swansont

You need better - i.e. technical - resources. You cited and encyclopedia earlier. This topic is more advanced than a high-school report. Perhaps you’d be better served by asking questions than making a proposal that’s not really based on solid science.

Another way of saying that is that you are violating known conservation laws. How do you artificially produce gravity?

“This is an abbreviation for "parts per million" and it also can be expressed as milligrams per liter (mg/L)” This is true statement the does not imply that the two numbers would be equal. You would have to convert between them. It’s like saying that an amount of money given in US dollars could be expressed as Japanese yen.

A liter is 1000 cm^3. 1 m^3 is 10^6 cm^3 So right off the bat you’re off by three orders of magnitude no Source? Your maths are atrocious

Let’s see the maths

Solar system exploration isn’t the same thing, though. You can investigate new things without much overlap. But if one probe is sent to a distant world to see if there is life there, what benefit is there sending a second one, years later, but before any data is collected?

They will not accept that which they’ve been paid to reject. Shocking.

Heating the cold regions doesn’t help solve the global warming problem, it makes it worse. More stuff in orbit, especially highly reflective stuff, will not be popular with astronomers. It always sounds simple when you don’t consider any details whatsoever. As evidenced by all the times it has been done?

It seems likely that deep space probes would be a collaborative effort, like the ISS, in order to defray costs. They would not be Bracewell probes; the OP went out of their way to specify one particular type of probe. These would have to be some other sort of probe.

Not huge, though. Total solar power incident on the earth is in excess of 10^17 watts. A 1 Megaton bomb is about 4 x 10^15 joules, which is the solar energy we get in a few tens of milliseconds.

Musk doesn’t appear to be all that bright. He’s an example of the myth that getting rich is a result of being smart, which ignores other factors (like being lucky, being given large advantages, and being sociopathic) Except it wouldn’t disassemble CO2 Now you need to explain what “kinetically charged” means.

No, intelligence. If intelligence is innate, then you shouldn’t be able to improve it with test-taking practice or strategies. If you are measuring intelligence and not knowledge, then your score shouldn’t depend on whether you know what particular words mean, but it does. There shouldn’t be cultural biases, but there are. All of these are flaws with IQ tests. So why was Feynman’s IQ 125? He obviously had a high capacity to acquire, understand and use knowledge.

How would this not violate conservation of momentum?

Elon has only a bachelor’s in physics and is not an engineer. Take their claims with a large grain of salt. Killing humans would be problematic “Carbon dioxide” and “beta decay” are not single words But, as has been pointed out, no, this would not happen, and even if it did, how would this cool the earth? neutrons are not charged.

He’s being investigated, so it hasn’t been determined that he broke the law. But he had two earlier shows in Germany, so I wonder why this wasn’t an issue after the first show, or if he was warned and went ahead anyway.

Any particle-antiparticle pair can annihilate.

The article cites data from the US. Inflation data from any other country would be irrelevant. Looks like that’s for Puerto Rico. And since it’s a future increase, there’s no data to look at. The article specifically excluded employees who get tips

They are posting from Pakistan, so…

But it’s just going to be a re-hash of what already exists. And right now, from examples I’ve seen, not very good. Hollywood does the re-hash already, but I think people will get sick of it.

What specific jobs are in danger from a language algorithm? So-called AI interpolates from what it’s trained on. It does not innovate. How is this different from the “automation will take all our jobs” cry that we’ve heard for decades now, and has fallen well short of the forecasted doom?

Sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference between awkward phrasing you might get with a bot and someone using a translation program or for whom English is not their primary language, since syntax doesn’t always translate well. Our rules are set up such that only a few topics are off-limits. Other than those, moderation is not for content or veracity. We focus on the behaviors listed in the guidelines.

These “informative” posts (and their cousins, the ‘thank you, that’s interesting’ posts) are often precursors to spam; the account is just waiting for their post count to be higher (unlocking some features or just hoping not to be the new account on the block) before posting spam links. We know the tactics, and will ban if there are actual rules violations.

! Moderator Note From rule 2.3 References to drug use are not permissible unless the references are scientific or otherwise useful as part of a discussion

I disagree in the case of fission. One is more difficult; for a high-yield explosion you need to keep the material together for a certain amount of time. Otherwise you get a “fizzle” (and other issues can cause a fizzle as well) Also, if you are using uranium for the fission device, it needs to be adequately enriched. Reactors can overcome the parasitic losses due to low enrichment by making them bigger to reduced neutron leakage. If you use plutonium someone has to make the plutonium.

That’s what he reported; the tests have changed over time (he was 12 in 1930) and his score would be on the side of the argument that IQ tests really don’t measure intelligence