Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: What's the motivation? (Score 1) 179

I notice you have dropped your other argument without acknowledging it.

And no, I do not have reading comprehension problems. "I made a mistake" puts the blame on you. "[something] made me make a mistake" puts the blame on [something].

Given that English is not your first language (my presumption being based on a reference to German news sources in 1986) I think it's fair to say that this is an understandable error. English is a fucked up amalgamation often jokingly referred to as "three other languages in a trench coat" so a simple grammatical error like this is easily explained by the language barrier. I have a bunch of German colleagues that all have some word and grammatical choices when speaking English (saying things like "unpossible" rather than "impossible," for example) that probably make perfect sense as a direct translation and I would think this falls into that category, wouldn't you say?

Comment Re:Finally (Score 1) 157

Now if only the AFP story would kill the seemingly-endless "Climate change is making [insert location here] warm up twice as fast as everywhere else" stories that, if you put them all together, would imply that the entire world is warming twice as fast as the entire world... demonstrating how idiotic these stories are.

Comment Re: What's the motivation? (Score 1) 179

At that time, we had no WWW ... so I hardly can point you to a German news source that shows it was a graphite explosion.

Are you suggesting that German news sources don't have archives? It's amazing what we can do with computers these days. But, sure, it doesn't sound fair to ask you to look for a needle in a stack of needles, so I'll let that go.

Lets check German Wikidpedia?

Let's.

Well, the German text neither mentions a steam explosion, nor calls the "fire of the graphite" and explosion. It is just named fire.

Funny, I found the text with little difficulty, and I speak like thirty words of German. From German Wikipedia:

Durch die Überschreitung der (lokalen) Auslegungsleistung wurden die Kanäle der Steuerstäbe blockiert und die exponentielle Leistungssteigerung war nicht mehr aufzuhalten. Schlagartig verdampften große Mengen Kühlwassers, und der dabei entstehende hohe Druck ließ den Reaktor bersten.

Additionally, with regard to your "I did not say that" you said "your steam bullshit made me type wrong." You certainly placed the blame for your error upon me.

Comment Re: What's the motivation? (Score 1) 179

1986 when the even happened: it was classified as a wild graphite fire that resulted in the explosion of a huge pile of graphite.

You have the cause and effect reversed. The cooling water in the reactor became supercritical and flashed to steam, causing the explosion. The graphite burned because it was already extremely hot and the explosion allowed oxygen to get to it, completing the fire triangle. I am old enough to remember 1986, too, and I would be interested in seeing your "1986 news source" that claims the graphite exploded, as solid graphite does not do that. Perhaps you are simply misremembering?

Your steam bullshit made me type wrong.

I respect that you originally wrote "hydrogen" in your previous comment and made a typographical error. However, there is no "steam bullshit" as this is the actual cause of the explosion. Additionally, "look at what you made me do" is something people who cannot accept responsibility for their own actions say when they're trying to blame other people for their errors.

Comment Re: What's the motivation? (Score 1) 179

It is not called a steam explosion when the graphite moderator block explodes in fire. Obviously in such an explosion a lot of steam from the cooling system is created.

The graphite was not the material that provided the explosive force, the steam was. That's why it's called "a steam explosion." If you blow up a rockface with TNT, it's a "TNT explosion" and not "a rock explosion." This is not a difficult concept.

Fukushima "melted down" after power loss, due to the tsunami, and steam explosions wrecking the reactor vessels

Damn, you just love getting shit wrong. They were hydrogen explosions.

Comment Re:Won't matter to me (Score 1) 29

Wow, someone from the future. What is 2917 like?

I'm not from the future. It's just that time is cyclical.

There are various hypotheses to explain it, such that the universe is cyclical or that we're stuck in a time loop. But the most broadly accepted hypothesis is that a prior civilization collapsed at the end of year 32,767, and it has taken us almost 35,000 years to get back to where we are now.

Of course, our calendar doesn't allow for a year 0, so we may have an off-by-one error. But then again people celebrated the millennium at the end of 1999, so maybe there's a tacit assumption that there was in fact a year 0.
 

Comment Re: What's the motivation? (Score 1) 179

Chernobyl did not melt down.

It suffered a Graphite Explosion.

Completely different things.

Those are, indeed, completely different things but only one of them happened at Chernobyl. The graphite didn't explode, the explosion was caused by steam. The reactor also melted down. you can see pictures of the rather famous "elephant foot" proving such.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real computer scientists don't comment their code. The identifiers are so long they can't afford the disk space.

Working...