I know of a scientist who smuggled a small amount of plutonium into the US. It was needed for an XRF instrument.

I wonder how much of this goes on for legit scientific investigations simply because the legal channels are so difficult to deal with.

Even better.

If you are dealing with online job apps you have already lost.

Over my 35 year technical career I've never found it necessary to use one of these.

is much bigger than 25 cm. I am very happy that they will be able to see it clearly.

No question, particularly in Arizona. The lack of rain makes it "older" on the surface, less erosion. I would love to build a giant metal detector and go searching for meteoroids and the like. I lived in Phoenix and miss roaming around the govt. land, which is plentiful, so there isn't anyone to ask permission. Just do the roaming in the winter, which is very mild, bring lots of water and curiosity. The mountains are climbable and everything is fairly accessible. You can bet most every day will be sunny and clear.

Anyone can flag a lot of shit. The question is how many of the flagging is meaningful and how much of it is like stuff you see on Drudge Report.

In other words how many false positives were output along with this?

United.

Massachusetts has great schools, among the best in the world.

They don't have a 12 month school year.

The first thing to do is getting the normal school year working properly across the US. Then we can come back and talk about 12 month school years.

You worked on the HAWK? That's pretty cool. My father worked on it during the 60's; he was a materials scientist. They were having a problem with the accumulator failing. I remember spending a Saturday afternoon in a field behind Raytheon watching them test accumulators by blowing them up in holes dug in the ground. Amazingly long service life on that system.

During the Cuban missile crises the President of Raytheon was coming to our house in the evening with X-Rays of accumulators which my father would individually approve or reject after viewing them. That work is why the US had HAWKs in service during the missile crisis. Pretty hairy stuff.

Russia has been using natural gas in efforts to economically blackmail various parts of Europe for a while now.

One of the effects of this is to cause prices of fertilizer and as a result grain production and food costs in Eastern Europe to vary quite a bit depending on the political situation. This innovation would help considerably.

Another nice aspect of this is that China is using a lot of coal in fertilizer production because for them it's a cheaper source of hydrogen than natural gas. This would help China reduce CO2 emissions quite a bit.

> so you also have to consider what the costs will be in the future.

The 9000 kilo gorilla in the corner with nuclear is waste disposal. The assumptions you make there largely drive nuclear economics.

Physics may prevent the antennas needed for long wave radar from working on fighters fast and maneuverable enough to be a threat to the F-35.

What is most likely to happen is that the construction of a 2nd canal will result in overcapacity and a price war. Neither will make money.

China is nominally a Republic too.

In real life it means squat.

It wasn't 'semi-finished'.

The French had excavated some 30,000,000 cu yd in a futile effort to build a fantasy sea level canal in the 13 years they worked there. The US excavated some 170,000,000 cu yards in 10 years PLUS put into place the entire lock system and the massive Gatun dam (largest in the world at the time) and Gatun lake, which was the largest artificial lake in the world. Not to mention other innovations like figuring out how to control diseases like malaria and yellow fever in the region.

The idea that the French did anything worthwhile at the Panama Canal is preposterous and completely counter to the actual facts.