Jump to content

Klaynos

Moderators
  • Posts

    8590
  • Joined

Posts posted by Klaynos

  1. 1 hour ago, fredreload said:

    Ya I know, a lot of guess work there lol. The electricity flows from a higher electrical potential to a lower one. That means I need to make the laser path a conductor to discharge the electricity.

    P.S. Might need an electron laser if I do not want to ionize the air path.

    A laser is not, and cannot be a conductor.

    "electron laser" is meaningless. 

    7 minutes ago, fredreload said:

    This is harder than I thought = =, because the material is not carried along. If I conduct a circuit on a gold wire, how do I move the voltage exhibited on a resistor?

    P.S. Alright I get it, you duplicate the resistor's resistance on the air path.

    This is also meaningless. Why are you putting random words together. 

  2. !

    Moderator Note

    Our rules require attached documents to be supportive only. You should be able to contribute to the thread without needing to go off-site or to download any additional documents. Please put your thoughts into a post for responses. 

     
  3. My grandfather was a carpenter, my parents still have a few pieces be made. 

    About a week ago I finished my first dovetail joint made out of an old spice rack. I've now started my second one. I don't have great ambitions at the moment. I'd like to get to a point where I can make a reasonable box. 

  4. I don't think you can draw any single rule on whistle blowers. It'll always come down to a balance of what is for the public good and that is rarely an easy line to draw. The bulk release of illegally obtained information without review is likely to cross that line in most people's opinion. In the UK there are legal protections for public officials as long as they are acting in good faith. Which again will often be a difficult line to draw. To a certain extent you have to have confidence in the justice system. 

  5. Hey, I was for a time employed as a software engineer and have since managed teams including software engineers and currently work along side several. 

    Do you have any programming experience?

    C++ is not what I would suggest as a good starting point (there's a whole thread on good starting languages somewhere). Broadly languages fall into two camps, procedural (e.g. C) and object oriented (e.g. java). C++ is a bit of a messy mix of both which to me makes it a messy starting place. Lots of people start with python these days, not my cup of tea (who thought meaningful white space was a good idea?) but it's very versatile. C is pretty old fashioned but is still a mainstay for how powerful it can be. 

    What kind of problems do you want to solve? That should help to find the right language. 

    For the most part if you understand the principles you can then apply those to other languages, I frequently jump between 3 or 4 languages and whilst I need to look up some syntax sometimes I know what I'm looking for. And you learn the quirks (e.g. pointers in C or that for efficient R you should avoid loops). 

  6. To add to Markus. Peer review publication creates somewhat of a double check. The first is that when you submit an article it will be sent to some other scientists in the field, normally about 3, chosen by the journal (sometimes you can make suggestions to make it easier for the editors). They will review it in depth and provide feedback to the journal and the authors, often anonymously to the authors, sometimes this is all public. 

    The second phase is if you pass they review then you get published. Then any other interested person with access to the journal can read your article. That allows them to do other experiments, repeat your experiments/analysis and then write their own paper in support or counter yours. During my PhD we discovered a new way to do something. Someone else showed something similar before us but their explanation didn't agree with our results so we published saying we thought they were wrong, here's some new results and a new explanation which agrees with both sets of results. They responded with a modified first explanation they fitted both. By then my successor had more results that again agreed with our explanation but showed their new explanation didn't work either. I've left the field so I'm not sure where it ended but there was a useful and constructive back and forth. 

     

    I think you might benefit from reading generally about the scientific process. Certainly in physics you don't get big new ideas from nothing. They are generated on the foundations of those that went before (...shoulders of giants...). A new theory must encompass all the evidence that has gone before. Even something seismic like special relativity must have agreed with the electrodynamics and classical mechanics that came before it. Then the following experiments will build on the evidence and understanding, there is rarely a single experiment that goes "yep, Frank was right" and there will always be scientists that question and check. For relativity every GPS device is effectively constantly checking the consistency of the theory with reality. 

  7. 4 hours ago, MigL said:

    Neither scale is used in Physics.
    The absolute scale, in  o K, starts at the point where kinetic motion of particles is essentially zero, and only quantum mechanical zero point energy remains. The K and C scales differ by 273.15 o , such that 0 o C is equivalent to 273.15 o K.

     

     

     

     

    Whilst I don't disagree, Kelvin is not a degree scale like °C or °F. 

    It's also not uncommon to find physics papers talking about °C. Although the closer you get to thermodynamics the less you use °C. 

    In the UK, in general, older people are relatively happy with both but anyone below about 40 or 50 will be far more in the Centigrade camp, I need to look up what the freezing point of water is if I need it in °F. For almost all other measurements people are accepting of both imperial and metric. I walk in km but I drive in miles. For shorter distances I go mm, cm, inches, feet, meters. My weight is in stone but I would measure ingredients in grams. 

  8. Yes, I think this is feasible. You'll obviously have to ensure that air can get in and out the battles as quickly as the water. You might also want to connect them together nearer the top to try and more easily deal with differing levels. What I'm going to call balancing will be critical, else you'll have one empty tank and start pumping some air on outflow and on inflow you'll have water pouring out the top of one before the others are near full. 

    A better idea (to get around the balance problem) would be to have each one tapped individually. You would then fill and empty each one on its own avoiding the balancing problem. You could even automate that if you were so inclined.

     

    Oh and to answer the pressure question. 1 bar will raise water by 1 m. So to fill a 1 m high barrel which is 1 m off the ground you need more than 2 bar. In the UK domestic water pressure is around 10 bar which is enough to easily lift water into the loft spaces of most houses. Filling from the bottom with a pressure close to the minimum requirement would b come very very slow though. That's one of the reasons why cisterns in houses fill from the top even if though there is enough pressure to not. 

  9. There are a few other public observatories in the UK. The Norman Lockyer one is the one I'm most familiar with. They do good public open evenings (pitched at the keen member of the public). 

    Wotsallthis, the aerosol optical depth at the chilbolton observatory isn't particularly unusual at the moment (https://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/data_display_aod_v3?site=Chilbolton&nachal=0&year=2021&month=2&day=27&aero_water=0&level=1&if_day=0&if_err=0&place_code=10&year_or_month=0).  I suspect you are suffering from local light pollution or not allowing hour night vision to adjust as much as previously. The human eye is an amazing thing with huge dynamic range but it can be slow and the ambient light matters massively. 

  10. I wonder if part of this is how most funding works. To get your next lot of funding you need to show progress. That normally means you need to have shown positive results. 

    If you have tried two different methods, one showed positive results and the other negative, both are valid and useful for the community. But you as a team only have the time or resource to write one paper, do you concentrate on the paper that will help you get funding or the one that won't, possibly with the intention that you'll write that one in the future?

  11. 2 hours ago, fredreload said:

    Well, you are trying to inhibit the infrared heat energy dissipation which is the same for all materials. Although you did mention 780nm is for rubidium atoms. So, I dunno.

    No, as has been explained to you, that is not how laser cooling works. Please review the posts in this thread. 

  12. 1 hour ago, fredreload said:

    Well Swanson sir, too many factors in question about these dream groups = =. I have only one objective, which is immortality, and I want them to realize this for me since they know the brain structure inside and out. Thing is I do not know them in person. I do not know how to invest in them(if investment in stock is even required), nor do I know how to purchase this product known as immortality from them, or their true objective(world domination?). I just sort of want an extra life for free, puting all the resources I can into these dream groups with my half baked knowledge(About progesterone and striatum) and man power(If any? Cuz my Amazon associate is not showing me any man power). These dream groups remain to be theoretical entities labeled by numbers from my perspective. I do not want to get people to invest/purchase this product known as immortality from them only to find out they are cons(they might not be). That would put my reputation at stake and be called a scammer(am not). What I think we should do is sort of tap into their network and see what they are doing and see if we can get a share if they are not civilians restricted. I alone am not a good indicator for these groups since I do not know them and I receive about 80% of all dreams turning out to be nightmares(They visit me at night and make me dream). I do not want to wake up missing an arm or part of the brain, that would be outrageous.

    With that said, a one meter BEC is a potential time machine if the energy is manipulated correctly. I am not as interested in traveling the future(who wouldn't), but more on manipulating the frames of the person in question so you can sort his life in reverse. Of course knowing the future grants infinite possibilities including death avoidance, but I just want to place this theoretical clone body on the correct time frame so once I pass out I would be linked directly to the clone body with no lag time.

    With that said, well, building a one meter BEC and storing energy has to do with precise manipulation of infrared energy. You are beaming the Near Infrared Laser of 780nm to inhibit sodium atoms from emitting infrared energy as heat energy while having it absorb light of a different wavelength so it keeps getting hotter and hotter until it turns into a BEC or possibly a black hole. I am not sure if a black hole is required to store light energy though I would have to look into the EIT method you mentioned.

    Everything you have written here is wrong. What does anything here have to do with immortality or time travel?

  13. 2 hours ago, fredreload said:

    As promised I am back on 2021/02/18. There does not seem to be anything I can add to this thread. Happy Chinese New Year

    I think it would be beneficial if you read all of the responses you've received in this thread again. 

  14. 9 hours ago, fredreload said:

    If anything does not make sense in this post

    Nothing makes sense in that post. 

    It seems to have nothing whatsoever to so with the topic of the thread. You seem (somehow given all the good information provided) to know less about laser cooling now than when the thread began. I am staggered. 

  15. One of the reasons sprites and other such phenomena have only started to be studied recently is that they are very fast so good evidence of them only really appeared when high speed cameras started to be flown on aircraft. 

    When the academic community started talking about them lots of pilots came forward to say they had seen them but didn't want to say anything incase they were imagining things. 

  16. There was an incident a few years ago of two fatalities on the Brecon beacons on two different peaks. It is thought likely that the same stroke caused both fatalities with two different strike locations. I don't have the reference to hand at the moment. I always think of lightning rods as adding protection if you're likely to be struck but not altering your likeliehood of being struck by much. 

  17. 6 minutes ago, CharonY said:

    I think it depends a lot on the level. Once you secured tenure (which is a big if) job security is as good, if not better than in an industrial position. However, before that, I agree that an academic career is far more uncertain. I would also agree to some extent with the benefits. There are few objective benefits, most of the motivation for pursuing an academic career is internal (and to a certain degree probably masochistic).  

    I agree. Having friends who were on short term contracts for 20 years makes me somewhat cynical. 

  18. So I know a good few people with PhDs, myself included. Mostly physics but some biology and at lease one languages...

    Of those the vast majority no long work in academia. Some did postdocs, some did not. Doing a PhD isn't just about learning/researching your topic it is about developing research skills and toolsets. 

    I would say people fall into a few different sectors, technical software companies (mostly modelling software), academia (the minority), research for commercial companies, telecoms companies and working for government agencies. Hardly anyone works on a topic closely or even loosely related to their PhD. 

    Some jobs people do include software engineering, technical sales, technical after sales support, translating between technical teams working in different languages, research, hardware development, product development (both physical and digital), fault modelling, data science in various forms etc...

    I don't talk much about my work on here, I joined my organisation at a graduate level with a PhD, not unlike many of my friends, 8.5 years ago. Compared to others with a master's who joined at a similar time I'm more senior than them now. To the point where I've chosen to not manage people and concentrate on research. I would say that that is not atypical for people with a PhD, join the same and out pace them in a couple of years.

    When working with people you can normally tell who went through a PhD by the speed at which they onboard with a project, the rapidity of generating and dismissing ideas etc... It's surprisingly noticeable even when dealing with people of similar experience and time with the organisation. 

    I'm very glad I'm no longer in academia. My contemparairies have less job security and far more pressure from their colleagues for few benefits. 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.