for example… so forgive me if I have serious doubts that your knowledge of science or technology is more than ankle deep. You “refute your extinction rate of 1”, do you… First off it isn’t mine; I did not make it up… maybe that is your way of doing things. I am curious if your angry sounding refutation is based on anything more than your apparently abundant supply of hot air? Because, if it is, you have done an excellent job of completely hiding it. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: The way the future was
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Platonist Guitar Cowboy Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 6:14 PM To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: The way the future was On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 12:59 AM, chris peck chris_peck...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi PGC yep. All art, like language, has an etymology. The Pistols weren't special because they did anything 'new', but because they did something that challenged the status quo of the time. When it comes to shocking people The Rite of Spring had the audience rioting at its premier, so suck on that Johnny Rotten! The Pistols were special because they ripped off David Bowie's sound system. Literally that's how they got their sound; at least the amplification component of it. Chris All of heavy metal, rock, punk etc. is slave to what we call the power chord; albeit today's punk rockers are quite dogmatic regarding the harmony be expressed with distorted guitars. Yes, thats true, but I don't think punk rock is really about musical innovation is it? These guys make a good argument that all pop of the past 40 years is essentially the same single song, you might like it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pidokakU4I Yes, I can see that and raise it, while shooting it down too: in terms of most parameters (not exclusively that harmonic sequence, funny as the video is), what is often called pop is western romantic era song form, overemphasizing particularities like blue notes, certain African polyrhythms, suspension and blue use of dominant harmonies and progressions, what is perceived as ethnic etc.I think 'buzz' or new styles always exhibit some local bias/overemphasis on a set of particular musical properties that proves ''not us, man. We've reinvented a better wheel' as opposed to the locally more worn kitsch. And, in the vague overlapping spans of generations, they do and they don't. So the swing guys started to bebob, and they then hard bobbed because things weren't fast enough, then some guys felt this too hasty and became cool; in mid 20th century Jazz say. With recording technology and computers this effect explodes to the point that you know nobody who knows all current stylistic phenomena, branches, sub-branches... But, I enjoy when people share their musical tastes and fetishes, however they break it down, and always meet a new musical conception whenever somebody bumps into me. ''Wow, ok that is the thing for them. Amazing, I always thought that's..'' PGC Or the stoners 60 thousand years ago with flutes, bones, rocks, and sticks might have already been 'rocking', as they certainly had the 'homeless nomadic take no prisoners perpetually alienated in hostile environment' thing of punk going. Yes, even the funky hairstyles and ritual clothing would be plausible ;-) PGC Im sure you're right. _ From: chris_peck...@hotmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: The way the future was Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 23:58:50 + _ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 00:26:56 +0100 Subject: Re: The way the future was From: multiplecit...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Electric instruments just amplified what was already here. Beethoven istm was first in rock, metal, punk etc. all the way to dubstep department;crystallizing sound's relations with explosive power, defiance, melancholy or magnificence. Bach was more goth than punk, I'd guess, especially with the organ. Or you could see the origins of jagged, animalistic, primal fifth-based harmony in medieval music of ars antiqua and ars nova as the seed of power etc. All of heavy metal, rock, punk etc. is slave to what we call the power chord; albeit today's punk rockers are quite dogmatic regarding the harmony be expressed with distorted guitars. Then maybe the old Greeks rocked like nobody had ever rocked before, but we lack patches of history to know what they really sounded like. Or the stoners 60 thousand years ago with flutes, bones, rocks, and sticks might have already been 'rocking', as they certainly had the 'homeless nomadic take no prisoners perpetually alienated in hostile environment' thing of punk going. Yes, even the funky hairstyles and ritual clothing would be plausible ;-) PGC On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 7:45 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: I have 4 pistols tracks in my very large and eclectic MP3 music collection, along with many others generally called punk. John Lydon also gave me my all time favourite headline, Sex pistol attacks New Zealand butter. I even managed to turn it into a crossword clue - Enthusiastically attack butter (4) ...but anyway, yes, I like the Pistols some of the time, even if they were McLaren's boy band really. PS whoever put Hendrix as a proto punk should on the same basis add Cream and even the Stones. (At this rate everyone will be in on it...) On 11 March 2014 02:49, chris peck
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR I must admit I've heard the extinction rate is way higher than usual - asteroid / methane burp high. (Although if it's us or them, as I said, that's a different story...) Liz - it is not hearsay though folks like spudboy who like to cherry pick their facts to fit their ideology would like it to be just something evil greenies cooked so Soros can grab more power - or whatever delusional script they hew to. There is substantial, incontrovertible evidence that the extinction rate has literally spiked through the roof. That this is so should really make thinking people question why? What could possibly be causing this global extinction; the answer for those whose minds are not already made up by ideology becomes painfully clear - and stares back at you whenever you look into the mirror. Chris On 11 March 2014 15:59, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Since I have been on the list longer then you I ask are you here to enforce progressive ideology? If you're pissed off, that's not my fault, that is your own. I was just elucidating to Liz on her comments to me. I am aware of technology, but it has to work well and the costs, affordable. No hurt incurred, but I refuse to hang back and take it. I refute your extinction rate of 1, by being aware that this is a figure whipped up by proggies to gain more control over the rest of us. Sometimes the theatre is on fire, but most of the time it isn't. The question is knowing when. Alarmism is an excuse to grab more power. Some people like freedom more. Though you may feel that I am pissed off - or perhaps that is your desire. I am more bored than anything if you want to know the truth. Attempting to converse with a sloganeer is a wearisome pointless affair. I seriously doubt that you are aware of science, engineering, math or technology - in any profound way, beyond a casual Popular Science level and the ideological slop you get from your Tea Party fellow travelers. You have displayed surprising ignorance of basic statistics for example. so forgive me if I have serious doubts that your knowledge of science or technology is more than ankle deep. You refute your extinction rate of 1, do you. First off it isn't mine; I did not make it up. maybe that is your way of doing things. I am curious if your angry sounding refutation is based on anything more than your apparently abundant supply of hot air? Because, if it is, you have done an excellent job of completely hiding it. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com I think that if extinction rates was 10k, you would already see silent spring round the globe. It smells of alarmism, to get people to march to the fearless leaders tune. You think a lot spudboy -- why not go review the mountains of evidence instead and come to a conclusion that is based on evidence -- as opposed to your opinion. Perhaps you remain blissfully ignorant of the scientific method -- test your hypothesis spudboy against something other than what you would like to believe. Its like the Marx brothers joke: who are you going to believe, you own two eyes or me! The academics, I suspect, are doing their hockey stick lie again, so things can roll their way with jobs for life, lots of cash from dur fuhrer, and appointments to jobs in the EPA, and such. Theres an inconsistency with the dire observations predicted, and the public policy resonse of the ruling class. To me, this is a tip off that fibs are being told and exaggerations sold. But fear not, I am a mere particle in the sandstorm of history. Do you consider this list to be a pulpit from where you may preach your particular brand of Ayn Rand addled ideology? Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 11, 2014 11:39 am Subject: RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR I mus admit I've heard the extinction rate is way higher than usual - asteroid / methane burp high. (Although if it's us or them, as I said, that's a different story...) Liz – it is not hearsay though folks like spudboy who like to cherry pick their “facts” tople to march fit their ideology would like it to be just something evil greenies cooked so Soros can grab more power – or whatever delusional script they hew to. There is substantial, incontrovertible evidence that the extinction rate has literally spiked through the roof.That this is so should really make thinking people question why? What could possibly be causing this global extinction; the answer for those whose minds are not already made up by ideology becomes painfully clear – and stares back at you whenever you look into the mirror.ChrisOn 11 March 2014 15:59, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Since I have been on the list longer then you I ask are you here to enforce progressive ideology? If you're pissed off, that's not my fault, that is your own. I was just elucidating to Liz on her comments to me. I am aware of technology, but it has to work well and the costs, affordable. No hurt incurred, but I refuse to hang back and take it. I refute your extinction rate of 1, by being aware that this is a figure whipped up by proggies to gain more control over the rest of us. Sometimes the theatre is on fire, but most of the time it isn't. The question is knowing when. Alarmism is an excuse to grab more power. Some people like freedom more. Though you may feel that I am pissed off – or perhaps that is your desire. I am more bored than anything if you want to know the truth. Attempting to converse with a sloganeer is a wearisome pointless affair. I seriously doubt that you are aware of science, engineering, math or technology – in any profound way, beyond a casual Popular Science level and the ideological slop you get from your Tea Party fellow travelers. You have displayed surprising ignorance of basic statistics for example… so forgive me if I have serious doubts that your knowledge of science or technology is more than ankle deep.You “refute your extinction rate of 1”, do you… First off it isn’t mine; I did not make it up… maybe that is your way of doing things. I am curious if your angry sounding refutation is based on anything more than your apparently abundant supply of hot air? Because, if it is, you have done an excellent job of completely hiding it.Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com Yah. I do view mountains of evidence, and intake what I read. But I also evaluate which of the evidence seems most, compelling, and, in the case of climate, appears, questionable, or exaggerated. And, especially does not match observations. Science, is observation and measure, not one or the other but both. When the AEC of the 1950s claimed uranium reactors were totally safe, should we still believe on ideological basis? What about lysenko, what about eugenics. Sometimes science is about a search for truth, and sometimes it's about a search for a research grant. Scientists ARE observing and documenting the rate of extinction silly fellow. You do not get to choose your own facts, spudboy (or whomever you are). Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: 11-Mar-2014 13:20:13 + Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com I think that if extinction rates was 10k, you would already see silent spring round the globe. It smells of alarmism, to get people to march to the fearless leaders tune. You think a lot spudboy -- why not go review the mountains of evidence instead and come to a conclusion that is based on evidence -- as opposed to your opinion. Perhaps you remain blissfully ignorant of the scientific method -- test your hypothesis spudboy against something other than what you would like to believe. Its like the Marx brothers joke: who are you going to believe, you own two eyes or me! The academics, I suspect, are doing their hockey stick lie again, so things can roll their way with jobs for life, lots of cash from dur fuhrer, and appointments to jobs in the EPA, and such. Theres an inconsistency with the dire observations predicted, and the public policy resonse of the ruling class. To me, this is a tip off that fibs are being told and exaggerations sold. But fear not, I am a mere particle in the sandstorm of history. Do you consider this list to be a pulpit from where you may preach your particular brand of Ayn Rand addled ideology? Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 11, 2014 11:39 am Subject: RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR I mus admit I've heard the extinction rate is way higher than usual - asteroid / methane burp high. (Although if it's us or them, as I said, that's a different story...) Liz – it is not hearsay though folks like spudboy who like to cherry pick their “facts” tople to march fit their ideology would like it to be just something evil greenies cooked so Soros can grab more power – or whatever delusional script they hew to. There is substantial, incontrovertible evidence that the extinction rate has literally spiked through the roof.That this is so should really make thinking people question why? What could possibly be causing this global extinction; the answer for those whose minds are not already made up by ideology becomes painfully clear – and stares back at you whenever you look into the mirror.ChrisOn 11 March 2014 15:59, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Since I have been on the list longer then you I ask are you here to enforce progressive ideology? If you're pissed off, that's not my fault, that is your own. I was just elucidating to Liz on her comments to me. I am aware of technology, but it has to work well and the costs, affordable. No hurt incurred, but I refuse to hang back and take it. I refute your extinction rate of 1, by being aware that this is a figure whipped up by proggies to gain more control over the rest of us. Sometimes the theatre is on fire, but most of the time it isn't. The question is knowing when. Alarmism is an excuse to grab more power. Some people like freedom more. Though you may feel that I am pissed off – or perhaps that is your desire. I am more bored than anything if you want to know the truth. Attempting to converse with a sloganeer is a wearisome pointless affair. I seriously doubt that you are aware of science, engineering, math or technology – in any profound way, beyond a casual Popular Science level and the ideological slop you get from your Tea Party fellow travelers. You have displayed surprising ignorance of basic statistics for example… so forgive me if I have serious doubts that your knowledge of science or technology is more than ankle deep.You “refute your extinction rate of 1”, do you… First
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com Oh I hear you about facts, but which facts are relevent? Where's the cause and effect, and with the climatoligists, involved at East Anglia and U Penn, where's the hockey stick? What is your solution for remediating the big mess you are insisting we are in? (whomever I am?). The only facts that are relevant to determining the current rate of extinction are determining base-line rates for extinction, and measuring the current rates of species extinction and then comparing these rates to the average rates that have been determined for the base-line. You do much hand-waving and little actual investigation. You don't get to choose the facts spudboy. And changing the subject is merely avoidance. I will assume that you now accept that the extinction rate is 10,000 times the background rate of extinction, seeing as you have nothing intelligent or useful to say on the matter or to add. In case you still have not understood, let me clarify; I am not especially interested in reading your regurgitations of the Tea Party libertarian talking points you fill your spudboy brain with. So unless you have something to say about the what the current rate of extinction actually is and WHY, all those biologists and other scientists who have compiled vast datasets that reveal an exceedingly alarming rate of species extinction currently in progress -- 10,000 times the background rate -- why they are all wrong about it. What is wrong with their data spudboy? Either make a point -- and please -- for all our sake -- don't go back to comparing this centrally important piece of compiled data, as you did, to adding up the average penis size to see if it measures to the moon. Say something of actual intelligence and bearing on the subject, if you are able to. If you are going to challenge this figure of the current extinction rate being around 10,000 times the background rate of extinction then do so using facts and data that has a bearing on it. Otherwise you are tacitly accepting that you are wrong about this. Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, Mar 11, 2014 2:41 pm Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com Yah. I do view mountains of evidence, and intake what I read. But I also evaluate which of the evidence seems most, compelling, and, in the case of climate, appears, questionable, or exaggerated. And, especially does not match observations. Science, is observation and measure, not one or the other but both. When the AEC of the 1950s claimed uranium reactors were totally safe, should we still believe on ideological basis? What about lysenko, what about eugenics. Sometimes science is about a search for truth, and sometimes it's about a search for a research grant. Scientists ARE observing and documenting the rate of extinction silly fellow. You do not get to choose your own facts, spudboy (or whomever you are). Chris -Original Message-From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.comTo: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.comSent: 11-Mar-2014 13:20:13 +Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com I think that if extinction rates was 10k, you would already see silent spring round the globe. It smells of alarmism, to get people to march to the fearless leaders tune. You think a lot spudboy -- why not go review the mountains of evidence instead and come to a conclusion that is based on evidence -- as opposed to your opinion. Perhaps you remain blissfully ignorant of the scientific method -- test your hypothesis spudboy against something other than what you would like to believe. Its like the Marx brothers joke: who are you going to believe, you own two eyes or me! The academics, I suspect, are doing their hockey stick lie again, so things can roll their way with jobs for life, lots of cash from dur fuhrer, and appointments to jobs in the EPA, and such. Theres an inconsistency with the dire observations predicted, and the public policy resonse of the ruling class. To me, this is a tip off that fibs are being told and exaggerations sold. But fear not, I am a mere particle in the sandstorm of history. Do you consider this list to be a pulpit from where you may preach your particular brand of Ayn Rand addled ideology? Chris -Original Message-From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.comTo: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.comSent: Tue, Mar 11, 2014 11:39 amSubject: RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR I mus admit I've heard the extinction rate is way
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com I hopefully, wouldn't think that there's a tea party or libertarian view of science. The libertarians, unless I am wrong, are 100% pro-science, many atheists, and all that. Your 1 extinction rate claim appears specious, because if this was the case, not a tweet bird wouldn't exist, nor we be doing the Everything List two-step. Precisely -- that is YOUR GUESS. You are basically admitting that you are too lazy to do the research and investigate the available public domain information and data that exists, and that has been compiled for over a hundred and fifty years or more with increasing accuracy and quantity of data over time. You demonstrate a total lack of understanding of just how many species of life exist on this planet -- hint it is far greater than the census of song birds in your back yard. What you just admit you did -- to form your opinion -- is not science, but a shallow anecdotal impression your Tea Party addled brain feels comfortable with. Your opinion is worthless. And so is mine. Fortunately there is a vast body of field data, of biological censuses taken over time. The figure of 100,000 times the background rate of extinction is derived from this body of existing data; It is also rather more rigorous than your anecdotal certainty. Do you really wish to continue making an idiot of yourself? My guess is that whatever the human species is doing it is killing off lots of fauna and plants, especially in the hungry countries that want their people to live better, materially. Having said that, it isn't 1 times etc. If the greens were sane, and I submit they are all limbic, More of your bovine (unsupported anecdotal) opinions it must be very self-affirming to live in this fact free world; where beliefs become reality by being fervently believed. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com Well, a-Popin is a bit of a giveaway :-) Amen... and praise be :) On 12 March 2014 12:14, Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com wrote: From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 10:57 PM Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating Yes indeed! And the acid rain is a-pouring down, and everyone's face is a-sizzlin and a-popin from the sulphur, and the Ozone hole is a-lettin in the gamma rays, and the BP oil spill has a-wiped out all the shrimp, and the Germans is now a-making all their Mercedes with sunlight, and the oceans is a-risin, and a makin me a-drown, here in Ohio, and the spotted owl is a knocking over liquor stores cause we destroyed their natural habitat, now they're on food stamps! You know, one time the little boy will cry wolf, and you will be right, but nobody will listen, because as an act of green faith, you have been pushing the message once too often. Sir, I cannot partake of you Green Rites Church, but rest assured,I do read the literature. Are you a bible thumper? Certainly helps explain your gross ignorance of the scientific method. Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: 11-Mar-2014 17:10:21 + Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com I hopefully, wouldn't think that there's a tea party or libertarian view of science. The libertarians, unless I am wrong, are 100% pro-science, many atheists, and all that. Your 1 extinction rate claim appears specious, because if this was the case, not a tweet bird wouldn't exist, nor we be doing the Everything List two-step. Precisely -- that is YOUR GUESS. You are basically admitting that you are too lazy to do the research and investigate the available public domain information and data that exists, and that has been compiled for over a hundred and fifty years or more with increasing accuracy and quantity of data over time. You demonstrate a total lack of understanding of just how many species of life exist on this planet -- hint it is far greater than the census of song birds in your back yard. What you just admit you did -- to form your opinion -- is not science, but a shallow anecdotal impression your Tea Party addled brain feels comfortable with. Your opinion is worthless. And so is mine. Fortunately there is a vast body of field data, of biological censuses taken over time. The figure of 100,000 times the background rate of extinction is derived from this body of existing data; It is also rather more rigorous than your anecdotal certainty. Do you really wish to continue making an idiot of yourself? My guess is that whatever the human species is doing it is killing off lots of fauna and plants, especially in the hungry countries that want their people to live better, materially. Having said that, it isn't 1 times etc. If the greens were sane, and I submit they are all limbic, More of your bovine (unsupported anecdotal) opinions it must be very self-affirming to live in this fact free world; where beliefs become reality by being fervently believed. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post
Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 10:57 PM Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating Yes indeed! And the acid rain is a-pouring down, and everyone's face is a-sizzlin and a-popin from the sulphur, and the Ozone hole is a-lettin in the gamma rays, and the BP oil spill has a-wiped out all the shrimp, and the Germans is now a-making all their Mercedes with sunlight, and the oceans is a-risin, and a makin me a-drown, here in Ohio, and the spotted owl is a knocking over liquor stores cause we destroyed their natural habitat, now they're on food stamps! You know, one time the little boy will cry wolf, and you will be right, but nobody will listen, because as an act of green faith, you have been pushing the message once too often. Sir, I cannot partake of you Green Rites Church, but rest assured,I do read the literature. Are you a bible thumper? Certainly helps explain your gross ignorance of the scientific method. Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: 11-Mar-2014 17:10:21 + Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com I hopefully, wouldn't think that there's a tea party or libertarian view of science. The libertarians, unless I am wrong, are 100% pro-science, many atheists, and all that. Your 1 extinction rate claim appears specious, because if this was the case, not a tweet bird wouldn't exist, nor we be doing the Everything List two-step. Precisely -- that is YOUR GUESS. You are basically admitting that you are too lazy to do the research and investigate the available public domain information and data that exists, and that has been compiled for over a hundred and fifty years or more with increasing accuracy and quantity of data over time. You demonstrate a total lack of understanding of just how many species of life exist on this planet -- hint it is far greater than the census of song birds in your back yard. What you just admit you did -- to form your opinion -- is not science, but a shallow anecdotal impression your Tea Party addled brain feels comfortable with. Your opinion is worthless. And so is mine. Fortunately there is a vast body of field data, of biological censuses taken over time. The figure of 100,000 times the background rate of extinction is derived from this body of existing data; It is also rather more rigorous than your anecdotal certainty. Do you really wish to continue making an idiot of yourself? My guess is that whatever the human species is doing it is killing off lots of fauna and plants, especially in the hungry countries that want their people to live better, materially. Having said that, it isn't 1 times etc. If the greens were sane, and I submit they are all limbic, More of your bovine (unsupported anecdotal) opinions it must be very self-affirming to live in this fact free world; where beliefs become reality by being fervently believed. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
-Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Jesus, Chris. You must think that people all fit into nice little shoe boxes, easily, applied taxonimies. Yea vearilly, no. No just people, like you, who make non-sensical assertions such as: because they can hear tweety birds in their backyard, the global extinction rate cannot possibly be at 10,000 times the average background rate of extinction on this planet, because otherwise how could there still be tweety birds for our scientific observer to hear? Recent studies have estimated that there are around eukaryotic 8.7 million species on the planet -- and this is just the eukaryotic species (and then there are many millions of additional species of Archaea, Bacteria and all those proto-alive viruses). How many of these species do you think you can see in your backyard? Does it begin to dawn in your head why I don't take you seriously at all? For, if you confuse such kind of anecdotal BS for science you are profoundly ignorant of what science is, both in its ideal sense and even to quite an extent in its imperfect day to day practice. And when you mix your profound ignorance of science -- based on how you rely on laughably non-scientific surveys as the rather flippant and non-thinking basis for -- in this particular case -- your assertion that the extinction rates cannot possibly be that high, because you have song birds in your backyard mix it in with your heartfelt vocation towards preaching your Tea Party screed... to anyone and everyone (as if you were a talking point conveyance mechanism) it begins to become rather unpleasant for me at least. Not everyone, spudboy, just you. Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com Yes indeed! And the acid rain is a-pouring down, and everyone's face is a-sizzlin and a-popin from the sulphur, and the Ozone hole is a-lettin in the gamma rays, and the BP oil spill has a-wiped out all the shrimp, and the Germans is now a-making all their Mercedes with sunlight, and the oceans is a-risin, and a makin me a-drown, here in Ohio, and the spotted owl is a knocking over liquor stores cause we destroyed their natural habitat, now they're on food stamps! You know, one time the little boy will cry wolf, and you will be right, but nobody will listen, because as an act of green faith, you have been pushing the message once too often. Sir, I cannot partake of you Green Rites Church, but rest assured,I do read the literature. Are you a bible thumper? Certainly helps explain your gross ignorance of the scientific method. Chris -Original Message-From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.comTo: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.comSent: 11-Mar-2014 17:10:21 +Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com I hopefully, wouldn't think that there's a tea party or libertarian view of science. The libertarians, unless I am wrong, are 100% pro-science, many atheists, and all that. Your 1 extinction rate claim appears specious, because if this was the case, not a tweet bird wouldn't exist, nor we be doing the Everything List two-step. Precisely -- that is YOUR GUESS. You are basically admitting that you are too lazy to do the research and investigate the available public domain information and data that exists, and that has been compiled for over a hundred and fifty years or more with increasing accuracy and quantity of data over time. You demonstrate a total lack of understanding of just how many species of life exist on this planet -- hint it is far greater than the census of song birds in your back yard. What you just admit you did -- to form your opinion -- is not science, but a shallow anecdotal impression your Tea Party addled brain feels comfortable with. Your opinion is worthless. And so is mine. Fortunately there is a vast body of field data, of biological censuses taken over time. The figure of 100,000 times the background rate of extinction is derived from this body of existing data; It is also rather more rigorous than your anecdotal certainty. Do you really wish to continue making an idiot of yourself? My guess is that whatever the human species is doing it is killing off lots of fauna and plants, especially in the hungry countries that want their people to live better, materially. Having said that, it isn't 1 times etc. If the greens were sane, and I submit they are all limbic, More of your bovine (unsupported anecdotal) opinions it must be very self-affirming to live in this fact free world; where beliefs become reality by being fervently believed. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group.To
RE: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Sorry Chris, in a world of nasty, stubborn, skeptics, unwilling to genuflect at the great, green Gaia, expect lots of disagreeable people like me. What you have put forth does not line up well with cause and effect, but rather, ideology. I'll pass, thank you. Of course, I heartily agree that you are most disagreeable. the kind of giant of clear headed human intellect, who responds to facts with fulminations trailing off into nonsensical strings of words. a kind of Tea Party inspired stream of consciousness. I wouldn't expect anything less of you; nor more.. And that's the rub now, isn't it? Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com -Original Message- From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com? ] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com Jesus, Chris. You must think that people all fit into nice little shoe boxes, easily, applied taxonimies. Yea vearilly, no. No just people, like you, who make non-sensical assertions such as: because they can hear tweety birds in their backyard, the global extinction rate cannot possibly be at 10,000 times the average background rate of extinction on this planet, because otherwise how could there still be tweety birds for our scientific observer to hear? Recent studies have estimated that there are around eukaryotic 8.7 million species on the planet -- and this is just the eukaryotic species (and then there are many millions of additional species of Archaea, Bacteria and all those proto-alive viruses). How many of these species do you think you can see in your backyard? Does it begin to dawn in your head why I don't take you seriously at all? For, if you confuse such kind of anecdotal BS for science you are profoundly ignorant of what science is, both in its ideal sense and even to quite an extent in its imperfect day to day practice. And when you mix your profound ignorance of science -- based on how you rely on laughably non-scientific surveys as the rather flippant and non-thinking basis for -- in this particular case -- your assertion that the extinction rates cannot possibly be that high, because you have song birds in your backyard mix it in with your heartfelt vocation towards preaching your Tea Party screed... to anyone and everyone (as if you were a talking point conveyance mechanism) it begins to become rather unpleasant for me at least. Not everyone, spudboy, just you. Chris -Original Message- From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.com From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com Yes indeed! And the acid rain is a-pouring down, and everyone's face is a-sizzlin and a-popin from the sulphur, and the Ozone hole is a-lettin in the gamma rays, and the BP oil spill has a-wiped out all the shrimp, and the Germans is now a-making all their Mercedes with sunlight, and the oceans is a-risin, and a makin me a-drown, here in Ohio, and the spotted owl is a knocking over liquor stores cause we destroyed their natural habitat, now they're on food stamps! You know, one time the little boy will cry wolf, and you will be right, but nobody will listen, because as an act of green faith, you have been pushing the message once too often. Sir, I cannot partake of you Green Rites Church, but rest assured,I do read the literature. Are you a bible thumper? Certainly helps explain your gross ignorance of the scientific method. Chris -Original Message-From: Chris de Morsella cdemorse...@yahoo.comTo: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.comSent: 11-Mar-2014 17:10:21 +Subject: Re: The situation at Fukushima appears to be deteriorating From: spudboy...@aol.com spudboy...@aol.com I hopefully, wouldn't think that there's a tea party or libertarian view of science. The libertarians, unless I am wrong, are 100% pro-science, many atheists, and all that. Your 1 extinction rate claim appears specious, because if this was the case, not a tweet bird wouldn't exist, nor we be doing the Everything List two-step. Precisely -- that is YOUR GUESS. You are basically admitting that you are too lazy to do the research and investigate the available public domain information and data that exists, and that has been compiled for over a hundred and fifty years or more with increasing accuracy and quantity of data over time. You demonstrate a total lack of understanding of just how many species of life exist on this planet -- hint it is far greater than the census of song birds in your back yard. What you just admit you did -- to form your opinion -- is not science, but a shallow anecdotal impression your Tea Party addled brain feels comfortable with. Your opinion is worthless. And so is mine. Fortunately there is a vast body of field
