Not so.

For commuting in the mornings, apparently it's good to have it plugged in and to have set the battery to do a quick charge before you want to go, that warms the pack up, and at the same time you can also preheat the cabin; that also helps because the climate control doesn't have to use the battery to do that and it clears the windscreen, so you gain both range and convenience.

Actually, the exact same car would get significantly worse mpg in America than in (say) the UK.

The reason is: the American gallon is rather smaller(!)

So it's not really a fair comparison.

Actually the directional antenna helps with both RX and TX directionality and power equally; and there's almost certainly an attenuator that offsets the aerial's gain.

It doesn't help with the power coming from the laptop/tablet, but that's pretty small; some laptops will have gain control on their transmitters as well.

My understanding/way I imagine it is that; as you move towards the blackhole, the particles that make up the astronaut cause the event horizon to come out to meet them, and this curves the event horizon and this causes a local burst of Hawking-type radiation that rips apart the astronaut, and this radiation spreads out from the impact point in a wave; that in turn creates more perturbations of the horizon and so on. You end up with a very thin ring of fire all around the black hole. And this never goes away; indeed it forms the moment the black hole does, and so there's actually nothing inside the blackhole, just flat spacetime. In a sense I suppose the collapse never completely happens you end up with just a shell of matter.

I have only a qualitive understanding of this, but I think Hawking radiation is the radiation that escapes the blackhole; but there's probably some quantum-generated particles produced that don't have enough energy to escape and promptly fall back in again.

So as you fall into the blackhole, it will get warmer and warmer, until you get burnt to a crisp by the Hawking radiation that forms near to the event horizon which is unable to escape.

It's kind of like a sonic boom, or more like a light boom.

So what you're saying is that you used google once and you didn't like 2 of the 10 results?

Search engines before google were universally the biggest heap of junk in the entire history of life on this planet.

No, it's not omnidirectional, he's doing beam forming.

So he creates a 4W beam and aims it at the receiver. That's why when he moved the device, it went out; the beam was missing for a while until the transmitter figured it out and steered the beam to where he was now standing.

This works fine, provided the power density isn't too high; otherwise if people get in the way of the beam then they get heated up. A few watts may be the limit. more if the receiver is bigger.

Theoretical maximum is actually 64k in the UK, but the modem standards were designed to be compatible with the US, which can only handle 56K (7 bit bytes @ 8Khz rather than 8 bits @ 8 Khz) so ... you won't get it.

Technology nearly always ultimately creates jobs, at least for a while.

Economists think that new technologies create jobs, at least in some phases. Generally, there's a few phases. Initially nobody uses the technology, and it's expensive, and nobody makes much money. Then more people use it, and the price starts to drop. This is the point where lots of money is made and usually lots of jobs. Finally, ubiquity, everyone uses it, and it's dirt cheap, relatively few, relatively badly paid jobs, and the total amount of money is not great. At this point you need a new technology. ;-)

e.g. Wireless internet equipment used to be rather more expensive, and all the companies and engineers used to make good money developing it, but now it's dirt cheap, and nobody is making much money on it.

YOU'RE GOING OVER THE SPEED LIMIT OF -127 MPH! YOU HAVE 10 SECONDS TO DECELERATE!
*car slows down below limit*
YOU'RE STILL GOING OVER THE SPEED LIMIT OF -127 MPH! YOU HAVE 5 SECONDS TO DECELERATE!
*car stops*
YOU HAVE BEEN JUDGED AND FOUND GUILTY
*drone fires hellfire missile*
*BOOOM*

HAVE A NICE DAY!
*flies off*

Actually, grids use intermittent energy sources like wind and solar first, not coal, they turn the coal down for those. They're actually cheaper than coal once built, and for new builds, per unit of energy delivered to the consumer, onshore wind is the same cost as coal.

Nope. Nuclear isn't the cleanest or cheapest.

Hydro is the cleanest, and wind and hydro are BOTH widely considered cheaper and more environmentally friendly than nuclear per unit of delivered energy.

Hydro is actually the least safe because sometimes the damn break.

As for safest, it's debatable. Is it really safe if people have to vacate largish areas of land to avoid getting ill and dying??? Because that's what's happened at both Chernobyl and Fukushima; and it was largely luck that that didn't happen like that at 3 mile island.

Unless you're the boss, I fundamentally disagree with the idea that you should have personal standards, that you force onto your colleagues to meet them like that.

In a business situation, the organization should have standards, and that's what they should meet. only if they've done something that is not fit for purpose, then yes, you can and should fail the review. But that's not you just not liking the way they've done it, you have to actually have a good reason to think it won't work.

The purpose of economic activity is to make money, not dot i;s and cross ts.