[VO]: Next Energy News
Howdy Vorts, Another link.. http://www.nextenergynews.com/ Richard
Re: [Vo]:Environmental space
I've been a bit busy this last week so I'll just tidy up on the responses to my thread. Horace - I changed the ambiguous wording from our personal spaceship to I then went on to calculate what size our individual “spaceship” would be today within which we each metaphorically have to live our lives... Jed - so we have about 0.26ha arable land per person - about 50 metres square each. I presume that includes land for milk/dairy production in which case things really are looking tight unless we all go veggie... or get CF jump started... Robin wrote (re my figures):- IMO they are completely meaningless, because they imply that we actually have compete freedom within that space. However that's not how the real world works. We all share the *same* space, and consequently what we do affects everyone else Obviously I agree wholeheartedly with the last sentence - it's shame so many don't realise their responsibilities. The purpose of the calculations was to clear up exactly how small an environmental space we have. Being in the environmental campaign business, I can assure you that there is a widespread belief/faith, almost unconscious in most, that the world is a huge place and that humans cannot adversely affect it in any real way. Once, in the 90's, I was in a meeting with Jersey's Chief finance Minister . Roughly speaking, this darkly humourous exchange took place... NP. - ...and that Sir, is why we need to address the way we do things because current practices are not sustainable. President RJ. - Mr Palmer, I have flown over and seen vast areas of the world - it is empty - there isn't any way that puny humans could affect the world in the way that Friends of the Earth are suggesting. N.P. We only have a couple of hundred yards square per person - the world is just about as full of over consuming humans as it can take. PRJ (spoken forcefully) Mr Palmer - do you believe in a Creator? because I do and the Great Architect would not allow us to do what you are claiming we are doing to the world's systems. NP (brightly) Oh, well in that case organisations like Friends of the Earth are doing the creator's will! The temperature in the room metaphorically dropped by about 40 degrees. PRJ stiffened, adopted a very scary expression, literally started frothing at the mouth and sweating for about 30 seconds before he regained composure and said (opening the door forcefully):- PRJ (sinisterly) - This interview is at an end! My interpretation of what happened is that I had spoken the equivalent of blasphemy in front of the Spanish Inquisition. That was an extreme example of what is behind the views of some of those with their hands on the levers of power. More down to earth business types have just been brainwashed that consumer society is the only thing that works - greed is good - and that they are heroes who deserve enormous rewards for their heroic defense of the system that generates those enormous financial rewards. Any naysayers should be disbelieved and characterised as naive fools. They almost literally don't see that they have any responsibility at all for the wider effects of their activities on the life support systems of Earth - mostly they believe that environmental threats are lies or just wildly exaggerated and that we actually have plenty of lebensraum. Sadly there are many neo con think tanks and such excrescences as Rush Limbaugh to reinforce the brainwashing. The purpose of my calculations was simply to blast these people out of their complacency with simple maths that is easily checkable.
[Vo]:Re: Next Energy News
Richard wrote:- Howdy Vorts, Another link.. http://www.nextenergynews.com/ This is a great digest site for partially baked technology...
Re: [Vo]:Bin Laden trades
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 8:49 PM, thomas malloy wrote: Taylor J. Smith wrote: Hi All, Meanwhile, the oil glut is intensifying as the U. S. miltary has been able to nullify Bush's laughable sabre rattling, increasing the probability of $40 per barrel oil before the end of 2008. The terror $40 / barrel oil? What planet are you living on? Perhaps that planet where the roads are advertised as being paved in gold? Gold plated, more likely. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Re: Next Energy News
Nick Palmer wrote: Richard wrote:- Howdy Vorts, Another link.. http://www.nextenergynews.com/ This is a great digest site for partially baked technology... Howdy Richard, Nick, A fun website. Thanks! This site is assured to be as informative as where to find the latest scuttlebutt on those pesky UFOS. http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/01-06a-05.asp or http://tinyurl.com/4sffj Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [VO]: Next Energy News
- Original Message From: R C Macaulay Howdy Vorts, Another link.. http://www.nextenergynews.com/ Richard Way cool site for the inventive mind and those seeking alternatives to conventional methods ! Here is one such example of a product announcement (actual availability unknown) which has all kinds of potential synergy in alternative energy. http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news3.17a.html Metal Foam ... presumably this is a bit like taking steel wool to the next level. Following the recent update on the Kanzius method of RF irradiation of salt-water, yielding H2, any number of potential variations on that basic theme have come to mind allways looking for possible synergy. One such potential hybrid - alluded to earlier, would combine both the normal DC electrolysis of salt-water, presumably at lower than normal voltage, but in a cell which is simultaneously pumped with RF. A major goal of any kind of ultra efficient electrolysis might involve maximizing HOOH at the anode, instead of O2. The Kanzius method might facilitate this- and might be itself facilitated (boosted) if there was an imposed electric field, in addition to the near field of the salt ions which are being jiggled. This would be under the unproved assumption that at very low voltage, perhaps well under one volt, peroxide and H2 can be formed at the same Faradaic rate as in H2 and O2 in a normal cell. Most experts in electrochemistry firmly believe that goal this is not achievable - since, in its ultimate form, it would seem to violate the LoT. That is not necessarily the case, if the process can remove ambient heat. But here again the balance which would be demanded - of adding energy in the form of both RF and DC and at the same time actively removing heat from an operating cell at a rather high rate, seems equally insurmountable to most experts. The current which flows in such a cell which would normally produce heat, instead removes it- and as such falls under that nebulous terminology of cold electricity. There is some reason to believe, however, that so-called displacement current can be engineered to remove heat and as such can be identified as cold. Even though they are 'probably' correct ... the possibility is worth exploring IMHO. Fortunately few of that mentality frequent this forum or they would jump on this suggestion with merciless vengence. Jones BTW: The inimitable James Clerk Maxwell invented the concept of displacement current, dD/dt, in order to make Ampère's law consistent with conservation of charge and other small details which prop up the LoT. His original interpretation was as a real movement of charge, but with correspondence to dipole charges in the aether. Although the geniuses who followed Maxwell have abandoned the aether as a fiction, this original interpretation may be more valid than they ever imagined. That is: as soon as some uneducated inventor, who doesn't know better, can demonstrate a robust cell which both produces hydrogen at impossible rates and also removes ambient heat to retain thermodynamic neutrality- we will be left with the only option to return to Maxwell while redefining aether to accommodate a certain kind of nano-lever which is now known as the Casimir force.
[Vo]:The Twinkle in Clarke's sk(eye)
Author-Authur wrote a short story 55 years ago - “The Nine Billion Names of God” which has not received as much comment in the various obits which have come out -- as the more famous Childhood's End ... which curiously, was written at almost the exact same time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Billion_Names_of_God ... in which story, computer programmers were sent to a remotemonastery in Tibet to help the monks compile alist of all the names of God. The story offers more surprising insight into the kind of spiritual atheism which Clarke is suspected of harboring. His was a kind of Buddhist outlook, more so than atheistic. Never mind that in a rewrite of the tale in 2008, any old X-boxes could do the job of figuring our all the permutations of the possible names in about 10 microseconds. That is part of the quaint naiveté of many Sci-Fi stories from the fifties, when looked back in retrospect. Anyway, ACC's story came around long before the X-box was available; and to make the plot work, it was said that once the list was complete the monksbelieved that the pre-ordained cosmic destiny of our planet would be fulfilled; and the worldwould end. This is somewhat reminiscent of the denouement of Childhood's End ... at least in transactional relevance. Take the two plots together, and you have the insight into Clarke's kind of Zen. The reason this came to mind just now, was not only the recnet changes in the night sky - but also a song playing on internet radio as I was stargazing last night, The song was titled 9 million bicycles in Beijing. Isn't the human mind a very strange kind of information processor ? BTW the short story ends with the programmers fleeing the monastery to escape the monks’ disfavor -- since the program finished the task, and the world was still there, but oops... one of them looks up: “Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out.” Come to think of it without Authur around, the night sky does seem to twinkle less that before. Jones
Re: [Vo]:The Twinkle in Clarke's sk(eye)
One of my favs. Here's the whole short story: http://lucis.net/stuff/clarke/9billion_clarke.html Terry On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author-Authur wrote a short story 55 years ago - The Nine Billion Names of God which has not received as much comment in the various obits which have come out -- as the more famous Childhood's End ... which curiously, was written at almost the exact same time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Billion_Names_of_God ... in which story, computer programmers were sent to a remotemonastery in Tibet to help the monks compile alist of all the names of God. The story offers more surprising insight into the kind of spiritual atheism which Clarke is suspected of harboring. His was a kind of Buddhist outlook, more so than atheistic. Never mind that in a rewrite of the tale in 2008, any old X-boxes could do the job of figuring our all the permutations of the possible names in about 10 microseconds. That is part of the quaint naiveté of many Sci-Fi stories from the fifties, when looked back in retrospect. Anyway, ACC's story came around long before the X-box was available; and to make the plot work, it was said that once the list was complete the monksbelieved that the pre-ordained cosmic destiny of our planet would be fulfilled; and the worldwould end. This is somewhat reminiscent of the denouement of Childhood's End ... at least in transactional relevance. Take the two plots together, and you have the insight into Clarke's kind of Zen. The reason this came to mind just now, was not only the recnet changes in the night sky - but also a song playing on internet radio as I was stargazing last night, The song was titled 9 million bicycles in Beijing. Isn't the human mind a very strange kind of information processor ? BTW the short story ends with the programmers fleeing the monastery to escape the monks' disfavor -- since the program finished the task, and the world was still there, but oops... one of them looks up: Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out. Come to think of it without Authur around, the night sky does seem to twinkle less that before. Jones
Re: [Vo]:The Twinkle in Clarke's sk(eye)
Thanks Terry for making this story available. Although Sir Clark provides a cute tale, it resets on the hubris of the human belief that God cares what we do and has any more or less interest than for the billions of other aware life forms in the universe. In fact, the salvation of our life form rests on accepting that we are only a very small part of the total intelligence of the universe. Once this idea is accepted, we would have less incentive to war on each other. Instead, we could start to accept what we need to understand from our situation rather than make up beliefs that we fight over. Ed Terry Blanton wrote: One of my favs. Here's the whole short story: http://lucis.net/stuff/clarke/9billion_clarke.html Terry On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author-Authur wrote a short story 55 years ago - The Nine Billion Names of God which has not received as much comment in the various obits which have come out -- as the more famous Childhood's End ... which curiously, was written at almost the exact same time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Billion_Names_of_God ... in which story, computer programmers were sent to a remotemonastery in Tibet to help the monks compile alist of all the names of God. The story offers more surprising insight into the kind of spiritual atheism which Clarke is suspected of harboring. His was a kind of Buddhist outlook, more so than atheistic. Never mind that in a rewrite of the tale in 2008, any old X-boxes could do the job of figuring our all the permutations of the possible names in about 10 microseconds. That is part of the quaint naiveté of many Sci-Fi stories from the fifties, when looked back in retrospect. Anyway, ACC's story came around long before the X-box was available; and to make the plot work, it was said that once the list was complete the monksbelieved that the pre-ordained cosmic destiny of our planet would be fulfilled; and the worldwould end. This is somewhat reminiscent of the denouement of Childhood's End ... at least in transactional relevance. Take the two plots together, and you have the insight into Clarke's kind of Zen. The reason this came to mind just now, was not only the recnet changes in the night sky - but also a song playing on internet radio as I was stargazing last night, The song was titled 9 million bicycles in Beijing. Isn't the human mind a very strange kind of information processor ? BTW the short story ends with the programmers fleeing the monastery to escape the monks' disfavor -- since the program finished the task, and the world was still there, but oops... one of them looks up: Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out. Come to think of it without Authur around, the night sky does seem to twinkle less that before. Jones
Re: [Vo]:The Twinkle in Clarke's sk(eye)
Edmund Storms wrote: Thanks Terry for making this story available. Although Sir Clark provides a cute tale, it resets on the hubris of the human belief that God cares what we do and has any more or less interest than for the billions of other aware life forms in the universe. Yes, but Clarke did not believe any such thing. The story is a lark. Clarke was an atheist. See: http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/clarke_19_2.html - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Twinkle in Clarke's sk(eye)
I realize the story is fiction and it does not represent Clarke's views. In fact, the plot might even be considered sarcasm because it is based on a simple-minded attitude that many people have about humans being God's chosen people. Clarke might well have been poking fun at people who think God is just waiting for us to do certain tasks. He chose naming God as the task, but various religions very seriously choose other tasks. If these tasks are not done a certain way, God will take vengeance or provide rewards if they are done correctly. To me, the story is a simple allegory that pokes fun without stirring up trouble. Whether this was Clarke's view is unknown. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: Thanks Terry for making this story available. Although Sir Clark provides a cute tale, it resets on the hubris of the human belief that God cares what we do and has any more or less interest than for the billions of other aware life forms in the universe. Yes, but Clarke did not believe any such thing. The story is a lark. Clarke was an atheist. See: http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/clarke_19_2.html - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Twinkle in Clarke's sk(eye)
Back in the late 1970s I actually had the fortune of being cast in a small bit part for an amateur audio production of ACC's Nine Million Names of God sponsored by our local Science Fiction community based in Madison, Wisconsin. Thirty years later I remember very little about the experience other than the fact that I think I played the part of one of the programmer troglodytes. It was a fun experience, however I felt intimidated every time it was time to read my lines. Occasional bouts of what I eventually learned was a form of Dyslexia (which had the capacity of striking at any time) made the experience somewhat stressful. I agree with Jed that ACC was an atheist through and through, even though I suspect we are both probably in agreement over the fact that he was more spiritual than most beings. I found ACC's novel 3001 The Final Odyssey to be one of my favorites. It wasn't one of his better stories. Nevertheless, I got the distinct feeling as I read it that Arthur wrote it more for his own enjoyment than for any other reason. I think he was having fun speculating on what he hoped the world would evolve into in another thousand years. I liked his reptilian raptors, which when genetically altered turned out to be excellent gardeners. They also made great nannies. It was a fun romp. I suspect that if anyone were to be so foolish as to conduct a seance and attempt to communicate with the spirit of Arthur from the Great Beyond all they would get back for their efforts would be disturbing visions of a black void filled with stern emptiness. Nobody here! Nothing! Zilch! Well, of course, you ninny! Arthur was an atheist. He's dead! And that's the way it's gong to stay. I can respect that. Same with Douglas Adams too. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.Zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Twinkle in Clarke's sk(eye)
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 2:56 PM, OrionWorks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He's dead! Is he? He lives within us and on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLXQ7rNgWwg His last public statements. Terry
Re: [Vo]:The Twinkle in Clarke's sk(eye)
Edmund Storms wrote: I realize the story is fiction and it does not represent Clarke's views. In fact, the plot might even be considered sarcasm . . . Yes, gentle sarcasm, although he would not be a bit surprised if someone took it seriously. To me, the story is a simple allegory that pokes fun without stirring up trouble. That is just what Clarke often did! He did not like trouble or hard feelings. For example, editors at the Sci. Am. recently described their visit with him in 1999, in New York: Clarke gently berated us for not taking cold fusion seriously enough. Most researchers had dismissed it a decade earlier, but he still believed that a revolutionary discovery could come from the experiments of the smattering of remaining devotees. I am sure he was gentle, even though he told me and other people that he was pretty upset with them. He was well aware of the editors' letters to me, in which they said they are certain cold fusion is bogus, and they never read any papers on cold fusion because reading papers isn't their job. He shared my opinion of such views. But he was not a confrontational or angry person. If I had those people I would express cold contempt, and I would end the conversation quickly and leave, because I would be tempted to start yelling, or to slug them, which would not help. If Gene Mallove had met them all hell would have broken loose. Whether this was Clarke's view is unknown. I am pretty sure it was. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Twinkle in Clarke's sk(eye)
On 28/3/2008 2:56 PM, OrionWorks wrote: I suspect that if anyone were to be so foolish as to conduct a seance and attempt to communicate with the spirit of Arthur from the Great Beyond all they would get back for their efforts would be disturbing visions of a black void filled with stern emptiness. Nobody here! Nothing! Zilch! Well, of course, you ninny! Arthur was an atheist. He's dead! And that's the way it's gong to stay. hmm, you make an afterlife sound like a self-fulfilling prophecy. i.e. If you don't believe in an afterlife you won't get one but if you do believe in one you will have one, although it might be up to (your) God to decide what *kind* of afterlife you deserve. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Environmental space
In reply to Nick Palmer's message of Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:30:59 -: Hi Nick, [snip] The purpose of my calculations was simply to blast these people out of their complacency with simple maths that is easily checkable. [snip] In that case, might I suggest a table of numbers indicating exactly what effect we *are* having on the planet (e.g. measures of pollution) and the consequences thereof, rather than dividing the planet up into hypothetical spaces. Global warming is one such. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
