|
Just provide a quote of some research scientist or a paper outlining your claim and it will be fine. You made the claim you have to provide the facts.
Classified
LOL
|
|
|
|
First of all the reactor couldn't operate at full power with no cooling for more than a very short period of time because of physics. High temperatures shut down the fission reaction.
That is bullshit. I understand that you have some kind of anxiety problem and want to manage it by controlling the facts you are exposed to but you really should really find a more productive way to deal with it. A therapist could help you out with the anxiety and a physics textbook could rectify the deficiencies in your understanding of how nuclear reactions work. By all means expose me to the facts. But they better be authentic. |
|
|
|
First of all the reactor couldn't operate at full power with no cooling for more than a very short period of time because of physics. High temperatures shut down the fission reaction.
That is bullshit. |
|
|
|
My problem is that the people on wikipedia claim that meltdown is impossible, and that is simply not true. Please explain what a "meltdown" means in the context of a liquid fueled reactor? nit-picking aside the definition still holds true, that is the reactor is operating on close or above peak output with the cooling inoperable. Once that situation occurs and you can't do anything about it you'll have a meltdown. What's melting is vital parts of the reactor itself not the fuel. That could be gas for all I care.
This is probably safer than the reactors running in current powerplants, but nowhere as safe as conventional power.
Which conventional power is safe? Greenhouse emissions aside, I just heard a story about cows being exposed to the exhaust from Coal fired generators can get cancer. Then when human's eat the cow cancer antibodies and protein (which are not destroyed by cooking) they cause problems. Anyone who thinks there is such a thing as "safe" power is dreaming. I am speaking of current state of the art, since this is about technology even beyond that I think that is only fair. I doubt this article was about a state of the art powerplant. Yes there will always be some danger associated with it, but till I see an example to the contrary I maintain my opinion that nuclear power is more dangerous. The safest commonly used power source is hydropower and while it still is harmful to the ecosystem it has the least impact on human civilization. |
|
|
|
I severely doubt this is any safer from the meltdown problem than other designs.
Since the "primer source" is nothing but some highly radioactive material all that has to happen for a meltdown scenario is that the mechanism regulating the link between it and the reactor to lock up. It's exactly the same problem.
True although stopping active fission is relatively easy. The harder to solve problem is decay heat. Modern reactor designs employ passively safe measures which are designed to keep reactor cool (dissipate decay heat) without the need for pumps and/or electrical power. My problem is that the people on wikipedia claim that meltdown is impossible, and that is simply not true. It's the usual thing with some fanatic proponents, especially in nuclear power... claim one thing and once you research it it turns out to be an exaggeration. This is probably safer than the reactors running in current powerplants, but nowhere as safe as conventional power. The main problem with any reactor imo is that is has to run as hot as possible in order to archive higher Carnot Efficiency. So they are constructed to the limits of what the material can withstand. With conventional power you have a limit on the temperature you are able to generate in the first place, not so with nuclear power. It needs a technology which is able to withstand such high temperatures to be able to leverage the higher efficiency in the first place. Steam is not it. Thermoacoustic devices might do it for example. |
|
|
|
|
I severely doubt this is any safer from the meltdown problem than other designs.
Since the "primer source" is nothing but some highly radioactive material all that has to happen for a meltdown scenario is that the mechanism regulating the link between it and the reactor to lock up. It's exactly the same problem.
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on the type of governments you are talking about....
The banker sockpuppets ruling over nation states... nfw.
But regional goverments apart from big city ones might do it if bitcoin gets huge. If bitcoin were to play a major role in the transition to distributed republics that would be it. But it is still questionable if bitcoin were to be replaced till then.
|
|
|
|
|
What's with all the new signups and their crystal balls?
|
|
|
|
|
"Like silver but on the internet"
they'll understand
|
|
|
|
There is two ways of current situation:
1. Bubble will pop after raising around 17 BTC then goes down to 1.99
1. Bubble will not pop and the price goes to 30 and up.
may I rent your crystal balls some time? (no pun intended) |
|
|
|
|
Prisoners Dilemma as a practical joke.
this is just a notch more complicatedobvious.
popcorn.gif
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin presents a nasty choice for traditional financial institutions and govt's. do they embrace or attack it? and now that the most feared means of attack appears to be in question: http://gavintech.blogspot.com/2012/05/neutralizing-51-attack.html. this post by Gavin raises the stakes considerably for it no longer is a case of some unlimited funds attacker building a farm and trampling all over Bitcoin. the fact that it may be possible for the network to fend off this attack will cause any attacker now to pause and consider not only the financial ramifications but also the political. if they fail, everyone will know about it and the identity of the attacker will most likely come out. failure will be catastrophic in that ppl will become even more emboldened to invest in the currency that withstood the attack from "x" govt or "y" financial institution and could ultimately be the coup d'etat of fiat currency or MOAR. The biggest threat is still propaganda it has been since the dawn of civilization. In order for bitcoin to become unstoppable it needs to become impervious to it. |
|
|
|
|
Most of your suspicions are correct, but the conclusions fallacious.
This is a cold war, much like the "soviet" cold war as an arms-race. If people in the US packing up so does the establishment.
|
|
|
|
You guys are going to see a huge influx of new members in the coming months and they are going to outnumber the Bitcoin veterans 10:1. You won't be able to demand they prove themselves then.  They'll do casual business with each other without your help or approval. Casual business is different from offering a security for people to invest in. |
|
|
|
Do you really think all Bitcoiners go on this forum?  says the guy who registered 10 days ago The point is not that everybody ought to use this forum when dealing in bitcoin but that there should be people around who a least have talked to the person if no other means of validation exist. There are plenty of ways to provide proof of legitimacy outside this forum in the bitcoin world for those who seek it. |
|
|
|
Name: BTC Economist
Posts: 190
Position: Full Member
Date Registered: June 18, 2011, 05:38:11 PM
Last Active: November 19, 2011, 03:49:30 AM
seems to me that he is a real bear who liquidated all his btc holdings and stopped caring, not a troll.
Probably sold all his/her coins at close to 2$ out of pure despair, as the price was heading nowhere back then [cursed Bitcoinica being the major cause btw]. Good for us, bad for the fella i guess. Now someone is far too happy to own those cheap coins, and our beloved long lost member "BTC Economist" can bash that head against the closest possible wall, until it rips open. This is the nature of a typical human...ignorance and pure stupidity. That looks more like he was getting zoutounged at the bottom while shorting bitcoin. I did ragequit after a similar incident myself for a while. But it probably was much worse for this guy... |
|
|
|
|
If you really wanna attach bitcoins to a bank note you can do this:
All banknotes contain UV active security features, from my knowledge these are just a bunch of flakes inside the paper distributed randomly. In order to generate the private key you need to photograph the note and write some software to derive a fingerprint of the note. This fingerprint can then be used to derive a private key.
Alternatively you can take a macro of the note and use the irregularities in the paint and so on. But this can be done with almost any physical object using sufficient resolution.
|
|
|
|
Why didn't you wait until we are there to bump it?  |
|
|
|
|
Very interesting idea.
This asks to have augmented reality features built into it, I have no idea of how to do it but when I think of something I will post it.
|
|
|
|
well the Fibonacci ratios converge to the golden ratio so what's the point? tbh I never understood the obsession with it, it's numerology imo. Well we'll find out pretty soon if we move beyond it. I guess it's something like 32*(1-5/8)=12 to 32*(1-8/13)=12.3076923 or something.... numerologists |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
