Moreno
-
Posts
712 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Moreno
-
-
6 minutes ago, Sensei said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_memory#Sleep
"Some theories consider sleep to be an important factor in establishing well-organized long-term memories. (See also sleep and learning.) Sleep plays a key function in the consolidation of new memories.[11]"
Why this memory consolidation can't happen during state of wakefulness? This isn't fair comparison, but we need not to turn of computer periodically in order to get long term data storage consolidated.
0 -
16 hours ago, Area54 said:
That is how I read DrmDoc's post. He presents a sound argument, with evidence. While I don't rule out a possible psychological element you have not presented any meaningful evidence to support your supposition. Do you have any?
I do not know about other people, but personally I start to feel psychological discomfort even sooner than any serious physiological discomfort if prevented from sleep long enough. I just cannot tolerate boring monotony of surrounding reality for a long time and it becomes quite a strong suffering. My brain demands to get disconnected and after sleep I start to perceive reality in a fresher way. It looks like a clearly psychological need to me. But why exactly sleep does have this effect is a good question. Looks like some magic to me.
0 -
^
So, if I understand you correct you are convinced that our need of sleep is based on purely physiological needs and our psychological comfort or discomfort based on presence or absence of sleep is rather an illusion based on physiological reasons...
0 -
There exist a speculations to explain a physiological need of sleep by claiming that brain is cleaned of toxins during the sleep time. However it is not explained exactly why this toxins cleansing can't happen gradually during waking time and why there is a need to disconnect the full consciousness for this reason.
But beside physiology in my perception there is a purely psychological need of sleep. Because sleep gives a person a mind-refreshing effect. If a person doesn't sleep too much and doesn't even need a lot of sleep for a physiological reasons he/she starts experience an unbearable "boredom" of surrounding reality which starts to surround him with and squeezes his mind. And after sleep person feels refreshing perception of surrounding reality like he is a "newborn" and the agonizing monotony of surrounding reality steps back for another day. This wonderful "refreshing" capability makes me interested a lot. There is a common scientific theories which are trying to tie sleep process with processing of data gathered by brain during the day and importance of dreams for this reason, but still it doesn't explain why this data processing can't happen somewhere in the subconscious during the state of wakefulness and we need to disconnect our full conciousness. It is known that many animals have either decreased need of sleep or anomalous type of sleep. For example giraffes sleep only 1 hour a day/night and many animals including see mammals, birds and reptiles have mono-hemispheric sleep (they never loose full awareness completely). Quite interesting that in my own perception (and that of other people) sleep has this wondering reality perception refreshing capability even it is hardly associated with any dreams. For example it happens rarely that person goes to sleep and wake ups "instantly", but in reality many hours have passed. I think it is an indication for lack of dreams, but wonderfully, people feel very refreshed after that type of sleep. I wonder, what could be done or how human brain have to be organized, at least theoretically, in order to have perception of reality always fresh like he just woke up after a good sleep and in this way we would have no psychological need of sleep.
Is it all explained by dreams or there is some other explanation? In reality dreams aren't too different from a common reality that surrounds us. People see in dreams themselves walking on the streets, visiting buildings and known places, talking to other people. So, why do they make such a strong effect on our perception of reality when we wake up (if they do)?
It makes me fascinated when I think about possibility to have a fresh perception of reality always and need no sleep for this. Any ideas how could it happen?
0 -
Someone told me that energy which a battery can deliver is approximately proportional to a difference in Fermi energy between anode and cathode. I guess it may not relate to metal-air fuel cells because Fermi energy is applicable more to a metals than gases. Fermi energy is also known as an electrochemical potential.
So, if we look at Fermi energy table for pure metals, then there is a substantial difference in Fermi energies between Aluminum (11.7 eV) and Sodium (3.24 eV). http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Tables/fermi.html#c1
If we will make a battery with aluminum cathode and sodium anode (or contra) how much energy will it deliver?
It is also interesting that though Aluminum and Sodium have different Fermi energies they both can serve as a high energy density anode in metal-air fuel cells.
0 -
Time.
The longer the wave, the greater the time between cycles. Long wave AM (RTTY for example) carry perhaps 300 baud of data (at best), whereas shorter waves carry much more data (gigs) in a shorter time span.
A cyclic redundancy check (CRC) is an error-detecting code commonly used in digital networks and storage devices to detect accidental changes to raw data. Packets of data may be re-interpreted if they're incomplete, but if the spaces are too long or broadly distorted due to Doppler shift, auroras, storms etc., they're dropped altogether. In AM networks, solar/terrestrial conditions provide only small windows of opportunity. Sometimes not at all, whereas FM is constant. Even if AM could be crammed with data reliably, the overall bandwidth in any given day would be much less.
What if we take a short GHz wave and change its phase velocity? Will it lose ability to carry lot of data?
Will it gain ability to spread for a longer distance?
0 -
Yes, this is good thinking.
Frquency modulation is the most common form of phase modulation, but not the only one.
If, however, you want to pack more data in you need to employ a variety of methods, in multiplexed mode.
This is how television tranmission used to work, before digital.
Current so called broadband internet signals also use multiplexing, in this case time domain multiplexing.
I meant some waves in which we could pack as much data as in GHz frequency, but which can propagate
as well as 1KHz-30MHz frequency. The methods you've mentioned still don't offer that possibility?
0 -
Short waves have advantage when we need to code a lot of data. But they can't regularly spread for a large distances. (unless we use an expensive satellites).
Long waves on other hand can spread for thousands of kilometers, but cannot code a lot of data.
Is there an absolute connection between frequency and wavelength? Can we modulate short waves somehow to increase their effective wavelength? For example, wavelength depends on phase velocity.
Does it mean that modifying phase velocity we can change wavelength regardless of frequency?
0 -
Some time ago I saw articles, most probably from car manufacturers, describing the ideas/wishes of some, to use hydrogen as fuel for their internal combustion engines, if the economies turn to it as energy source and thus satisfy the environmental requirements.In my opinion it's not only the environment that has to be protected it's an economical matter too. Internal combustion engines can't get away of an overall efficiency in the low thirties while fuel cells climb to 80%. Huge difference.We understand how admirably the engine manufacturers have perfected them during the past 100 years or so, but they have to do the same with fuel cells and a lot faster, because technology now is many times more advanced in all respects.It is my humble opinion that now fuel cells are not developed by the best and the progress is very slow, if I'm not mistaken there isn't a fuel cell ready for reliable use after almost two decades of research and development.
There is no competitive ways to store/transport hydrogen. Gasoline energy density = 34 MJ/L. Hydrogen (compressed at 700 bar) = 9 MJ/L. Hydrogen liquid = 8.4 MJ/L.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density
Fuel cells have many fundamental problems difficult to overcome. PEM fuel cells efficiency = 45-50%. Close to 40% for a system.
Alkaline fuel cells claimed to reach 70%, but much larger in size than PEMs and are quickly poisoned. Still they may be used in some London's taxies.
http://www.parliament.uk/edm/1997-98/1597
Heat engine efficiency depends on heat sink temperature. Modern ICE are still far from a limits possible.
0 -
Probably, I've posted a post in the wrong thread. It belongs to "plasma cushion levitating cars".
0 -
Stable levitation of one magnet by another with no energy input is usually prohibited by Earnshaw’s Theorem. However, the introduction of diamagnetic material at special locations can stabilize such levitation. A magnet can even be stably suspended between (diamagnetic) fingertips. A very simple, surprisingly stable room temperature magnet levitation device is described that works without superconductors and requires absolutely no energy input.
http://netti.nic.fi/~054028/images/LeviTheory.pdf
http://www.physics.ucla.edu/marty/diamag/
Are such materials as concrete, asphalt, sand, stone diamagnetics or paramagnetics?
0 -
That's interesting, but in 2002 someone already attempted to patent a "glass battery", but it was more likely
a hoax. Though description of their "glass battery" more resembled a capacitor.
https://www.cio.co.nz/article/471755/glass_battery_all_gain_no_pane/
0 -
I afraid that if we accept our Universe is absolutely eternal in materialistic sense of this word it leads to philosophical paradoxes
and things which contradict human mind. For example: if life is capable to self-organization and eternal development then in
eternal Universe we suppose to have eternal life which already achieved infinite level of development, etc.
It would be more logical to accept for the Materialists to assume that our Universe exist quite limited amount of time and self-created
out of "nothing". Or assume that their concept of "time" is incorrect.
0 -
...On top of all that, you cannot recuperate the energy blasted out. It is all pure loss, and you're not even moving yet, only hovering. Because of the conservative oversimplification of how ultrasound can exert forces, the actual situation will be much worse.
It is also a mystery to me how you would go about creating, maintaining and containing a plasma powerful enough to levitate on without it damaging the car or the road. High energy plasma is in general not very friendly to its environment.
(To be honest, I have no clue how you would go about creating, maintaining and containing the plasma at all, but that issue has already been raised by others).
I didn't personally said anything about "hot plasma".
Regarding energy looses there exist a few possibilities. I didn't say it is a near future technology, therefore:
1) We may wait for some powerful and unexhausted energy source similar to "cold fusion" been invented. Then energy looses wouldn't be a big deal.
2) We may try to reduce energy looses. For example, do modern hovercrafts use huge amount of energy? I'm not sure. Would ultrasonic standing waves blast out lot of energy?
0 -
Not at all true - the tread on tyres exists to carry away water on wet roads in order to delay the onset of aquaplaning (plus giving better grip on soft ground where the tread can dig in.
In any case, anything you could do like that (if it was possible - which I very much doubt) would necessarily put exactly the same loads on the road that tyres do - thus making your earlier statement that "The wheels is the main reason for the road get wore out. If vehicles would levitate instead, road construction and maintenance costs reduced a few times." completely invalid.
Theoretically, pressure which creates levitating car on a road may be spread more evenly on a larger surface than pressure
created by the wheels.
0 -
Unless you're using rails, you will be skidding all the time. It's the contact with the road that stops this happening.
Imagine you have spherical wheels that can rotate freely in any direction - that is what it would be like.
If rubber-made regular automotive tires would be completely flat, you would skid most of time too. What prevents them to
skid is the bulges on tire surface. Is it proved we can't create the same type of bulges and irregularities in magnetic or sonic field
underneath the car to create traction?
0 -
As quiet as a hovercraft no doubt.
No, there is a doubt, because not a fact it will operate like a usual hovercraft. It may be as quiet as a maglev train.
Ultrasonic beam is either pretty silent too. People just can't hear it. Quite interesting that the first crushless flight
a human ever made, they did on the device which can be described as a "noiseless hovercraft". This is a montgolfière.
0 -
Reactionless drive is a violation of basic physical law - that will never happen. No matter how we do it there will be a reaction against something.
I do not claim that violation of basic physical laws is possible. But according to many observations a ball lightning is
capable to do an amazing things. One of them is:
Another outstanding BL feature [19,23,25] is its capability to drag heavy objects, such as metallic roofs0 -
I still don't see why you have such an aversion to wheels.
Levitation would potentially make obsolete not only wheels, but also all the suspension system, hydraulic brakes,
mechanical steering, drive shaft, etc. So, you got much cheaper, low maintenance car. It will increase comfort of driving
even on gravel roads. Very smooth and quiet ride on any kind of a road. Potentially safety may be increased as the skid
problem may be eliminated. There is also global problems with old tires disposal and road construction. The wheels is the main
reason for the road get wore out. If vehicles would levitate instead, road construction and maintenance costs reduced a few times.
I think levitation is a far future technology. The first cars of that kind may appear in 22 cen. only. In 21 cen. plug-in hybrids will be a mainstream. The one doesn't make problem to the other. A car can be all-electric and levitating in the same time.
I think some technologies which still sound as sci-fi may be very helpful. For example a "reactionless drive", if the secret of ball
lightning will be discovered. Therefore I think it is a far future technology.
0 -
:-| I find that video very, very hard to believe. Do you have any data on the power required to do what it's showing?
Do you think conversion efficiency of electricity to ultrasonic beam is very low?
I don't know about power of ultrasonic beamers, but know there are devices which are
capable to cut stone.
0 -
Yes you can incorporate the drive in the track/vehicle system, but that confines the vehicles to special tracks exactly as I said.
You need special tracks not only to provide forward propulsion but also to prevent sideways movement and to guide the vehicle around curves and intersections.
I'm not sure this is a case in acoustic levitation, for example. You can imaging acoustic levitation as a car supported by many
legs and each leg is an ultrasonic beam. this beams all may have different directions and change direction to ensure the
best stability of a vehicle, change direction of movement and stop it. For example to stay straight all beam may be directed strictly
perpendicular to the ground. If you need to move forward you need to change the angles of the beams. If you need to stop or go in reverse you need to change the angles to opposite. There could be complicated combination for making a turn or skid prevention.
0 -
Assuming for the moment that you have levitated your vehicle by some means.
What are the ways of propelling it?
Propellor/TurboFan
Jet engine
Rocket Engine
Have you ever stood behind a hovercraft fan or saturn rocket exhaust or any other of these?
There is a real issue with other such vehicles on the road, even in perfectly windfree conditions.
And yes, as Halls of Ivy said
How do you stop, manouver etc?
I would prefer to avoid blades and modern reaction drives for obvious reasons. Therefore the way of propulsion may be associated with the way to stay levitated. For example, if it's a maglev train you may manipulate with electromagnets by turning them on
and of and change train direction in this way. If it will be acoustic levitation, we may manipulate with a direction of sound waves coming out of bottom of the car moving it in a desirable direction or even to break (by changing the angles of the sonic beams to opposite).
Finally, if you want a bit of sci-fi, there seem some natural phenomenon been observed in which momentum of body does seem to be violated.
For example - ball lightning. Ball lightning appears to be pretty small and nearly transparent (of low mass) but is capable to pull heavy objects for a long distances, such as machinery, log, humans, etc. If this is not "reactionless drive", then what?
KipIngram writes:
I'm assuming you meant "skid," not "squid." But that goes back to exactly what was noted earlier - this would skid more easily than a wheeled vehicle, because it inherently has no resistance to motion in any direction, whereas wheels do.Explain maglev trains and quantum locking.
Regarding price, how can you know? The high costs of maglev trains is explained by cooling systems. And what if we would have room temperature superconductors? History shows that those mechanical systems with moving parts cost more initially than those without. I would guess room temperature superconductors in maglevs will cost cheaper then rails and wheels in high-speed trains.
For absence of tare and ware.
0 -
It's hard to be cheaper and more effective than a wheel. Why is it so necessary not to touch the ground? Touching the ground with four wheels just happens to work extraordinarily well. I'm not sure it's a problem that needs a new solution. None of the arguments in favor of "air cars" (that can actually fly well above the ground) apply hear - this "cushion" still requires the ground there to provide the bottom pressure containment barrier. So it has no advantages whatsoever over a car. And lots of disadvantages, as noted above (side winds being a very significant one - wheels only roll along one line).
There is a bunch of advantages. Some of them:
1) Much cheaper car (initially), lighter, simpler(?) and cheaper to maintain a car.
If you have a car, try to remember how many money did you spend on tire rotation and replacement,
suspension and brakes. Steering system here relates as well.
2) It becomes all-terrain vehicle, can fly over the water and mood possibly. Increases comfort.
3) No skid wheels crashes.
4) If all or majority vehicles will become levitating, load on paved roads will diminish few times and hence road building costs,
which are expensive, by the way.
5) Reduced noise
6) No big problem with tire recycling.
0 -
If there exist magnetic fields strong enough to suspend non-magnetic objects in air (such as frogs), using their
dia/paramagnetic properties, how strong magnetic fields would be needed to levitate car over cement or asphalt,
assuming that later may have dia or paramagnetic properties? Could somebody calculate it?
0
Are glass batteries a hoax?
in Engineering
Posted
It seems like the whole idea is based around the claim that regular Lithium on anode converts to some mysterious low Fermi energy form on the cathode.
http://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2016/EE/C6EE02888H#!divAbstract
But it is not clear if Lithium is transferred at all and what is this low Fermi energy form of Lithium. How Fermi energy of Lithium can change?