Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:"Unwanted" Methane? (Score 1) 256

by Ihlosi (#46704253) Attached to: Navy Creates Fuel From Seawater
Specifically the methane has to be cooled to -161.49C at 1atm,

In that case, you'd end up with a gaseous fraction that's mostly hydrogen, and a liquid fraction that's methane plus everything else.

I would assume you'd have to cool the mixture to a temperature between -161.49ÂC and -42ÂC (boiling point of the next heavier alkane, propane), so you get hydrogen and methane in the gaseous fraction, and propane and heavier alkanes in the liquid fraction.

Comment: Depends on the effort. (Score 1) 256

by Ihlosi (#46703079) Attached to: Navy Creates Fuel From Seawater
It depends upon what sort of fuel you're trying to produce.

And on how difficult (read: expensive) it is to avoid unwanted byproducts. And on the possible market value of the byproducts.

If you can sell the liquid hydrocarbons that you want to produce and the methane that appears as a by-product for almost the same price, it would be economically counterproductive to spend money on reducing the fraction of unwanted methane. Just produce both and sell both.

Comment: Re:Permanent Habitat? (Score 1) 100

by Ihlosi (#46688177) Attached to: NASA Laying Foundation For Jupiter Moon Space Mission
If something goes wrong on Mars, you're dead. There's no rescue.

Sudden evacuation might be problematic. But with less serious problems, the lower transit time to Mars vs. Europa might be advantageous. You're dead anyway within about 24 months from the lower gravity and radiation (or suicide, if sickness doesn't get you first).

There's no experience with humans living in low gravity conditions for more than a few days. We have plenty of zero-g experience, but none that would tell us what a few months of 1/3 g would do to the human body.

Radiation is a problem, though. Shielded habitats would be a high priority. Either underground, or possibly by using water (produced on-site) as shielding.

Comment: Figure out how to ... (Score 1) 392

by Ihlosi (#46668103) Attached to: How Many People Does It Take To Colonize Another Star System?
... create genetic variety in an artificial way. Hey, if you can get _two_ people (and tons of robots) to another star system, then doing a little bit of DNA-related organic chemistry shouldn't be too hard.

In effect, for a few generations, you could introduce intentional mutations that are known to be somewhere between "marginally harmful" and "beneficial", until the gene pool is large enough that things can be left to random chance again, if the colonists desire.

Comment: At some point, colonization will be ... (Score 1) 306

by Ihlosi (#46653469) Attached to: Should NASA Send Astronauts On Voluntary One-Way Missions?
... de facto one-way. If there's a chance of living to a ripe old age where you're going, then voluntary one-way missions are perfectly fine, especially when they come with the opportunity to stake a claim.

If "one-way" implies using your favorite method of suicide after a few months, then no.

Comment: Re:Sweet revenge (Score 1) 109

by Ihlosi (#46596321) Attached to: Weev's Attorney Says FBI Is Intercepting His Client's Mail
Not carrying out "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" (where does that come from? Possibly the WORST example of literary fairness/justice there is.

Definitely not. "One eye for one eye.", at that time, replaced the proven concept of "You stepped on my toe, so I'm going to kill you, every male in your family, rape every female in your family and kill them, too."

At that time, when ever-increasing vengeance cycles and bloody vendettas were the norm, "One eye for one eye." was a huge limitation on any punishments the injured party could dish out. And don't forget the same piece of literature also demands things like having at least two witnesses in order to sentence anyone to death and forbid the common practice of punishing family members of the offender if the latter proved to be too elusive.

Kill Ugly Processor Architectures - Karl Lehenbauer