Leaderboard

If you want to learn, you need to forget AI and work the problem out yourself. It sounds to me as if you have not done that. If you had, you would not be asking this question. Look up Raoult’s Law - then calculate for yourself the first part of the problem and show me how you did that. Then we can talk about the second part.

Well, no, not really. Switzerland is a different country. And this is basically the same argument as before, about the timing of something vs the underlying sentiment; I see you omitted the paragraph that follows your quote, that shows the result of a vote to prohibit new construction. These lame “arguments” are rather tedious. You’ve obviously convinced yourself of something, but it’s not based on any facts you’ve shared.

Yes, and it's a classic joke, which I first heard as a teenager, and not in a vaccine context. It went something like: Doctor: Your baby has jaundice. Mother: I want a second opinion. Doctor: Okay. Your baby is ugly!

https://chemistryhelpforum.com/t/useful-latex-code-for-chemistry-equations.147266/ For those who might be interested, here is an interesting thread about LaTex / Mathml and MatthJAX in chemistry. I wonder if there is anything there we could learn for this forum ?

Why dont we start with some very basic classical physics definitions which apparently you never learned. Space is volume, spacetime is a geometry that uses the Interval (ct) to give Time dimensionality of length. Energy is the ability of a system/ state etc to perform work. Spacetime does not equal energy by any mainstream physics application. The above definitions apply to all main stream physics theories if your not following the above definitions then this thread definitely belongs in Speculations. Particularly how those tensor entries apply to the Kronecker delta and Levi-Civitta connections.

Here is another evidence that math is not a science: in these science forums math seems to be one of the rarest topics.

Oh, yes, the atomic physicist retired from the Naval Observatory pointing out errors to the guy who makes up mathematical symbols and uses AI to claim others are incompetent. It's been so thrilling from the sidelines!

The main practical discriminator is scale. Given an amenable geography, hydro comfortably works with GW. Flywheels work with MW. Ditto weight-lifting. The efficiency figures for pumped hydro are clear enough. Large water pumps have a hydraulic efficiency ~85%, and Francis turbines (typical design for large units) can reach ~95% efficiency. Pipe and distribution losses add a couple of per cent each giving the overall round trip efficiency of ~75% I quoted earlier. I don't believe solar evaporation losses are a thing in Wales. But bear in mind that the context is trading up low cost wind energy on a stormy night in November to high value peak load GW at very short notice on Christmas Eve with perhaps a ten-fold increase in billable revenue - and the efficiency only needs to be reasonable. Availability at required scale is the ultimate measure.

Thanks a lot.

Click on Notifications bell icon, top right, then Settings. That's on a laptop view.

Don't speak too soon ... Georg Cantor | Biography, Contributions, Books, & Facts | Britannica See ... You did learn something !

Georg Cantor | Biography, Contributions, Books, & Facts | Britannica

Today I learned that there is an entire international subculture of ignorant jerks bent on refuting Cantor.

Do phones have motion-activation capabilities? You might look for an app that takes pictures at regular intervals. Time-lapse with a large gap. Most phones nowadays have a feature that records several seconds of pictures with each shot, which improves odds of capturing something.

This wasn’t true last year when you claimed it and it’s still not. Germany’s oil imports are lower than when they started shutting down nuclear, and basically none of it is from Russia. So this is not only not a fact, it is a lie - a repetition of an untruth that was pointed out to you, yet you’ve repeated it https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/135990-anti-democratic-political-decisions-in-the-western-countries/#findComment-1290436 It’s also something whose connection to “less freedom” is unclear to me. Your survey quote lacks an actual link, but here it is https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/two-thirds-germans-against-shutting-down-last-nuclear-power-plants-point-survey “32 percent of those surveyed were in favour of the remaining reactors continuing to run for a limited period, and an additional 33 percent were in favour of an unlimited runtime extension. Only 26 percent fully support a complete phase-out nuclear power at this point in time” So it’s the timing that’s the issue. Only a third wanted an unlimited extension. The shutdown plan predates that; it was made under Schröder and the first shutdown occurred in 2003. Merkel initially delayed it until Fukushima caused a pivot and she accelerated the plan.

Details matter here. It depends. Which humans? How were they trained? What parameters were given for the analysis?

... Not an issue apparently, see Flywheel Storage Power System Reading between the lines, the limited current scale of such installations seems due to a lack of perceived urgency rather than any significant technological limit. And the UK always has Dinorwig - it would take one monster of a flywheel to compete with that.

Today I learned that the No True Scotsman fallacy is just 51 years old (it was coined in 1975 by a philosophist Antony Flew). That Scotsman could still be alive today if he was a real person!

The story of that convict, with a bit more details (he was jailed again later) is mentioned in the Krakatoa book. Ludger Sylbaris - Wikipedia

Yes! That was why my mother, then teaching geography at the local girls' grammar school, bought the book. Plate tectonics was the new thing. She was quite excited by it and so, having a scientifically-minded boy's interest in volcanoes, I read parts of the book myself. Of course the detailed understanding of how volcanoes arise behind subduction zones has progressed hugely since then, but the principle was already there.

If someone wrote a wiki on weaponized obtuseness, this post should be in it. a) repeating an unfounded claim does not make it true, especially if you ignore a whole discussion that spawned from it. b) let me think, what else could have happened in China in the last two decades? Was it the introduction of capitalism and massive growth? No, that would be against my narrative. Clearly, they have become much more authoritarian after the death of such liberal figures like Mao. Also, again you ignored examples like Russia.

Today, after going through about one third of this book, I learned that I don't care about English kings.

Interesting that the BBC article has a paragraph uncritically praising the anti-nett zero stance of Reform Party's Richard Tice. A little research shows that the author, Justin Rowlett has a significant oil company share holding in his portfolio. It is not a balanced piece of journalism.

Except I don’t think it is madhouse politics, at least not the part of the UK government. The issue of rewiring the grid for distributed power generation, as opposed to the legacy system of a small number of large central generating stations, is hardly a new one: it has been flagged for years now. The madhouse stuff is coming from those right wing parties who cynically see an opportunity to turn combatting climate change into a party political issue, which is depressing beyond belief. For all his (many) faults, Bozo at least did not do that. It seems to me that regional pricing might be a good, market-driven solution, provided it is set up in a way that does not cut the legs from under existing investments or unduly penalise populations currently without good access to renewable generation.

I'm sorry in advance but ill be blunt with you on this. To say something like this one has to be either stupid or dishonest. We all know that GR is incomplete and we have mountains of empirical data undeniably confirming it. It is probably the best that we got at the moment arguably yes... But to put GR in rank of absolute Truth is either sing of stupidity or dishonesty. In both outcomes you lost all remaining respect that I still had towards you . You don't have the right to call yourself scientist. You see that's the main difference between us. Im running publicly open research out of pure interest and love of science. All my methods and results are open for public. And don't claim to be right, im just sharing results and open for corrections and critic. But with you it is completely another level or the complete lack of it. All you do is just throwing empty insults and Appeal to tradition/popularity (argumentum ad populum). In stead of engaging with the actual evidence and arguments presented (this is science) you keep repeating same logical fallacy's over and over again. You call it speculation? Prove it as scientist! All codes and data and results are open at willrg.com and if you will I only will be grateful for helping me be less wrong. But instead you silently moving the thread and when confronted retreat to insults. You don't have the right to call yourself scientist! Shame! Another example of Appeal to authority logical fallacy presented to us by yet another "moderator". Good start mate! @MJ kihara Im not enjoying this too. I came here with hope to meet likeminded people who with united front engaging in the scientific attempt to be a bit less wrong, but instead Im facing.. this... Glad you found it entertaining though @Mordred , buddy well done you memorized some words from a text book. I suggest you to engage with basics of philosophy of science. Start from googling the words "ontology" and "epistemology". Than try to apply this methods to classical mechanics. There's a fascinating world of physics awaits you as soon as you learn to separate anthropocentric interpretations from empirical data. Good luck!

@swansont On what basis this thread was moved to speculations? What did you find so speculative? Was it the remarkable agreement with empirical data across 10^20 orders of magnitude range? Or was it the lack of adjustable parameters and refusal of curve fitting? Or was it full open source methodology derivations calculations and results publicly available at willrg.com ? At least have some dignity and scientific honesty for open scientific dispute! Moving this thread without a word while I was away is just pathetic! Ahhhh I know! You moved it here because you ashamed of how your glairing incompetence was publicly reviled on the last few pages. This is worse than pathetic! You have no right to call yourself a scientist! Shame!