Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

If Fusion Is the Answer, We Need To Do It Quickly

delt0r Re:Big fusion reactor unnecessary for boosting (305 comments)

Replying to this and undoing mods. But man this rubbish has got to stop. A fansworth fusor can at most fuse 10^9 atoms per second. 1 gram of T is .5x10^23. You would need to run it for 15000 years!

about two weeks ago
top

Fukushima's Biological Legacy

delt0r Re:Bio-accumulation (116 comments)

You mite want to read the papers. The Summary is misleading to a straight out lie.

about two weeks ago
top

Why the "NASA Tested Space Drive" Is Bad Science

delt0r Re:A little behind the times (315 comments)

Really look at the data. No the control that should show no thrust at all did (the cavity that should produce no thrust). The force amounts were hardly above the force meters minimum, so where you do expect fairly inaccurate results. Last but not least, it wasn't even done in a vacuum. Forces that small are just not credible with air. Its a 101 of tiny force measurement.

Extraordinary evidence demands a better standard than... "you can't dismiss the results, but it may be X Y or Z". The fact that such things (air effects etc) were not taken into account is just plain shoddy experimental work with that level of force. Its up there with youtube videos of free energy machines. Either do your experiment properly or don't make claims that your experiment didn't even test.

about two weeks ago
top

Why the "NASA Tested Space Drive" Is Bad Science

delt0r Re:A little behind the times (315 comments)

Many is vague: let's put a real number on it and say 6 orders of magnitude, or 25 MW. Pretty good size I'd venture. Multiply that by ~40uN/25W and you've got all of 40 Newtons of force. How often do you really suppose a 25MW microwave resonator is operated in a situation where 9lbs of force would be noticeable? Unless I'm drastically overestimating the size of such a thing friction alone would likely hold it in place. And if not a single 1/8" bolt certainly would.

True, i should have run some numbers. In fact 25MW is not far off what accelerators use.

Photon momentum is easy to calculate. E=mc^2 so the mass per second per watt is m=P/c^2, and its moving at the speed of light so multiply by c and you get momentum per second, or force F=P/c . That is for 1N of force you need 3x10^8 watts. Or for one watt 1/3e8=3.333x10^(-9).

Finally, if we take the NASA measurements as indicative of forces being generated...

Lets be very clear, their data shows no such force. Just systematic error. If you get the same "significant" force from the negative control, then its systematic error and you don't make stupid claims.

We understand EM forces and fields very very well. Quite frankly the original claims don't even past a basic "hinky meter" test. They certainly don't have any proper math/physics to back anything up.

about two weeks ago
top

Why the "NASA Tested Space Drive" Is Bad Science

delt0r Re:A little behind the times (315 comments)

Read the results again. They shown no effect outside systematic error. In God we trust, the rest of you show me the data. And the abstract is *not* the data.

about two weeks ago
top

Why the "NASA Tested Space Drive" Is Bad Science

delt0r Re:A little behind the times (315 comments)

That was with 25 watts. There are cavities with truly massive powers in them. Many orders of magnitude larger than here. For example superconducting cavities used for linear accelerators. The forces they claim would be large enough to be noticed. Also if the force is less than 3.3 nN per watt, its no better than a pure photon drive. Ie just point your microwave transmitter backwards.

about two weeks ago
top

Why the "NASA Tested Space Drive" Is Bad Science

delt0r Re:Another case, perhaps? (315 comments)

Yes. But this drive claims to use EM force. We understand that the best.

about two weeks ago
top

Why the "NASA Tested Space Drive" Is Bad Science

delt0r Re:Another case, perhaps? (315 comments)

There is nothing magic about the fact there is nothing in between you and the planet. All forces act over a distance. When i want to push a ship, i must push against something else. Sure that something else does not need to be on the ship to conserve momentum. I could perhaps invent anti gravity and push against a planet that is near. We don't know how to do that, but such a thing would conserve all the laws we generally assume will never be broken.

So short answer, Yes. However no such force has been found or postulated in any realistic fashion.

about three weeks ago
top

Why the "NASA Tested Space Drive" Is Bad Science

delt0r Re:A little behind the times (315 comments)

If you want to test every claim by people that don't appear to be charlatans, you will spend entire lifetimes just showing bunk is bunk (try anitgravity, free energy BS on youtube). Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.

about three weeks ago
top

Why the "NASA Tested Space Drive" Is Bad Science

delt0r Re:A little behind the times (315 comments)

There is another problem with the emDrive. Given the shape of microwave cavities used in communications and powers involved, we would have seen the effect long before now.

about three weeks ago
top

Why the "NASA Tested Space Drive" Is Bad Science

delt0r Re:Another case, perhaps? (315 comments)

Are you falling toward earth or is earth falling up to you? In reality its both. That is why momentum is conserved. In fact conservation of momentum follows from the fact that you can only have forces * between* things and that they are opposite, ie pull together, push etc. Things here can also mean photons.

about three weeks ago
top

Hack an Oscilloscope, Get a DMCA Take-Down Notice From Tektronix

delt0r Re:Who'd buy a Tek? (273 comments)

Of course you use a scope/samplers with RF (at uni, we use scopes a lot). And yea quite a few hobbyist mess around with that stuff too. For fun.

about three weeks ago
top

Hack an Oscilloscope, Get a DMCA Take-Down Notice From Tektronix

delt0r Re:SOP for Test Equipment makers (273 comments)

So when will this magical free market fix things and have someone sell a fully featured out of the box scope at the base model price?

about three weeks ago
top

San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant Dismantling Will Cost $4.4 Billion, Take 20 Years

delt0r Re:Fusion is your FUTURE corporate boondoggle (343 comments)

No its not. U238 is as much a fuel as Th is (they are both fertile, not fuels). At is about 5x less prevalent on land. Not orders of magnitude. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

about three weeks ago
top

San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant Dismantling Will Cost $4.4 Billion, Take 20 Years

delt0r Re:Fusion is your FUTURE corporate boondoggle (343 comments)

Th is 5x more prevalent. That is *not* orders of magnitude. Oh and that is only if you ignore ocean reserves of Uranium.

China has planned just one LFTR and IIRC it is not even started construction. Th in used is some of the standard reactor designs. ie *not* Liquid anything.

about three weeks ago
top

Greenpeace: Amazon Fire Burns More Coal and Gas Than It Should

delt0r Re:As soon as greenpeace touches it (288 comments)

Science does not work that way. Ever. And even then you don't even have one source.

about a month ago
top

The Truth About Solar Storms

delt0r Re:The failure mode is transformer core saturation (91 comments)

The current skyrockets...

And all the breakers and other fail safes kick in (I have seem thermal trips on some). The transformer is saved. Even with the last event only *one* large transformer failed and that was because the breakers failed. Oh and it was fixed/replaced routed around in just 9 hours. There was no "wait for a new one on order for weeks".

about a month ago
top

Greenpeace: Amazon Fire Burns More Coal and Gas Than It Should

delt0r Re:As soon as greenpeace touches it (288 comments)

That is just plain stupid. If i have listened to someone in the past, and they have always given poor, uninformed, retarded bullshit ideas. Then i would be an idiot to keep wasting my time listening to further ideas from these idiots.

about a month ago
top

Greenpeace: Amazon Fire Burns More Coal and Gas Than It Should

delt0r Re:As soon as greenpeace touches it (288 comments)

You mite what to check a few more sources. These days is quite easy to be a healthy vegetarianism. Mostly because you can have all year access to foods that 100 years ago you could not. Vegan diets are harder to get right. But again in modern society it can be done with a bit of care.

about a month ago

Submissions

top

delt0r delt0r writes  |  more than 7 years ago

delt0r writes "The new exemptions include Cell phone reuse [www.businessweek.com], backups for Archivists, and removal of malware [www.freedom-to-tinker.com]. But does not go far enough with regard to personal fair use. It is however a step in the right direction. Here [www.copyright.gov] is copyright office page on the changes."

Journals

delt0r has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>