Multiple-Tesla fields that are changing their orientation rapidly in time aren't particularly healthy to be around. Induced currents in your nerves, heating, etc. That MRI field is acceptable because it's DC. That is, if you don't have any ferromagnetic objects on you.
No, the superconductors are not simple magnets.
What's on the tele then?
Rockets being the only solution does not automatically mean rockets are a viable solution. Please quit ignoring the real challenges presented.
Unfortunately, this can't be approached as an engineering problem and get the result you would like. It needs to be approached as a problem in fundamental research of the physics underlying our world.
There were lots of efforts to miniaturize the vacuum tube. They only resulted in smaller tubes. It took new insights in fundamental physics before people could understand how to make a transistor. There were many experiments with germanium (a natural semiconductor) that could have led to the transistor before 1947 if anyone had understood what was happening.
Some steel. Not all of them. That's why the refrigerator magnet doesn't stick to that silver door.
A field strong enough to work on water would kill you first.
Look at the amount of money made on oscillococcinum, and you might agree it's a successful hack to make money from the stupidity of others.
This would be cool if it was more than a stage trick. The superconductor needed to do this used to be mail-ordered from Edmund Scientific. So lots of hackers were doing levitation demonstrations in the 90's. People think it's cool because they've not lived through that, or have forgotten it.
It works on the principle of superconductors excluding a magnetic field. When they are cooled to liquid nitrogen temperatures. Steel is low in ferromagnetism and isn't as good a conductor as copper so it's not as good for making electromagnets.
Well, I did that once with a bottle of liquid nitrogen from Airco and a superconductor I bought from Edmund Scientific. This was before there was a Slashdot. So, no, not impressive.
Before someone makes a working hoverboard, we will first hear about the principle that makes it possible. Because one that's practical is almost guaranteed to get someone a Nobel Prize. And certainly Lexus would go for that if they could.
No new principles lately. There is an existing principle of magnetic repulsion that would work only in an extreme condition. One requiring really special stuff buried in the street, and probably including liquid nitrogen to keep it working for even a short time and a few feet.
So, it's a gimmick.
Hey, I hang out with a lot of creative people. Not Elon Musk, but Steve Jobs for more than a decade, and lots of people at least as smart that you don't know. They can be really brilliant, and successful, and they can still make really stupid mistakes and sell them to the rest of us pretty well because they believe in themselves completely and they have a track record. I've done that too.
That's the hyperloop. Something Elon never meant to stand behind (and still really isn't), just put out there to torpedo a worthy project that he didn't believe in.
Anyone who looks at the hyperloop design can see it's not a no-brainer. It has safety issues up the wazoo
Meanwhile, little Switzerland can have incredible trains everywhere and the United States can't get it together, and unlike with rockets and cars Elon's not helping this time. And I am not sure that the "lease" part of his solar business is a great thing for the world either.
Although the hyperloop is possible and might even be practical someday, let's please be honest about the reason it was created. Elon Musk just wanted to kill the California high-speed rail.
That might have been OK if there was a hope that we could actually replace it practically with a hyperloop. But given the history of bleeding-edge rail - ride any maglevs lately? We haven't even had much success with monorails outside of theme parks and Las Vegas - we don't really have any working system to replace high-speed rail. Hyperloop should really be called "Pipes that carry People" and we need decades of work on it before considering intercity lines.
If the same blob was included in chip's ROM, nobody would think it's different from before right?
Yes, we would think it's different because it is different. When the functionality of that blob is in a ROM chip or circuitry, nobody can update it, including the proprietor, without hardware modification or hardware replacement. When the functionality is in software or any kind of reprogrammable device, the question becomes who is allowed to run, inspect, share, and modify that code. This is an important ethical distinction that the developmental philosophy of the younger open source movement was designed to never raise as an issue because that movement wants to pitch a message of cheap labor to businesses.
All the questions of software freedom enter the picture because you're dealing with software now. All the issues that the open source movement was designed not to raise (older essay on this topic, newer essay on this topic) the older free software movement raised over a decade before the open source movement began.
If this code were distributed as Free Software to its users, this could be great news for all of us (even the majority of computer users who will never fully take advantage of these freedoms because they're never going to become programmers). Programmers can accomplish wonderful practical benefits like putting in interesting features, fixing bugs, learning from the code, all while being friendly with others by giving or selling services based on improving that code, and helping to keep users safe from malware all along the way.
If this code is distributed as non-free user-subjugating software (a.k.a. proprietary software), the proprietor (Intel in this case) is the only party who can inspect, share, and modify that code. And users (regardless of technical ability) are purposefully left out of controlling their own computers, which is unethical.
"Apple bashing"? How inarticulate and ultimately blindly supportive of a known repeat bad actor to keep their customers from controlling the iThings they buy. It's hardly far-fetched to see how the company receives bad press. They've made an ugly history for themselves rife with mistreating workers, users, and harming the environment. They found they could get away with non-freedom in software also exploits app developers "mercilessly" as Richard Stallman put it on his reasons why one shouldn't do business with Apple. Apple also uses digital restrictions management on eBooks which is set up so that those eBooks won't work on jailbroken iThings, stuck users with a U2 album and made it hard to delete, censors bitcoin apps for iThings, deauthorized a Wikileaks access application, banned an erotic novel from iTunes because of its cover, left a security hole in iTunes unfixed for 3 years, and more.
The logistics of having an exodus making a significant difference are somewhat difficult though. Consider the current birth rate of 350K new humans per day and compare with the lack of orbital launch capacity. Then try to figure out how to reach the manufacturing capability to build hundreds of city sized starships per year. One of the variables is going to have to change in some way or spreading across the galaxy isn't going to do much to reduce earth population.
Well, maybe someone will find a couple of dozen stargates tucked away somewhere.
He who steps on others to reach the top has good balance.
