Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Mass & kinetic Energy - Extinction (Score 1) 293

Ok, people pointed out the complete bullshit number about the actual - inflation corrected worth.

But there is another vector that needs to be taken into consideration, that has a devastating effect on bigger space mining undertakings.

To make it short if done on a big scale space mining could change the earths orbit and rotation period.

And this is what most fly-highs do not take into consideration.

1.) every planetary body in our solar system is there and "does" that because it has a mass, and a certain kinetic energy

a.) also mass distribution plays a role (moon tide = earth has changing mass distribution, "wobble, wobble")

2.) .. and interacts with other bodies through the "mystic and largely unkown" force of gravitation - its so unkown many people just jump and do other silly things and consider to survive ..

3.) these properties make the planetary bodies move in such elliptecal shapes as they do.

From 3.) change them by mass and the momentum/energy that is "glued" to the mass, you change how the planetary bodies will behave.

Yes, this happens contiously. Earth is loosing as well as gaining mass - naturally. Helium can escape the atmosphere, but meteors are hitting the earth, transfering mass and energy.

And the Apollo missions transfered mass to the moon.

The key point is the scale you'd do that and when thinking in "deathstar" categories you can predict a big change.

If you can't imaging it, go ice skating and do a pierotte and pull your arms to your body.

What in consequence might happen I can only guess , however I know something will happen.

Because you change the system on a big scale. .. our planets relative distance to the sun has considerable effect on our climate. .. the day/night cycle has considerable effect on our life.

I call this the real "masseffect"

Comment Re:Rate of prion conversion dep. on ingested amoun (Score 2) 133

From what is known this cannot be correct.

1.) Because the test is a blood test, testing for prions present in the blood and multiplying them. Also do the prions accumulate in the tonsils and so on.

Meaning: you will ingest prions and they can/will accumulate in you.

2.) even by todays slaughtering standards, like separating the brain early out and sucking away the spinal mass. It cannot be excluded to contaminate the meat.

Because to get to the spinal mass you need to cut it open. Also is the carcass split into halves by a chainsaw,
does cut bones open to the marrow.

And many industrial slaugthering houses do not adhere fully to the standards, its a very rough business.

3.) the cases of vCJD in the UK cannot simply be explained to be only have been transmitted through brain tissue, because these people ate meat but perhaps they ate hamburger meat where you'd cannot really tell or taste if there was a brain among.

Comment Rate of prion conversion dep. on ingested amount (Score 1) 133

The problem with prions is that they need to multiply over time.

Having a very early onset means you'd likely had ingested huge amounts of prion contaminated beef. But even if you have ingested some amount you might get hit later on, this is what they meant with "decades".

So his conclusion is correct.

Because he reduces the prion ingestion - there are still cows getting diagnosed, but the diagnoses is only done on older cows and on cows that show symptoms!

And because the symptoms show up lately the unsymptomatic cows might have also infected you before.

Comment The real question: Who made who? (Score 4, Insightful) 133

I have a feeling that many cannot remember the "mad cow crisis" in the 90s. Because after the crises var-CJD/MCD has not gotten much attention lately.

The interesting thing was, that there was some evidence that MCD was being transmitted onto cows by feeding them carcass meal (pulverized dead leftovers from slaugther - everything not sold .. like brain, eyes, bone, spinal matter, ..) which was then restricted.

There were secondary hints, that the initial prion mutation could be the effect of a chemical agent used some years before in agriculture.

Note: those prions could really multiply every generation through this kind of "recycling".

However that crises took shape in england where it was observed that a higher than usual incident rate of CJD in humans occured and a conclusion was finally drawn between MCD and vCJD. Hint: "piri piri"

Which finally lead to carcas meal ban in Summer 1996.

The UK was at the center of the outbreak with very high incident rates. Public was kept in the dark for some time.

Now the interesting fact is in [1] which tells us, that there was a peak in 1992 contrary to the ban of 1996 I cannot explain that drop, it could be that using brain and spine for carcas meal production was forbidden.

For a long time there was an import ban on bovine meat from UK in the EU.

Interstingly there was a test developed for live cattle[2],
which is not being used.

The "walking dead" moment:
Now the interesting point is that MCD-crisis is not really over, and this testing method explains that we might be infected by prions from cows with MCD, and even if a cow is not diagnosed with MCD - only cows older than 24 months are tested. A normal cow could carry those prions and we ingest those prions. However those cows never get diagnosed because not reaching the age where they'd show symptoms.

And yes the sad moment is "some might be infected"
the question who is infected?

Sometimes it is only good to know for others (blood donation recipients) but not for you ?!

Another conclusion can be drawn, that when having still cows with MCD it is likely that even now people get infected by MCD-prions, as of now.



Comment burni2 launches his own hackproof os based .. (Score 1) 108

.. it's so secure it can only run a very stripped down version of hello world.

Among the popular security features are the TKA and M.A.M.

Trump Kernel Api - the only API that strips down logic expression to just "false"

McAffee-Mode - deletes every trace

If you're really serious. Relase the binary to public and bet your whole money on the "not hackable" challenge.

Comment Re:Making America Great again - with wind power! (Score 1) 340

sorry to correct you in this point ... and even so late ..

(me: working in that industry in germany, and I'm working hands-on as well as at the desk - offshore/onshore - development & fixing).

The Growian was a pitch regulated, 100m rotor diameter, two blade, downwind turbine with steel body fiber glas reinforced profile rotor blades and an asynchronous generator.
The growian had only 420 productive hrs.

pitch & cone regulated, single profile steel only blades - downwind - asynchronous generator
The smith putnam had 1000 productive hrs.

The german wind turbine development took their ideas mostly from the danish designs of the 80s - many turbines were build under OEM contracts

The "modern" wind turbine of the revolution:
Three blades - stall regulated - asynchronous generator - up wind type - with "tip brake" - fiber glass reinforced blades

the blades tip could be rotated 90Â by a spring loaded mechanism triggered by the turbine control system.

the historic main companies active in Germany
- Nordtank (later part of Vestas) (DK)
- Micon (later part of Vestas) (DK)
- later NEG Micon (later part of Vestas) (DK)
- AN Bonus (DK) (now Siemens(DE))
- Nordex (DE)
- Adler/Koester (DE)
- Jacobs (later part of REpower) (DE)
- HSW (later part of REpower) (DE)
- Aerodyn (DE)
- Lagerwey (NL)

And some even had a wind driven yawing system like the AeroMANn a two blade upwind turbine .. with a mere 33 kW.

The "current" motern wind turbine:
pitch regulated - Doubly fed generator or full converter - three blade - upwind windturbine with fiber glass reinforced blades - 100+ m rotor diameter - 2-3 Megawatt.

The current three blade state of the art turbine has much more in common with the danes simple turbines than with the Growian.

Growian and Smith-Putnam are quite well comparable as they share certain similar design features as well as their structural mode of failiure- just that Growian was shutdown before it would've thrown a blade.

But when you'd want to take a look at the history of the small steps you can read the "Windkraftanlagen - Grundlagen, Technik, Einsatz, Wirtschaftlichkeit"
from Erich Hau.

You will then realize that virtually no research from the Growian could be used on that small step path.

(Remark: we do not mill with these turbines, we just visit the "Windmuehle" or the "Muehle" which does not mill - normally)


Comment Re:Let me know when ... (Score 1) 340

"at a power output proportional to the CUBE of the windspeed"

Basically true, but in respect to modern wind turbines its a bit off(1) due to pitch control.

This does not take into account that you can pitch the blade angle out of the wind when reaching the nominal windspeed of the turbine (which every pitch controlled turbine does). Meaning when the nominal wind speed has been reached the power output will remain mostly steady.

Todays turbine development is going into the direction of increased rotorsize(look at the formula at (1) thats quadratic ) to reach the nominal wind speed much earlier.

But generally speaking that control can be configured to pitch their blades much earlier - this is done for certain sound reduction modes, not using as much energy as would be availible much earlier would give you a usable power reserve.

but: more power = more load = more material = more cost


Comment Making America Great again - with wind power! (Score 2) 340

The U.S. were once pioneers of wind power(4) in size not only in space but in wind turbines (you might think that the danes were the only pioneers?).

You need to take a look at the good old west. Water pumps powered by wind turbines. Offgrid farms getting their first electricity from wind turbines.

Wind power plants are indeed smaller production unit than a big coal or even a nuclear power plant, that needed to be manufactured as well as their parts (also done in the US). While manufacturing solar panels got outsourced like chip manufacturing.

Meaning! you can employ more people with wind power than with coal power, coal power and nuclear power destroys much more jobs that it generates!

It is different with wind turbines, they need good old american craftsmanship to build a solid turbine that sustains harsh conditions.

Some american wind power history:

American visionary Palmer Putnam built a 1.25 Megawatt! turbine(1) in 1941.

Indeed after some time it threw a blade. But before that it produced more energy and ran longer than the german multi million dollar 1980s disaster called Growian.

Whiners fall down and never try again. Pioneers stand up shake the dust off, don't mind their bruises and climb that horse again, and again till they succeed.

MOD-2 a 2.5 Megawatt turbine with 91m (~275 ft.) diameter rotor. (2) and so on ..

Pioneers can and will fail, but as Kennedy said, that you don't go to the moon because its easy, but because its hard! And generating power from wind is hard but in the recent 30 years we got quite a good understanding how to do it and how to size up the turbines!

Can you feel the changing wind right now? Do you got faith of the heart or fraid of the trump? (3)

This is what made america great, having faith of the heart and this is what can make america great again.


Slashdot Top Deals

"An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup." - H.L. Mencken