Sensei

It reminded me this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xj4gSMdaaxE The last time I was making woodwork, I made a wine press: Not as pretty as this one.. Very similar project to hot tub of wood, for sauna.

The very long chain of jokes... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxFkEj7KPC0

I see you just mention amount of Hydrogen everywhere, omitting how much you will need Oxygen.. 100 kg Hydrogen = 100 000 grams / 4.3h / 3600s = 6.46 grams of Hydrogen burned/reacted per second. 6.46 grams of Hydrogen requires 51.27 grams of Oxygen, from air, if you don't take it in tank. There is 0.3 grams of Oxygen in Liter of air at sea-level (and less at higher altitude). 51.27 g / 0.3g/L = 170.9 L of air must be sucked in by fuel cells per second. Approximately 10.26 m^3 per minute. Looks quite a lot. Wouldn't it require powerful air compressor.. ?

They are not comparable. In solar panel you invest once, then you can use the next 20-30 years, without significant costs, until it breaks (with tiny decrease of power after many years of usage). Oil you have to buy day by day. One day oil price on stock market is $145.31 per barrel in July 2008, the next couple months it dropped to $30.28 in Dec 2008. Just an example. You can't predict price of oil in couple months/weeks, not to mention period of 20-30 years. It can, and will, go high, when oil wells will be running out of oil, one by one. High demand for limited good results in increased price. I am great fan of solar panels. I would use them everywhere, if I could, and only after exhausting accumulators use regular power supply.

You're mistaken. You're mistaken. Obviously they would exist, without any purpose. Jupiter, and other giant gas planets, accidentally played very important role in Solar System formation. They attracted cosmic dust, comets, to them self. If they would not exist, rock planets would be bombarded by asteroids,planetoids,comets,cosmic dust, much more often, and life could never appear. But don't turn it up-side-down. Jupiter just helped development of life on the Earth, but was not designed to do so on purpose.

You might find this paper interesting https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-04910-3 It's study how presence of Magnesium Perchlorate (which is 0.6% wt, of Mars surface) together with UV rays accelerate the dying of microorganisms.

One of the largest problems with Venus is that it receives ~90% more energy than Earth. Irradiance 2600 W/m^2, instead of Earth's 1370 W/m^2. You can calculate it reversing inverse-square law: [math]E_e=\frac{P_0}{4\pi r^2}[/math] Ee=1370 W/m^2 on Earth at 150 mln km (150 bln m) distance from the Sun. [math]P_0=E_e 4\pi r^2[/math] P0 is total power released by the Sun (energy per second). Then, calculation of irradiance of other planet at distance r' will be possible using: [math]E_e'=\frac{P_0}{4\pi r'^2}[/math]

If we're at subject "musical instruments (nearly) nobody heard about", how about Theremin Yes, the guy is shaking hands in air, without touching it.. Some can call it magic..

Welcome on the board!

GOTO is essential instruction in machine code/assembly.. JMP (JuMP to absolute address) and BRA (Branch Relative Address given as offset). GOSUB is nothing different from JSR (Jump to Sub-Routine absolute address) or BSR (Branch to Sub-Routine relative address given as offset).

Sorry, I have not read entire thread carefully, but I only see you mentioning Hydrogen, and completely ignoring Oxygen issue. On sketches there are just Hydrogen tanks, and you're providing liquid Hydrogen calculations. Am I correctly expecting that Oxygen will be taken from air? If so, should not you make calculations also for Oxygen.. ? And show how, and how fast, Oxygen will be taken from air on various altitudes.. ? You mentioned 17 km altitude in post #16. If we use this calculator with 17000 m http://www.altitude.org/air_pressure.php "At 17000m, the standard barometric pressure is 10 kPa (75 mmHg). This means that there is 10% of the oxygen available at sea level." Let's assume that at standard conditions there is 0.04464 mol/L 21% is Oxygen, and 10% of that is at 17km. So it gives 0.04464 mol/L * 0.21 * 0.1 = 0.00093744 mol/L of Oxygen O2. To split 1 molecule of water to H+ OH- there is needed 1.23-1.5 eV, so for 2 Hydrogen atoms (1 H2), it's 2.5-3 eV. Multiply by e and it's 3.94e-019 J. Let's assume that it'll be given back in reverse reaction, without loses. In post #8 you mentioned motor has 86 kW = 86000 J/s Divide 86000 J/s / 3.94e-019 J = 2.1827e23 Oxygen atoms reactions per second. /2 = 1.09137e23 O2 /Na = 0.1813 mol O2 needed per second. 0.1813 mol / 0.00093744 mol/L = 193 L per second needed. In post #16 there is mentioned 127 MW. And it would be 285000 L of air needed per second.

The best is to start with activity diagrams, with arrows. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activity_diagram

HTML, AJAX, MySQL are not computer languages. Albeit it's worth to learn them. ps. You forgot Java. My list in priorities to learn: C/C++,Java,PHP,JavaScript.

Reaction of Lithium with water: Lithium floats on the surface of water, so it has smaller area contact with water than if it would sink. Comparison of alkali metals video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvVUtpdK7xw

You ca You can build whatever you like. At the end, if it will be working, you could... sell them for $24k per unit.. Probably you will earn plentiful more than on "purple gold".

On eBay/Alibaba/etc? http://www.ebay.com/bhp/vacuum-furnace

Well, there is huge, deistic god won't reveal himself/herself to humans, so scientists can't make any experiment with him/her. To start making experiments, scientist has to have some revelation of phenomena. Humans wouldn't know about magnetism if there would be no natural magnets, and any other way to magnetize objects. Humans wouldn't know about electrostatics if there would be no way to charge objects by rubbing them.

I have better news for you. Bonobo builds a fire and toasts marshmallow The problem with "constructions" is that they are typically made of material easy to process. Animals use wood, early humans also used wood. And nothing remained to our time. Beavers are building dam from wood. If they would extinct, prior human, nobody now would believe that they could build dams..

That should be banned! It's mistreat with cruelty poor chimp..

One of the best examples of spin IMHO is radioactivity. Say we have radioactive isotope with even quantity of protons and neutrons, f.e. Uranium-238 has 92 protons, and 146 neutrons. Both even. So it's composite boson with spin 0. It's decaying: U-238 -> Th-234 + He-4 + 4.267 MeV To Thorium-234, which has also spin 0. Helium-4 has also spin 0. So decay is immediate. And decay energy is split immediately to Th-234 and He-4. Appropriately to their masses to conserve both energy (E=mass of uranium-238 nucleus * c^2) and momentum (initially 0). But if radioactive isotope is fermion, it has fractional nucleus spin. f.e. Uranium-235 has 92 protons, and 143 neutrons. Spin 7/2 It's decaying: U-235 -> Th-231 + He-4 + 4.86 MeV Th-231 has 90 protons and 141 neutrons, spin 5/2. 7/2 dismatch 5/2 obviously. So there is needed gamma photon to be emitted by excited nucleus after decay.. Excited nucleus has more mass, and more total energy, than in ground state. So alpha particle is accelerated to smaller velocity, and has smaller kinetic energy, and smaller relativistic mass than like it would be in 1st case with U-238.

This movement of daughter isotopes and products is final stage. This is decay energy, easily calculated as I am showing in article from my signature. Because you are not familiar with it. Say we have Uranium-238, with m0 = 238 g/6.022141*10^23 = 3.95208282e-22 g It's decaying to Thorium-234, and Helium-4. If you subtract rest-mass of U-238 from rest-mass of Th-234 and rest-mass of He-4, you will have missing-mass, in u units, multiply it by 931.494061 MeV and you will have decay energy in MeV units. m0 = 238.051 u m1 = 234.044 u m2 = 4.0026 u m0-m1-m2=238.051 u-234.044 u- 4.0026 u=0.0044 u 0.0044 u * 931.494061 MeV/u = ~4.1 MeV (actual value is Uranium-238 -> Thorium-234 + alpha + 4.26992 MeV) Basically rest-mass m0 of isotope prior decay, is equal to relativistic-mass of daughter isotope plus relativistic-mass of alpha particle (for composite Boson as is U-238).

How about radioactivity? [math]m(t)=\frac{m_0}{2^\frac{t}{t_{1/2}}}[/math] m0 - initial mass of radioactive isotope f.e.[math]^{14}_6C[/math] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-14 t1/2 - half-life for [math]^{14}_6C[/math] is 5730 years. so after 5730 years we find that [math]m =\frac{1}{2}m_0[/math] There is no motion involved in this calc. We find animal body, carbon ore, ancient artifact, we know how much of Carbon-14 it should have, and measure what is actually mass of this isotope, and finding out how much of time was needed to decay isotope to have such effect. Reverse of above equation. Instead of measuring mass m at time t, measure time t from known m0 and m and t1/2.. Radioactive dating article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating

One can move in +1m in X axis in f.e. 1 second, or 2 seconds, or 1 hour, or +1m Y axis in 1 second, or 2 seconds, or +1m Z axis in 1 second, or 2 seconds, (or any other distance d, less than c, in time less than t=d/c) Then how can you say "and thus no fourth dimension is needed to explain it.".. ?

Correction: you can't do it for bound-to-atom electrons. But you can do it for free electrons, traveling through vacuum, or through cloud chamber or other particle detector and leaving trace (and slowing down while traveling through medium). The more kinetic energy had particle, the longer trace. Long thin traces are from electrons. Short thick traces are from alpha particles (Helium-4 nucleus) But can you describe where is each atom in every molecule.. ? Either no. For polar molecule it's to some level of precision possible, because they have one region of molecule more positive and opposite more negative. So after flying though external electric field they rotate accordingly to electric field (other electrons or protons gathered on metal electrodes). But for perfect non-polar, it's pointless, as protons and electrons in molecule cancels each other nicely.

Mordred, you think your links are absolute truth, undeniable dogmas. There is needed more humble opinion. Don't reject experimental evidence prior you know it first.. (whatever it is).. f.e. Dark flow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_flow ps. You don't know, what you don't know..