Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Singularity (Score 1) 38

by Scottingham (#47502585) Attached to: Method Rapidly Reconstructs Animal's Development Cell By Cell
Replacing neurons with artificial ones sounds iffy, but other than that I think you're on the right track. So-called 'brains in jars' are probably the way it'll get done. Instead of artificial neurons I could see GM neurons or GM viruses keeping your existing neurons in tip-top shape. Given sufficient sensory stimulation and input there's no physical reason why this could happen indefinitely. Moving from neurons to 'not neurons' is going to be extremely difficult, if not practically impossible.

Comment: Re:Singularity (Score 1) 38

by Scottingham (#47502227) Attached to: Method Rapidly Reconstructs Animal's Development Cell By Cell
No.

This method is currently only for embryology studies. They are only able to track each cell while it is being observed. There are no tracking devices placed into these cells.

What you are proposing would be roughly 100 orders of magnitude more complex. In addition to each cell you'd have to track each synapse connection, which ranges in the 100s of billions.

The only way I could see 'mind uploading' work is if there was some MRI-like machine that could resolve down to the molecular level and was able to take a snapshot of every molecule in its orientation/current velocity. Then, assuming some magical hyper-quantum (whatever) computer could store and then presumably simulate what would happen 'next' with such a snapshot...Then you'd be essentially modeling reality/matter on a quantum scale, and that would be....cool.

Comment: Re:For The Love of Glob! (Score 5, Interesting) 551

by Scottingham (#47457599) Attached to: The Last Three Months Were the Hottest Quarter On Record
Way to prove my point!

I don't give a shit about C02 emissions. It's stupid to assume that the world would give a shit, even if some other countries managed to. Honestly, I'm more pissed off about the other effects of burning coal (have you checked your mercury levels lately?) and fracking.

I'm also not suggesting the earth dies. I'm suggesting we/our economy/culture very may well. The earth doesn't give a shit, it's seen plenty hotter and plenty colder. It's humans that are fucked, well, keeping our pop above 7 billion anyway.

In terms of being a 'far-left' radical...I've hung out with that crowd. They are just as dumb and backwards as the far-right (surprise!). Now, my political philosophies can certainly be considered radical, but I bet not in the way you think. In brief: Computational Socialism (gasp!! The S word!) made viable through modular GW-scale lead-cooled fast reactors.

If your philosophy doesn't involve trying to raise the whole world (countries/borders are inhumane and out of date) out of poverty with the end goal of a stabilized world population...well then...fuck you.

Comment: For The Love of Glob! (Score 4, Insightful) 551

by Scottingham (#47457253) Attached to: The Last Three Months Were the Hottest Quarter On Record
When the hell is the debate going to shift from 'IF' to 'Now what the fuck are we going to do?'

Miami is fucked. NYC, unless they build some wall, is fucked. So where are the debates on how to build the containment walls? Or the storm-proofed shelters? Or the projected increase in FEMA budget?

Or, you know, we could spin our wheels yet again bleeting on and on if humans caused this pickle or not. It doth not matter.

Comment: Best Source Of Real News I've Found So far (Score 3, Informative) 109

by Scottingham (#47431005) Attached to: Google's Experimental Newsroom Avoids Negative Headlines
A few months ago I was trying to look up the latest figures on the Ebola outbreak. All I could find through most news cites were BS articles that wasted 3/4 of their space on the background of what Ebola is and where Sierra Leone is. In my searching I stumbled across a Daily Map Archive from the EU commission.

Each day they bring a new map with news from around the world. Succinct news, showing where it is geographically, with actual figures and no other bullshit. Granted, it's nearly all bad news...but I've learned so much about events around the world that the major news outlets don't cover (too much time covering important things like Brazil Exploitation Theatre or the latest breaking news out of Hollywood).

Thine linken: http://ercportal.jrc.ec.europa...

Coincidentally, their map today is of that very same Ebola outbreak. Things are not looking good.

Comment: Re:Sounds about right... (Score 3, Interesting) 441

The variable you are neglecting to consider is transmission losses.

Look into super-conducting cables. So far, only Germany has managed to get a 1km long super-conducting cable in place for a still tiny % of the energy necessary to make this global grid work in the way you're talking about.

1/3 Local nukes+1/3 wind+ 1/3 solar > coal

Comment: Water Reactors are Teh Suck (Score 5, Informative) 268

by Scottingham (#47285451) Attached to: The EPA Carbon Plan: Coal Loses, But Who Wins?
Of course nuclear power doesn't seem viable if you look at it's current state! All the reactors we have now were designed in the '50s. They use water as a moderator (ie thermal neutrons) and coolant, requiring complex assemblies of fuel rods and control rods. Thermal neutrons also cause way more incidental nuclear waste (irradiated steel cores, wires, etc). They use
It doesn't have to be that way! The most recent design for a fast reactor seems to be the most legitimate and feasible new design to date. It's called the dual fluid reactor. http://dual-fluid-reactor.org/

It separates the fuel loop from the coolant loop. This has numerous advantages. You can alter the rate of either independently to best suit the current need. The coolant used isn't liquid sodium. Which, aside from not playing nice with air and water has a low boiling point and high neutron cross section. This reactor uses liquid lead as its coolant. Its so stable and resistant to radiation that the coolant loop can be piped into the non-containment area for power generation. In the papers I've read they mention coupling it to an MHR generator then a super-critical water loop en route to turbines.

It is engineered to run at 1000C, which at that temperature, makes it possible to do pyro-chemistry with electrodes to filter out the daught products in line with the fuel loop. The separated daughter products are then sent to a passive cooling chamber (the super short lived ones are hooked up to the coolant loop where it contributes to energy production) where they remain hella hot for a few hundred years. Then they become inert. There are supposedly lots of valuble metals after about 90 years that make the waste itself a hot commodity.

The reactor is designed to be a 2 meter cube, for simple production there are no bowed parts, only 90 angles with straight pipes. A reactor this size can put out 1500MW thermal.

Couple this with the recent advancement of laser-based particle accelerators and you wouldn't even have to start with enriched fuel! The power required to drive the laser would be
As Elon Musk would say (probably): Seriously guys, it's the 21st century, act like it!

A method of solution is perfect if we can forsee from the start, and even prove, that following that method we shall attain our aim. -- Leibnitz

Working...