Moreno

What do you think about possibility to legalize short range cell phone jammers which could be used for security purposes (electronic bug jamming)? Government could certify such devices making sure they work on very short range and unlikely creating threat to other people.

We would need to keep current roads all the same for a sake of cyclists, pedestrians, boardists and archaic transport rallies. Another thing that road maitnance expenses could become slightly to significantly lower.

The largest problem with flying cars would be the traffic control, I think. And steering.

This is if we assume all the other technical problems solved, such as energy, noise, sharp blades, compactness, materials, etc.

Another interesting possibility would be a levitating cars which are capable to hover over road just 20-90 cm above without energy spend for hovering proper.

If here is some person who knows automotive busines deeply, you could tell me what is an operations that allow to make automotive technicians most of money? Could you do a rough percentage breakdown? It may include such subsections as:

1) Oil and filter replacement.

2) Tire rotation and rubber change.

3) Suspension.

4) Electronics.

5) Engine.

6) Electrics.

etc...

Which specializations are in the highest demand now, at least in U.S. or Canada? Is it profitable to have a garage?

An artificially created mini black holes could be huge source of energy for entire humanity - Stephen Hawking claims.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/640496/End-of-the-world-Stephen-Hawking-black-hole-could-destroy-us

Why does he believe that creation of such black holes will consume smaller amount of energy than what they would be able to provide later?

Hello everyone, the other day a friend of mine said that we should harness the power in lightning to power everything. And I quote he said "One lightning strike has enough energy in it to power my entire town forever!" Now this is high school, so obviously his thoughts on how much energy that is in a lightning bolt is greatly exaggerated, or he doesn't understand that energy gets used up in kilowatt-hours rather than simply kilowatts. Either way, I failed to mention this and said that he may be able to use a superconductor if you could get the lightning to hit it. He said ok and went on his merry way. But upon further thought when I was bored I began wondering if theres a limit on how much energy a superconductor can hold before it simply doesn't accept energy any more. Now I don't know much about electricity except the basics, and my understanding of superconductors is that they are a wire that's frictionless, so that energy could go through it forever even after the powersource is gone. I also understand that they have to be kept at extremely cold temperatures(-200 C) to retain the superconductivity trait. Now my question: Is there a limit to how much energy can go into a Superconductor before it doesn't collect it any more. And if so why that happens.

Thanks in advance!

Unexpectedly, the largest fundamental constraint for superconducting magnetic energy storage is the same as flywheel - physical strength of a material superconductor made of or embedded in. Therefore the best examples of SMES have energy density no more then 500 KJ/kg (typically much less), the same as a carbon fiber flywheel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energy_storage

Read about Lorentz force. In standalone applications, however, SMES could be installed into a rocky ground to use the Earth itself as a support.

What do you think about this "patent"? They claim 67% of gasoline energy density. And propose to store methane in light hydrocarbons.

http://www.google.ca/patents/US5900515

What could be done in order to store liquid methane at room temperature? Possibly some "super-additives" which are capable increase boiling point dramatically?

If I'm not breaking the law, I don't want profiling. The state does not have an inalienable right to know things about its citizens that are not a threat to society.

But I didn't say encryption should be prohibited at all. It could be implemented and stored on paper. Electronic devices on other hand are to dangerous to left them potentially uncontrolled by government or entire society. In large quantities especially. It could lead to catastrophe. This problem goes beyond secure data storage.

Personally, I could hardly imagine a law obeident person who would very want to hide law obeident data behind an unbreakable encryption. Criminals and enemy spies do it a WAY more often. But even if a law obeident person has a whim of that kind, an encryption could be implemented on the paper without any kind of an electronic device. He could make paper print of the encryption code and store it in a fireproof case what is a much more reliable storage method than to use a smartphone which could be lost or stolen. I think that if all electronic devices in a state will become totally impenetrable for a government (and society!) it creates dangerous situation to national security when just a few corporations (some of them foreign!) could control majority of electronic devices in a country but govt. and society can't. If they would decide to participate in a plot against govt. or switch to an enemy's state side...

 

Because that requires making the "master key" OS that could be used to hack into any phone. Once it exists, you can't be sure it will not be misused. You can't guarantee that nobody will get their hands on it; many employees will be involved in writing the code.

 

 

How would that work? Is the hardware ID written somewhere in tiny, tiny letters?

This article:

​http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/03/john-mcafee-better-prepare-to-eat-a-shoe-because-he-doesnt-know-how-iphones-work/

I suggest there is no real need to use acids and lasers, really. Some less destructive methods could be...

But FBI can't write software codes because they don't know Apple unique codes, I suggest. But since Apple engineers know those codes already, why can't they simply crack the phone themselves? No secrets would be revealed...

Why both parties can't agree to such a solution: FBI gives phone to Apple and Apple secretly from anyone else cracks the phone. Then they just transfer to FBI all the data it contained.

One more thing FBI could do about this phone is to use an electronic or quantum tunneling microscope to discover its hardware ID. It could be helpful in cracking.

So, McAfee didn't secceed in breaking the Apple phone as he promiced?.. Then he has to eat its own shoe...

So, when Congress suppose to give an ultimate decision? Or there is not going to be any?

http://phys.org/news/2015-03-real-time-holographic-closer-reality.html

Are holograms capable to be non-transparent and depict true black colours? The main purpose of hologram is to create 3D images, what I think may be unnecessary for screenless display. But they require very expensive equipment and images they create deserve for better.

Is it possible to create 2D screenless displays? What technology would you propose?

Why FBI can't create the software themself? Is there some secret codes that Apple soppose to reveal? What is there that Apple programers can write only?

Fischer-Tropsch synthetic fuels seem to be the most viable option at the moment. They work with any feedstock material so the process can use cleaner fossil fuels (like natural gas at the moment) and then switch to fast-growing biomass (algae, kudzu, duckweed, etc).

 

Or the Methanol-to-Gasoline Process specifically to make Gasoline. Excess Methanol would be the Octane Booster instead of Ethanol we use now.

 

Biodiesel made from algae oils will still be relevant even with FT processes because engines run so much better on the stuff. Lubricates and cleans out engine better than normal diesel and doesn't produce the infamous "diesel stink" from sulfur.

How efficient is Fischer-Tropsch Process? ​

 

 

That's not what they are being asked to do, though. They are being asked to create (and in any event would be required to create) a tool that could extract the info from any of their phones. The US government has another dozen cases where they want devices unlocked after this one, and what's to keep another country from compelling Apple to turn over the code to them, where there isn't even a charade of pretending a judge might be involved in granting the use of the code. Going to China? Hand over your phone at customs. The UK has made noises about wanting a back door for mobile devices, so I would imagine they would demand it, too.

 

This has implications for corporate espionage as well as personal privacy.

Why do you think that FBI could protect secret of "Apple codes" worse than Apple itself? If you assume that somebody will bribe high-ranked FBI officials to get the codes what prevents them to bribe some high-ranked Apple employees to do the same?

What does it mean technically that Apple have to "deblock" their smartphones?

I think another interesting possibility is to use GM or selection to create plants which would resemble animal's meat by chemical composition very closely. Soy already contains all amino acids necessary for humans. The problem is their proportion to weight. If everything would be possible with GM help, ultimately a plants could be created which are indistinguishable from delicious smoked meat of animals. Both by taste and basic chemical composition. Or juice of plants which is indistinguishable from milk. No need for herding...

Because in order for a system to work it is not enough to just have the genes. They have to assemble protein apparatus, localize it properly and regulate their expression and integrate it into the existing metabolic background. It is incredibly tricky to confer anything that is somewhat more complicated (i.e. more than a handful steps).

When a plant is making its first steps growing from a seed it can grow without Sun isn't it? It grows because there is some reserve of nutrients in a seed. If this is so, then I have no difficulty to imagine a symbiosis of electrosynthetic bacterium which uses electric current as an energy source and provide ready nutrients to the plants. Well, I didn't say it's going to be easy, but if they created cubic watermelons, never-rotten strawberries and pigs glowing in the dark...

Organisms cannot break down CO2. They can however fix it, which I assume is what you mean. It basically only works on bacteria as they are most flexible in use of reducing equivalents (and their ability to dump them) and maybe some unicellular organisms. Overall it is not clear that it has any benefits, as photosynthetic can utilize sunlight.

 

Nitrogen fixation is another thing entirely and while there are bacteria able to do so, we are unable to confer this ability to non-fixing bacteria via genetic modification.

Currently gene engineers can transfer genes from one organism to another, it seems. So, why can't they transfer genes which are responsible for electrosynthesis or nitrogen fixation to any other plants? Or at least to breed such kind of those bacteriums which live in a perfect symbiosis with any other plants?

Some microorganisms are claimed to be capable survive without light and instead use pure electric current to reduce CO2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microbial_electrosynthesis

If scientists will use genetic modification to make plants to have the same ability someday, will it mean the end of agriculture as we know it? All kind of plants could be grown in a watts supplied by nutrients and there will be no more need for a farmland, agricultural machinery and pesticides? Not a bad deal...

Is it also possible to use genetic modification to make all plants be capable to fix nitrogen from air and have no more need for nitrogen fertilizers?

If some model says " their dielectric permittivity start to approach infinity." then you know it's wrong.

What technology do you think, could combine best features of dielectric capacitors and supercapacitors? Could there be such a thing as a "dielectric supercapacitor"?

A good starting place to find out about current supercapacitor technology is Wikipedia. They are working toward nano-scale solutions with electrodes and dielectrics being one atom thick. Batteries tend to be less expensive, lighter weight, and smaller than similarly sized supercapacitors, but advancements supercapacitors appear to be gaining on batteries.

I wasn't talking about regular supercaps. Their large disadvantage is low working voltage. They don't use dielectrics. I started conversation about dielectric capacitors and ways to improve them.