Sensei

Remote desert? It's just 8 km in straight line from Nile.. Currently the first green trees are 100 meters from Pyramids.

Imagine such device: Each block of rock used to build has average 2.5 tons. We can lift it up on little "boat", place rock on it, surround it by wood walls, fill container with water, and block is 1 level up. It's moved to it's place. Water is released. Boat goes down. New block of rock is placed on boat, and it's filled by water again, and cycle is repeated. We can imagine row of such water-lifters, around whole pyramid. Obviously when one level is finished, new lifters have to be build on above level. We would have to pump water to the top most lifter. Egyptians were using pumps since ever to irrigate grain fields, so technology is present. Water released from lifter in above level, can flow to below lifter, so it's reused, and less water have to be pumped.

Have you bothered reading Rosetta Stone article, I provided? There are 3 languages used on it, and more or less, the same content.

What a nonsense you are writing.. How we would know names of kings and pharaohs without being able to identify symbols.. ? Have you heard about Rosetta stone? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_Stone

Neutrinos are taken into account. See below "Sum of energies". I am adding just once 0.42 MeV, assuming 50% of energy is taken by neutrino. 73.46% Hydrogen and 24.85% Helium from photosphere are pretty accurate measurements (similar content has Jupiter), as they're obtained from spectral lines of light from the Sun. What is inside is prediction from models, and will remain this way. After all we won't send there any device to check it experimentally.

That's true it's unlikely to collide. But as I showed at the beginning of post, it must happen [latex]9.17*10^{37}[/latex] times per second anyway. Otherwise Earth would be able to get 1367 J of energy per meter^2 per second. Helium-4 fusion is even more unlikely to happen, because it requires 3 atoms at the same time (Be-8 has more mass-energy than 2 He-4 alone, and additionally decays to 2 He-4 + 92 keV, very rapidly): [latex]_2^4He + _2^4He + _2^4He \rightarrow _6^{12}C + \gamma + 7.275 MeV[/latex] More likely is fusion between He-3 and He-4 (if your suggestion about larger amount of He-3 in core is true): [latex]_2^3He + _2^4He \rightarrow _4^{7}Be + \gamma + 1.5861 MeV[/latex] Beryllium-7 is unstable and decays to Lithium-7 via electron capture: [latex]_4^7Be + e^- \rightarrow _3^7Li + V_e + 0.861893 MeV[/latex] This is exactly what is triggering Chlorine based neutrino detector (neutrinos from proton-proton have up to 0.42 MeV too low to trigger this kind of detector). True. We're ashes remaining from older generation of stars. He-3 can probably only two (or three) ways to be created: by decay from Tritium, or by fusion between proton and Deuterium.

I didn't calculate from whole Sun. But multiplied by 0.34 (34%) first (calculated 60% from just core). 0.34 * 0.6 = 0.204 Yes, I am aware of no convection (according to theory/model). But I don't care about convection in this equation at all.. If you start reaction with x particles (no matter if it's star or chemical reaction at home/lab), and then it's growing to x+y after t seconds. x remain constant. y/t is rate of production. x is initial amount of Helium x+y is current amount of Helium Meaningless amount of He-4 fused further (according to wiki CNO cycle is 0.8% of energy source at the moment). I have no idea. But 2 He-3 would fuse quickly to He-4 and two protons at the beginning of life of star, so it might be meaningless.. That's why it's so rare isotope (1.34(3)×10^−6)

Hello! Each [latex]m^2[/latex] of surface of Earth is receiving 1367 W (ignoring atmosphere influence). We know inverse-square law: [latex]P = \frac{P_0}{4*\pi*r^2}[/latex] After reversing it, we're receiving: [latex]P_0 = P*4*\pi*r^2[/latex] Distance to the Sun is approximately [latex]r = 150*10^9[/latex] meters. After plugging numbers we get: [latex]P_0 = 1367*4*\pi*(150*10^9)^2=3.8651*10^{26} W[/latex] As you can see this pretty much agree with wikipedia Sun page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun (Luminosity on the right table) It's energy Sun is emitting every single second. One of possible fusion path is: Fusion of 4 protons to 2 Deuterium: [latex]p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow D^+ + e^+ + V_e + 0.42 MeV[/latex] (neutrino takes part of energy) [latex]p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow D^+ + e^+ + V_e + 0.42 MeV[/latex] [latex]e^+ + e^- \rightarrow \gamma + \gamma + 1.022 MeV[/latex] [latex]e^+ + e^- \rightarrow \gamma + \gamma + 1.022 MeV[/latex] Fusion of 2 Deuterium to 2 Helium-3: [latex]p^+ + D^+ \rightarrow _2^3He + \gamma + 5.49 MeV[/latex] [latex]p^+ + D^+ \rightarrow _2^3He + \gamma + 5.49 MeV[/latex] Fusion of 2 Helium-3 to 1 Helium-4: [latex]_2^3He + _2^3He \rightarrow _2^4He + p^+ + p^+ + 12.86 MeV[/latex] Sum of energies: E = 0.42 MeV + 1.022 MeV + 1.022 MeV + 5.49 MeV + 5.49 MeV + 12.86 MeV = 26.304 MeV Conversion to Joules: [latex]26.304 MeV * 10^6 * 1.602*10^{-19} = 4.2139008*10^{-12} J[/latex] Divide energy Sun has to emit by single fusion cycle to get quantity of reactions per second: [latex]\frac{3.8651*10^{26} W}{4.2139008*10^{-12} J} = 9.17*10^{37}s^{-1}[/latex] Additionally we can calculate quantity of neutrinos: [latex]9.17*10^{37}*2 = 1.8344*10^{38}[/latex] [latex]\frac{1.8344*10^{38}}{4*\pi*(150*10^9)^2}=6.488*10^{14} m^{-2}=64.88 \frac{bln}{cm^2}[/latex] Which also nicely fits with wiki page neutrino flux 65 bln. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino Mass of the Sun is [latex]1.98855*10^{30} kg[/latex] Single atom of Hydrogen has mass = [latex]\frac{\frac{1.007825}{1000}}{6.022141*10^{23}}=1.6735*10^{-27} kg[/latex] Single atom of Helium has mass = [latex]\frac{\frac{4.0026}{1000}}{6.022141*10^{23}}=6.6465*10^{-27} kg[/latex] If we know mass of object, and what it's made of, we can calculate quantity of atoms. According to this website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_core Sun's core has 34% of mass of the Sun. And it's made of Helium in ~60%, and ~40% Hydrogen. Phrase "so the innermost portion of the Sun is now roughly 60% helium" can be found on net and Sun wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun [latex]1.98855*10^{30} kg * 0.34 * 0.4 = 2.7*10^{29} kg / mass_H = 1.616*10^{56}[/latex] Hydrogen atoms [latex]1.98855*10^{30} kg * 0.34 * 0.6 = 4.0566*10^{29} kg / mass_{He} = 6.1*10^{55}[/latex] Helium atoms If core has 34% of mass then in outer regions of the Sun there will be: [latex]1.98855*10^{30} kg * 0.66 * 0.7346 = 9.6412*10^{29} kg / mass_H = 5.761*10^{56}[/latex] Hydrogen atoms [latex]1.98855*10^{30} kg * 0.66 * 0.2485 = 3.2614*10^{29} kg / mass_{He} = 4.907*10^{55}[/latex] Helium atoms In total we can find now [latex]6.1*10^{55}+4.907*10^{55}=1.101*10^{56}[/latex] Helium atoms Initial quantity of Helium atoms according to theories was 27.4%, so: [latex]1.98855*10^{30} kg * 0.274 = 8.1978*10^{55}[/latex] Helium atoms Time needed to fuse can be calculated by f.e.: [latex] t = \frac{Q_{current}-Q_{init}}{rate}[/latex] (Q - quantity) [latex] t = \frac{1.101*10^{56}-8.1978*10^{55}}{9.17*10^{37}}=3.07*10^{17} seconds = 9.7[/latex] bln years Why so large discrepancy from 4.56 bln years? Where is error? Abundance of Helium-4 in the core is lower than 60% as all materials are suggesting? And this graph would make Sun even more older than that: The smaller luminosity (power), the smaller amount of Helium-4 produced per second, and star must be even older.. Faster rate of production = more energy emitted to cosmos = vaporization of planets.. ps. In older version of calc, I was taking into account also lost of mass due to flares etc. but don't want to be boring you too much..

Of course I thought about C/C++ as pretty low-level languages. (I even wrote sound card driver for C-Media PCI card 15 years ago) I meant that you don't write driver/OS in f.e. interpreted languages.

Not true. You can't make f.e. 3d game with PHP/JavaScript. You can't write drivers using high level languages. You can't make operating system using high level languages. You can't write memory monitor in Java/JS/PHP/Basic. etc. etc. There are many things that won't have sense doing in interpreted language, because the way they are working, program would have to run years to finish.. If you have to use 3rd party library written in C/C++ in some high level language to do something (f.e. render 3d graphics using CPU (pixel by pixel)), it just proves inability of doing it natively in given language.

These things are different. Proposition of using one language for everything is reverse to progress.. It's kinda like saying "one bacteria species should be enough for life".. Science is progressing, because some people are doing experiments, and others theoreticians are trying to explain observations. If you would start making experiments and showing them to public on forum, you would get respect and positive reputation. Find new kind of particle, and you will have Nobel in hand It's question not to me, as I have not been in school for 20 years. But I hope so they are learning C/C++ extensively.

Yes. We use the right tool, for right task. To drive a nail we use hammer, not rock or dumbbell (although they would work more or less good for this task). If you would do research before posting, and talk only about things that you know, you wouldn't have reputation points like you have now.. That's natural selection, like in real life. Living languages are evolving, dead languages are dead and nobody knows about them, until finding fossils.. Common language of science is not human language, but mathematics.. No, it's not. If you would know C/C++/PHP/JavaScipt/Java etc. you wouldn't ask such silly questions.. C/C++ is compiled to machine code, one at a time (f.e. 32 bit Intel for Windows). Have direct pointers to memory. Allow low-level manipulation of data. Thus very prone to crashing program or crashing whole computer including restart in the worst scenario. So completely not suitable for servers running web masters programs. PHP is server run interpreted script. Access to low-level of server would cause serious issues with security.. It will never crash server due to error in script.. JavaScript is client run interpreted script. It's run on web browsers, and nowhere else. Java is either interpreted or JIT-compiled. Can be run on either server (f.e. JSP) or client. It's high level, so no memory pointers like in C/C++. PHP, JSP and JavaScript can be mixed with HTML pages seamlessly. Program meant to run on server must be in not compiled form, except CGI (which is C that is writing HTML to stdio). But it's obsolete now. Architecture of server is/should be unknown to web masters.

50 bar is almost ~50x higher pressure than standard pressure. It's almost pressure that's at 500 meters below sea level in ocean. Water mass is 500 tons per m^2 at such depth. Submarines from II war were squashed at 200... 280 meters, at twice smaller pressure. Pressure will be so high, it's unlikely to push piston back... Normal piston is releasing gas that's inside when it'll go to upper est position, then piston goes in reverse direction, because it's empty and nothing disallows going it in that direction. Then there is injected fuel, and spark is igniting it, and changes liquid to gas which pushes piston again. And everything is repeated. You want to push piston back, without releasing CO2 from inside.

Under standard pressure, normal temperature (on Earth), CO2 dry ice goes directly from solid state to gaseous state skipping liquid state (sublimation) at -79 C. So "bottom liquid CO2" from image C, the most probably, will never happen. Yes, piston would be pushed up. But why on image D it would go back to "squeezed"?

Different LCD/LED monitors work slightly differently. One mine monitor has linear polarization of photons with 45 degree. Other one has vertical polarization. Cell phone LCD is emitting not polarized photons. 3 LCD, 3 different results. You can verify what is polarization of your devices by using polarization filter such as this one: Pure speculation: if one of your eyes would be better at seeing polarized photons than the other eye, slightly different image would appear to each one, but brain would like to merge them. This technique is used by one of 3d glass technologies - screen is emitting image for left eye using polarized vertically photons, and image for right eye using horizontal polarized photons, then 3d glass has vertical polarization filter on one eye, and horizontal polarization filter on 2nd eye, so 2 different images (rendered/recorded by 2 cameras during movie making) are reaching eyes at the same time. And our brain is rebuilding 3d depth.. Do you have the same 3D illusion while watching 2D images in real world, not LCD monitor?

The most of modern C/C++ IDE's have syntax checking, wrong entered stuff is highlighted.. Visual Express/Studio is searching for names of variables, members, classes while entering couple letters, suggesting what you might want, and then you can pick it up from drop-down list. Use f.e. ConTEXT editor for programmers. It can analyze different types of languages, PHP, C/C++, JavaScript etc. http://www.contexteditor.org/ In interpreted languages the all variables are strings. So language doesn't need to know type, when there is just one type variable you can have. In C/C++ you need to tell language what will be type of variable, otherwise it doesn't know type. In C/C++ string doesn't even exist as language standard (std::string is just yet another optional to use class included in external linked library). There is array of characters (char name), which is equal to array of bytes. You can't use it as "default type", without telling how large is array, and we are back to root.. At modern times in serious programming everybody are using Unicode, which has wider character standard.

I have made couple devices for fast production of Hydrogen, Oxygen and Chlorine, and NaOH (because had enough waiting for slow battery rate). Mine normal rate is 1 Liter of Hydrogen per hour easily. Couple times measured. The bigger area of electrodes, the more current is flowing. But usually people are using 60 grams of NaCl and 18 grams of H2O which has volume = ~28 cm^3, so it's hard to use large size electrodes.. But I bet, he used metal which is immediately reacting with solution. If I use steel or aluminum for positive electrode, there is often no sign of Chlorine, instead electrode is dissolving. You need/should use carbon-graphite electrode for positive electrode (or better for both). 1 A * s = 1 C 1 C / e = 1 C / 1.6*10^-19 = 6.25*10^18 electrons (in theory) one electron can split H2O to OH- and H+ So there are needed 2 electrons to produce one molecule H2 1 L of H2 has mass 0.08988 g/L 1 molecule of H2 has mass 2 * 1.0078 g/Na = 2 * 1.67*10^-24 g so in 1 L there is 0.08988 g/3.3469*10^-24 g = 2.68*10^22 molecules of H2 2.68*10^22 / 3600 seconds = 7.459*10^18 molecules produced per second *2 electrons needed to each molecule= 1.492*10^19 electrons per second needed Which is 2.387 A average. I can easily go beyond this current. Today I was using 5 A to produce Hydrogen in experiment.