jimmydasaint

I was thinking about the efficiency of solar panels and unpredictable wind energy to power towns and cities, rather than solar powered cars. 

Quote

DS1's solar panels convert 22% of their available energy into electrical power. This may not sound very good, but it is much better than most solar panels. Most solar panels on people's houses, for example, are fairly inefficient. Less than 14% of the energy that reaches them will be converted to electricity.

http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/projects/vss/docs/power/2-how-efficient-are-solar-panels.html

In regard to cars, I am considering that the cars would be using sources of power that can be renewed from non-fossil fuel sources, like the batteries you mentioned. 

On 17/09/2017 at 1:04 PM, StringJunky said:

Thinking about it , if China gets the lead on this, the US, Russia and the Middle East are possibly going to see quite a power shift away from them through the shift in energy sources. Energy is a critical currency. I can't see that being a bad thing, even though China is communist.

In my opinion, SJ, China have undergone an Industrial revolution similar to ours a few hundred years ago and are moving on to "post-Industrial Revolution days".  I anticipate that they will lead the world in non-fossil technology and make it more accessible for countries that they border, causing a new revolution in non-fossil fuel power. Any country that can raise 640 million people out of poverty deserve to be noticed.  They seem to be a complex capitalist/socialist society rather than Communist, and good luck to them! However, my question would be: is the energy too dilute to be useful to bring electricity to large towns? Do we all have to significantly change our lifestyles to accommodate a low fossil-fuel future? I am cynical, and hope I am wrong....

I hope you understand what is meant by deductive inference and read this:

Quote

WHAT DOES 4 CHANNEL ALPHA FEEDBACK DO TO WHOLE HEAD (8 CHANNEL) ALPHA ACTIVITY?

Eight channel EEGs (O1, O2, C3, C4, T3, T4, F3, F4) were recorded, filtered, and digitized for 17 right handed non-meditators, who received broad band alpha feedback simultaneously on 4 channels (O1, O2, C3, C4). Alpha feedback was both 4 auditory tones and 4 periodically presented digital integrated amplitude alpha scores. Auditory feedback on each of the 4 feedback channels was presented through 4 spatially separated speakers, and employed separate pitches for the tones which signaled activity at each of the 4 cortical feedback sites. Auditory feedback was driven by the envelope of the filtered, full wave rectified broad band alpha activity. Auditory feedback was presented to Ss sitting upright, eyes closed, in a totally dark, climate controlled, sound proof (Industrial Acoustics Corp.) chamber. Auditory feedback was continuous, except for an 8 second interruption every 2 minutes, during which 8 second interruption all the feedback tones shifted to resting pitches, which signaled the S to open his/her eyes to view the digital scores, which were illuminated only during these 8 seconds.

http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/2414356/Biocybernaut_Institute_Aug_2016/PDF/3_ScienceArticle_WhaDoe4Chan.pdf?t=1505336873944

Then pull your big head out of your ass to understand my previous hypothesis.  And goodnight! You cannot read scientific evidence and that is sad.  Your huge ego gets in the way again! 

Quote

The 64 EEG variables (8 channels X 8 filters) were analyzed to produce mean, maximum, and minimum scores on each variable, which were convolved with the mood scale variables in novel ways to minimize individual error variance and maximize the predictive power of the resultant Brain Amplitude Maps. The resultant partial differential psychophysiological surfaces reveal recurring threedimensional patterns, which are imaged in the predictive Brain Activity Maps for different mood states. These recurring 3-D patterns reveal surprising underlying similarities between certain specific psychological states known as specific moods. Striking visual similarities are immediately apparent between maps from moods we consider similar.

http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/2414356/Biocybernaut_Institute_Aug_2016/PDF/4_Partial-Differential-Psychophysiological-Surfaces.pdf?t=1505336873944

So you refuse to read evidence when it is presented to you.  No time for niceties now - I did ask if you were a troll or a bullshitter and now the point is proved.  Sorry, mate!

OK Sammy.  I have finished my kebab and now am watching a nice Netflix movie.  Neurofeedback presents a halfway house for my initial opinions; even if they were erroneous.  However, if I give you a scientific reference at least try to read it.  Have you ever read a scientific paper? Does it justify your arrogance?

Anyway, read this:

Quote

The focus of the Biocybernaut technology is not Evoked Potentials, but rather the continuous EEG that runs even in the absence of sensory stimulation reaching the brain.  These waves are called brain waves or EEG, which stands for Electro-Encephalo-Graph.  Brain wave measurements of the EEG provide information on the instantaneous and ongoing states of an individual’s brain.

Brain waves are given names based on their electrical frequency of oscillation.  Brain wave frequencies in cycles per second (called Hertz) range from below 1 Hertz to 100+ Hertz.  The following list of the different brain waves is in order of electrical frequency from lowest to highest:  Delta (0-4 Hertz), Theta (4-7 Hertz), Schumann (7-8 Hertz) , Alpha (8-13 Hertz), Beta (13-25 Hertz) and Gamma waves (25-100 Hertz).

Each brain wave has distinct sub-frequencies that are also defined based on their frequency.  The sub-frequencies are also all indicative of distinct brains states.

In addition to electrical frequency, EEG machines also measure electrical amplitudes.  Electrical amplitude is indicative of the power in a brain wave activity.  Brain wave feedback training, also called neurofeedback training, teaches individuals to reduce or increase their brain wave amplitudes at particular frequencies that are associated with useful and beneficial results.

http://www.biocybernaut.com/projects/

You wasted my fucking evening with no analytical comments whatsoever. I stated an opinion and you seem unable to separate opinion from fact or hypothesis.  I would rather enjoy a nice kebab than argue with a know-nothing moron.Once you actually learn to read a scientific paper and understand it, come back and argue. Goodnight!

No analysis whatsoever.  Are you a troll and a bullshitter, or only a troll. Do you understand about EEG?

OK, you don't seem to understand what I am talking about and vice versa.  If you have an electrode giving a small voltage to a brain centre in a lab rat, it can replicate hunger or satiety. Now what would the EEG look like?  If you have a readout and you can replicate the ionic depolarisation, will it not replicate the rat behaviour?  

I found this, slightly contradictory article about the uses of EEG, what is your analysis?

Quote

We created our own genuine facial emotional expression database for use in the study**. Participants viewed these stimuli while their EEG was measured. Then a classifier recognised which EEG features (power and coherence) corresponded to positive and negative emotions in each individual. We randomly selected 70% of each individual’s data from the positive and negative conditions, respectively, for each stimulus type. A pattern recognition algorithm learned how to classify the data into two separate categories (positive and negative). We then used the other 30% of the data to attempt to predict whether the participant was viewing or listening to positive or negative stimuli. The result is the percentage accuracy of this prediction. EEG power alone had very poor predictive power, hardly better than chance. In contrast, power and coherence together had excellent predictive power. The stimuli that produced the most accurate predictions were pure tones (95% accuracy); and the stimuli that produced the least accurate predictions were emotional images. This is unsurprising as tones are pure and unimpeded by ‘noise’, while images are varied in their content. The music was also highly predictive (93%); followed by the emotional faces (92%), the mood induction statements (91%) and finally the short video clips of emotional faces (87%).

Although this was a pilot study with a very small sample, this study showed that EEG pattern recognition is a promising method for measuring individuals’ emotional responses to visual and auditory stimuli. Its accuracy depends on the validity of the trained algorithms and its capability to perform on new datasets. Further research will focus on whether this powerful method can be used to accurately predict how people feel towards images and videos of products, people, brands and concepts.

http://themindlab.co.uk/detecting-emotions-with-eeg-patterns/

A more accurate description by you should be in  the following lines, as this is a Science Forum: The evidence is not there yet to show a feedback mechanism for EEG.  Your ego gets in the way of your answers.

And another. Bring your analysis and give your opinions clearly when they are opinions. My posts were opinions and I must clearly state this prior to further discussion:

Quote

Owing to the high temporal resolution and low cost of electroencephalography (EEG), it has been extensively used in recent attempts to detect emotional states due to its prominence in high temporal resolution but low cost. EEG and emotion correlation reported in numerous studies [1, 2] combined with computational modeling [3] enables possibility of automatically estimating emotional states. The use of musical excerpts as stimuli is considered to be a promising approach because music is understood to be capable of strongly eliciting various emotions [4]. However, very little is currently known about the subjective characteristics of human music perception

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40708-016-0051-5

OK. If a person shows a pattern "A" for joy and this is reproducible then there is a profile for that individual called "joy".  If the signal can be replicated by electromagnetic means, let's say by microwaves or terahertz waves, does it not recreate the initial mind-brain conditions that existed previously for "joy?" 

I thought stimulation of the brain with tiny electrodes could cause people to feel hunger or pain.  Using small electrical pulses could reproduce a feeling - why not using electromagnetic waves?  Your argument please.

IIRC, there are about 13 factors for clotting to occur perfectly.  Heterozygotic males, namely XhY, have little  Factor VIII or IX but DO have platelets to aid clotting .  So, if I am correct, some clotting still occurs although it is imperfect. 

Hi Laura,

Slippery slope to mind control here, which I do not approve. If a person feels pain and it is registered as an EEG trace, there is no reason why it cannot be fed back to the patient to replicate the pain. What about a person experiencing sadness or anger a catalogue of EEG traces is linked to these?

Gene products called cyclins  I assume, from memory, that they are proteins.  The cell is forced into apoptosis if there are genetic anomalies in the cell cycle.  I will give you more info when I do some additional reading. 

I would find it totally wrong to speculate without having all the facts at our fingertips.

Be patient and all will be revealed to you, and you may be given medical advice from genetic counsellors.  

In the meantime, as a parent, I would need to do some further reading and would choose sites such as the following:

http://www.friendshipcircle.org/blog/2012/05/22/13-chromosomal-disorders-youve-never-heard-of/

If you need help in understanding any of the disorders, please respond and I am sure someone will help you.

Good luck

You are right, of course, we need a theoretical basis to explain the formation of heavy elements.  I like the theory of the triple alpha process - IIRC, it was proposed by Hoyle. who suggested that three alpha particles had the correct resonance (in the excited state) energy to form carbon. I take your point and agree with it.  I hope they are proved correct....  

https://www.faraday.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/CIS/polkinghorne/lecture4.html

Thanks for that quick answer.  Of course, heavy metals are required for the photochemisynthetic method. That makes it a health and safety hazard then and so unlikely to be used unless there is a secondary reaction where the acetate made is converted into a carbon-based fuel.  That is  a whole new field of investigation. 

As a former biomedical scientist, forgive me for being a bit sceptical but, it goes with the territory.  The modelling activity was very interesting however...

Quote

 

While the scientists think the new study gives a robust picture of how large injections of soot into the atmosphere can affect the climate, they also caution that the study has limitations.

For example, the simulations were run in a model of modern-day Earth, not a model representing what Earth looked like during the Cretaceous Period, when the continents were in slightly different locations. The atmosphere 66 million years ago also contained somewhat different concentrations of gases, including higher levels of carbon dioxide.

Additionally, the simulations did not try to account for volcanic eruptions or sulfur released from the Earth's crust at the site of the asteroid impact, which would have resulted in an increase in light-reflecting sulfate aerosols in the atmosphere.

The study also challenged the limits of the computer model's atmospheric component, known as the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (WACCM).

"An asteroid collision is a very large perturbation—not something you would normally see when modeling future climate scenarios," Bardeen said. "So the model was not designed to handle this and, as we went along, we had to adjust the model so it could handle some of the event's impacts, such as warming of the stratosphere by over 200 degrees Celsius."

 

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-08-dino-killing-asteroid-earth-years-darkness.html#jCp

I don't understand what the Abstract says.  Could you please explain this in plain English mate and give us a recap of GR while you're at it. Thanks/

It seems that cadmium is seeded into bacterial culture and then the cadmium is crystallised, as a sulfide compound, on the surface in the form of semi conductors. The presence of cadmium is a limiting factor here.  How much of it is present in the Earth (estimates?) and what is the use of the acetate which is made as a photosynthetic product?  IMHO, this is exciting but at the first stage of making a useable fuel source for humans.

Interesting but looks highly theoretical. When has a black hole interacted with a neutron star? When has a black hole been characterised close up?

14 minutes ago, beecee said:

Hi jimmy...Comments are of course welcome from anyone...I specifically mentioned experts because I'm only an amateur lay person myself.

Thanks for that beecee.  I do recall that glycine was found in the corona of certain new stars and this finding reinforces my opinion that life is meant to occur all over the Universe.  However, there is a caveat, and a serious one, IMHO, the basis of life on Earth requires nucleotides (the building blocks of DNA) which are far more complicated than the complex molecules discussed in the abstract and could require a number of steps to reach the necessary complexity to form DNA.  The other issue involves how basic molecules could be transported to Earth for abiogenesis to occur. 

Hi SJ,

I took the point of biological molecules being ubiquitous, but I thought the OP was only asking for Physics experts and I am a hundred feet wide in interests but one inch deep in actual knowledge.  I didn't want to get in the way of experts.

Are you only calling for experts in the field? And are you supporting the idea of panspermia? Basically what are you calling for?

Thanks for the replies guys (nice to hear from you Cap'n). I am just being over-lazy.

Mate, I still end up at the person's account and the status is interspersed with their replies to threads.  It's a lot tidier if a little box appeared on the home screen where we could write instant answers.  Unless I am getting this wrong!

Really! I'll try again.