Next Big Future: If Tesla can become the BMW of electric cars that ...: Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk said he’s optimistic that the company can produce a $35,000 car with a 200-mile range in a few years. “I feel pr...
comment:
I am amazed that Tesla has had as much success as they have had. Their cars are too darned expensive. Still, Musk claims he can make one of his cars for less than 35k. He's been saying that for years, though. I'll believe it when I see it.
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Saturday, August 10, 2013
Next Big Future: Simulated Nuclear Exchange Between the US and Chin...
Next Big Future: Simulated Nuclear Exchange Between the US and Chin...: The analysis [Federation of American Scientist] of the numbers, characteristics and deployment of the strategic nuclear forces of China and...
comment:
The chance of a nuclear exchange between China and USA is close to zero, in my opinion. China has no reason to attack the USA. Why? The USA is self-destructing, so there's no need for China to risk itself with a counter strike from America. The only way the Chinese attack us is if we attack first. This administration is not likely to do that.
However, the future can change things. Both here and in China. Things have a way of going bad, and I think the trends are not good.
comment:
The chance of a nuclear exchange between China and USA is close to zero, in my opinion. China has no reason to attack the USA. Why? The USA is self-destructing, so there's no need for China to risk itself with a counter strike from America. The only way the Chinese attack us is if we attack first. This administration is not likely to do that.
However, the future can change things. Both here and in China. Things have a way of going bad, and I think the trends are not good.
This chart tells it all
Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Peter Schiff On The Half Full Economy
By Tyler Durden
Created 08/09/2013 - 17:11
The marginal economic strength that was described in the most recent GDP release from Washington has caused many to double down on their belief that the Federal Reserve will begin tapering Quantitative Easing sometime later this year. While some believe that is a fantasy given our economy's extreme dependence on QE, market observers should have learned long ago that the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) initial GDP estimates can't be trusted. A perusal of their subsequent GDP revisions in the last five years reveals a clear trend: They are almost twice as likely to revise initial estimates down rather than up, and the downward adjustments have been much larger on average. As a result of this phenomenon, an overall optimism has pervaded the economic discussion that has consistently been unfulfilled by actual performance. The government is continuously over promising and under delivering. Unfortunately, no one seems to care.
 |
| Bush years on left, Obama on right. Note that the red is smaller in the Bush years, but larger in the Obama years. |
To solve the world's problems, just build your own world as you like ( repost from 11-17-12)
Note: There are ideas on this blog that are similar to the movie "Elysium".
How much matter would it take? And where would it come from?
Let's assume that you have a torus ( think do-nut) which is 1000 meters in diameter, with a thickness of 100 meters. Assuming an outer skin or shell of 1 cm thick, this gives a mass of 170796 tons of iron.
But you would probably not want to use iron all around. Or iron at all. A better choice would be stainless steel, which would not rust. The moon has plenty of iron and silica for glass. The new man-made world would be made primarily of these two components.
If you use fused silica glass half and half, the weight would be reduced by half, then add back 27% of the missing half. giving a result 85398+23860 equals 109258 tons. If you wanted a thicker skin, double the thickness, and thus double the mass.
How to assemble all of this? If you lifted 1000 tons at a time, you would need 109 launches, probably from the moon. If you fused the two pieces together on the ground, then launched, it would still require a tremendous amount of lifting power as well as significant assembly still required in space. You would have to fit the 109 pieces together in space.
Not to worry. Parkins' device is claimed to be able to lift as much as 20,000 tons per launch from Earth. Besides, the moon's gravity is only 1/6ths of the Earth's, so that's doable-- at least in theory.
With a potentially mammoth launcher, you could divide it up into just a few sections. Each would be lifted off the lunar surface, docked with each other, and finally secured to each other. A new world thus constructed.
Time to work to make it a livable habitat.
It would be spun at 1 RPM in order to give artificial gravity of 1 g. You would start working on the inside so as to make it livable. It would need shielding from cosmic radiation. Plus a way to grow food and keep water. And so on and so forth. The energy source can be the sun, as it shines eternally in space.
You could build as many of these worlds as you wish. With cheap access to space, people could start populating it. The new worlds could be placed in Lagrange points. There are five of these around the Earth-Moon system, plus five more around the Earth-Sun. You could also place these around Mars and Venus. Plenty of places available.
The sky is literally the limit.
Update:
One of the basic ores on the moon would be ilmenite With that resource, you can make iron, oxygen, and rutile ( titanium). Another basic ore would be silicon dioxide, or just plain old beach sand. You can make glass out of that.
How much matter would it take? And where would it come from?
Let's assume that you have a torus ( think do-nut) which is 1000 meters in diameter, with a thickness of 100 meters. Assuming an outer skin or shell of 1 cm thick, this gives a mass of 170796 tons of iron.
But you would probably not want to use iron all around. Or iron at all. A better choice would be stainless steel, which would not rust. The moon has plenty of iron and silica for glass. The new man-made world would be made primarily of these two components.
If you use fused silica glass half and half, the weight would be reduced by half, then add back 27% of the missing half. giving a result 85398+23860 equals 109258 tons. If you wanted a thicker skin, double the thickness, and thus double the mass.
How to assemble all of this? If you lifted 1000 tons at a time, you would need 109 launches, probably from the moon. If you fused the two pieces together on the ground, then launched, it would still require a tremendous amount of lifting power as well as significant assembly still required in space. You would have to fit the 109 pieces together in space.
Not to worry. Parkins' device is claimed to be able to lift as much as 20,000 tons per launch from Earth. Besides, the moon's gravity is only 1/6ths of the Earth's, so that's doable-- at least in theory.
With a potentially mammoth launcher, you could divide it up into just a few sections. Each would be lifted off the lunar surface, docked with each other, and finally secured to each other. A new world thus constructed.
Time to work to make it a livable habitat.
It would be spun at 1 RPM in order to give artificial gravity of 1 g. You would start working on the inside so as to make it livable. It would need shielding from cosmic radiation. Plus a way to grow food and keep water. And so on and so forth. The energy source can be the sun, as it shines eternally in space.
You could build as many of these worlds as you wish. With cheap access to space, people could start populating it. The new worlds could be placed in Lagrange points. There are five of these around the Earth-Moon system, plus five more around the Earth-Sun. You could also place these around Mars and Venus. Plenty of places available.
The sky is literally the limit.
Update:
One of the basic ores on the moon would be ilmenite With that resource, you can make iron, oxygen, and rutile ( titanium). Another basic ore would be silicon dioxide, or just plain old beach sand. You can make glass out of that.
Next Big Future: Eric Lerner of Lawrenceville Plamsa Physics Presen...
Next Big Future: Eric Lerner of Lawrenceville Plamsa Physics Presen...: On June 11th 2013 Eric Lerner and Lawrenceville Plasma Physics, Inc. were invited to share the latest achievements in the field of nuclear f...
Elysium ---- Movie Review
I went to see the movie last night at the IMAX on the west side of Houston.
The theater was about half full and there was a smattering of applause at the end. Some people seemed to like it.
As for me, it seemed to be entertaining, with plenty of action and things that go boom. If you accept the premises of the movie, you can enjoy it. If you don't, the movie looks rather flawed.
The main premise is that there can be such a place as this space station called "Elysium", at the same time that the Earth is really bad shape. For to construct such a place would require a technical competence far beyond anything that we have now. If such competence existed, why could it not be used to solve Earth's problems? It is that premise, that such competence would NOT be used for the greater benefit of humanity, that is the major premise of the movie. If you accept that, you can like this movie. If you don't, there's no doggone way that you can like this movie.
It has been said that the movie reflects our present more than it predicts the future. I would agree. It is basically a rather ignoble view of humanity that is offensive here. That there is something righteous and good about being poor, and something evil about being rich. That, by being rich, you can only take from others, or withhold from others, and not contribute something of worth for your prosperity. The movie doesn't even demonstrate that, it just presumes that people are that way. Again, I would agree that there are some people like that, but I would hope that it doesn't define humanity. For if it does, nothing like the technological marvel that is Elysium could ever be possible anyway. Why? Why invent something if you can steal it?
So, my verdict is this: If you want to be entertained, go see it. If you want to be informed, there are better ways to spend your time.
The theater was about half full and there was a smattering of applause at the end. Some people seemed to like it.
As for me, it seemed to be entertaining, with plenty of action and things that go boom. If you accept the premises of the movie, you can enjoy it. If you don't, the movie looks rather flawed.
The main premise is that there can be such a place as this space station called "Elysium", at the same time that the Earth is really bad shape. For to construct such a place would require a technical competence far beyond anything that we have now. If such competence existed, why could it not be used to solve Earth's problems? It is that premise, that such competence would NOT be used for the greater benefit of humanity, that is the major premise of the movie. If you accept that, you can like this movie. If you don't, there's no doggone way that you can like this movie.
It has been said that the movie reflects our present more than it predicts the future. I would agree. It is basically a rather ignoble view of humanity that is offensive here. That there is something righteous and good about being poor, and something evil about being rich. That, by being rich, you can only take from others, or withhold from others, and not contribute something of worth for your prosperity. The movie doesn't even demonstrate that, it just presumes that people are that way. Again, I would agree that there are some people like that, but I would hope that it doesn't define humanity. For if it does, nothing like the technological marvel that is Elysium could ever be possible anyway. Why? Why invent something if you can steal it?
So, my verdict is this: If you want to be entertained, go see it. If you want to be informed, there are better ways to spend your time.
Friday, August 9, 2013
Thought of the day
Just came up with something interesting. At least, it is interesting to me.
I've said that the truth is slippery, and that ideology can make you stupid.
Taking that one step further with this thought: It is what we believe that makes us blind to the truth.
Yet it is impossible to separate ourselves from what we believe. The ego will attach itself to whatever one wants to believe, but in doing so, it will cause the mind to fail to perceive what is out there. It will also cause one to see something there which is not.
Chew on that one today, my friends.
I've said that the truth is slippery, and that ideology can make you stupid.
Taking that one step further with this thought: It is what we believe that makes us blind to the truth.
Yet it is impossible to separate ourselves from what we believe. The ego will attach itself to whatever one wants to believe, but in doing so, it will cause the mind to fail to perceive what is out there. It will also cause one to see something there which is not.
Chew on that one today, my friends.
Is Cold Fusion Entering the Final Stages?
Free Republic
comment:
I linked to the Free Republic site because I got the link from there and there's a guy on that site that keeps pumping this.
As far as cold fusion is concerned, it's time to poop or get off the pot. The arguments for and against are silly.
comment:
I linked to the Free Republic site because I got the link from there and there's a guy on that site that keeps pumping this.
As far as cold fusion is concerned, it's time to poop or get off the pot. The arguments for and against are silly.
This movie may be interesting enough to go see it
The official trailer below:
The ideas for this movie are in this blog!!!
Did somebody rip me off?
BTW, that was a joke.
Finally, it is being denounced as socialist, but I reserve judgment until I see it.
The ideas for this movie are in this blog!!!
Did somebody rip me off?
BTW, that was a joke.
Finally, it is being denounced as socialist, but I reserve judgment until I see it.
The Rats are Fleeing the Sinking Ship
Yet I would expect that as the number of expatriates continue to grow, this exit tax will become more and more onerous as the government tries to trap people, and their wealth, in the country.
Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Americans Renouncing Citizenship Surge 66%
By Tyler Durden
Created 08/08/2013 - 15:40
A massive 1,131 individuals renounced their US citizenship last quarter, according to data that has yet to be officially released (though we were able to procure an advanced copy [1]). This is a huge jump. Compared to the same quarter last year in which 188 people renounced their US citizenship, this year's number is over six times higher. Not to mention, it's 66.5% higher than last quarter's 679 renunciations. This brings the total number of renunciations so far this year to 1,810. While still embryonic, it's difficult to ignore this trend– more and more people are starting to renounce their US citizenship.
Links:
[1] https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2013-19224.pdf
[1] https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2013-19224.pdf
Marc Faber: Look out! A 1987-style crash is coming
cnbc
comment:
It makes sense. But the Fed is backing the market. Any plunge is likely to be met with some type of intervention.
No way this administration can afford to let this market fall like that.
"In 1987, we had a very powerful rally, but also earnings were no longer rising substantially, and the market became very overbought," ...
Faber says that's exactly where we find ourselves this August.
comment:
It makes sense. But the Fed is backing the market. Any plunge is likely to be met with some type of intervention.
No way this administration can afford to let this market fall like that.
Thursday, August 8, 2013
Media Matters to declare victory over Limbaugh regardless of reality
Legal Insurrection
comment:
All in all, I'd prefer Rush to remain on the air.
But it makes little difference one way or the other.
Why? Because Limbaugh doesn't use his popularity very well, in my opinion. If his idea is to advance conservatism, he is failing, and failing big time. This is regardless of whether or not he stays on the air.
A lot of people would probably scoff at this assertion. But if you do, ask yourself this: Why did a guy like Barak Hussein Obama become president? How is this possible with someone like Limbaugh, with all of his alleged influence and alleged enlightenment of all of us?
You see, I think Limbaugh likes his money. Yet he preaches patriotism. The founders, that he speaks so well of, risked it all, including their lives, so that this country could live. In contrast, people like Limbaugh make a fortune while the country dies. If he is so good, if he is so patriotic, how can this be?
I don't like being critical of Rush. But if this immigration bill passes, the Democrats will have a majority forever.
How do you remain in the GOP like Rush is going to do regardless of what the GOP does, and especially if they allow this? Limbaugh has little importance in the larger scheme of things. But he does has his money and his show.
The GOP leadership loves their money too. They probably bought and paid for, just like the rest of them in both parties.
comment:
All in all, I'd prefer Rush to remain on the air.
But it makes little difference one way or the other.
Why? Because Limbaugh doesn't use his popularity very well, in my opinion. If his idea is to advance conservatism, he is failing, and failing big time. This is regardless of whether or not he stays on the air.
A lot of people would probably scoff at this assertion. But if you do, ask yourself this: Why did a guy like Barak Hussein Obama become president? How is this possible with someone like Limbaugh, with all of his alleged influence and alleged enlightenment of all of us?
You see, I think Limbaugh likes his money. Yet he preaches patriotism. The founders, that he speaks so well of, risked it all, including their lives, so that this country could live. In contrast, people like Limbaugh make a fortune while the country dies. If he is so good, if he is so patriotic, how can this be?
I don't like being critical of Rush. But if this immigration bill passes, the Democrats will have a majority forever.
How do you remain in the GOP like Rush is going to do regardless of what the GOP does, and especially if they allow this? Limbaugh has little importance in the larger scheme of things. But he does has his money and his show.
The GOP leadership loves their money too. They probably bought and paid for, just like the rest of them in both parties.
More Dems than Republicans, 53% to 27%, say American Dream is dead | WashingtonExaminer.com
More Dems than Republicans, 53% to 27%, say American Dream is dead | WashingtonExaminer.com
comment:
A couple things here. Number 1, I don't get to listen much to Limbaugh anymore, but today I caught a few minutes of it, and he seemed to be talking about it.
Number 2, my chart that I constructed and put up here would indicate that the dream is definitely dead, but apparently, a lot of people haven't gotten the message yet.
The dream may not be dead, but it is in definite trouble.
My question is this: do a lot of Americans want it dead? Because there's this Limits to Growth mentality that has a lot to do with the lack of growth, in my opinion.
comment:
A couple things here. Number 1, I don't get to listen much to Limbaugh anymore, but today I caught a few minutes of it, and he seemed to be talking about it.
Number 2, my chart that I constructed and put up here would indicate that the dream is definitely dead, but apparently, a lot of people haven't gotten the message yet.
The dream may not be dead, but it is in definite trouble.
My question is this: do a lot of Americans want it dead? Because there's this Limits to Growth mentality that has a lot to do with the lack of growth, in my opinion.
A tale told by an idiot
full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
How can anybody who listens to this drivel think that this man is anything but a blithering idiot.
How can anybody who listens to this drivel think that this man is anything but a blithering idiot.
Braveheart - FREEDOM
Why does one wake up with a different mood than the one one goes to bed with? I was in a better mood last night. This morning, everything seems different and ominous.
The idea from this post came from reading this hopeful post on Behind the Black, which was written about a year before last year's election. The idea was that the space program just needed to be FREE from government control. But Obama was re-elected, and so the march towards the idiocracy continues.
I'd like to think that the human spirit can win over the attempt to crush it. That's what this scene was about. Wallace screams "Freedom" as his last word, which is not what his torturers wanted. They wanted him to cave in and give them what they wanted to hear, which was a cry for mercy. The feeling this morning is that, in the real world, as opposed to the movies, Wallace may have given in and said "mercy" after all.
Maybe Elon Musk succeeds, but SpaceX almost went under in 2008. It is a fragile thing, as life itself is.
The idea from this post came from reading this hopeful post on Behind the Black, which was written about a year before last year's election. The idea was that the space program just needed to be FREE from government control. But Obama was re-elected, and so the march towards the idiocracy continues.
I'd like to think that the human spirit can win over the attempt to crush it. That's what this scene was about. Wallace screams "Freedom" as his last word, which is not what his torturers wanted. They wanted him to cave in and give them what they wanted to hear, which was a cry for mercy. The feeling this morning is that, in the real world, as opposed to the movies, Wallace may have given in and said "mercy" after all.
Maybe Elon Musk succeeds, but SpaceX almost went under in 2008. It is a fragile thing, as life itself is.
Smart women aren't having kids = Idiocracy
Just when you thought that it was just a movie, this article says that smart women don't have kids. That means the dumb ones are having kids, which was the idea behind this moive
Next thing you know, they'll be putting gatorade on crops.
Update:
Nothing works anymore and they don't know why.
Next thing you know, they'll be putting gatorade on crops.
Update:
Nothing works anymore and they don't know why.
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
No need for panic
Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Guest Post: Is Water The New Oil?
By Tyler Durden
Created 08/07/2013 - 13:36
The sharpening international geopolitical competition over natural resources has turned some strategic resources into engines of power struggle. Transnational water resources have become an especially active source of competition and conflict, triggering a dam-building race and prompting growing calls for the United Nations to recognize water as a key security concern. With the era of cheap, bountiful water having been replaced by increasing supply and quality constraints, many investors are beginning to view water as the new oil. Political and economic water wars are already being waged in several regions, reflected in dam construction on international rivers and coercive diplomacy or other means to prevent such works. The World Bank estimates that such constraints are costing China 2.3% of GDP [1]. In short, we must focus on addressing our water-supply problems as if our lives depended on it. In fact, they do.
Links:
[1] http://goo.gl/OTXc1
[1] http://goo.gl/OTXc1
French are fleeing Krugman's worker's paradise
Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Crossing The Rhine...To Escape 10% Unemployment
By Tyler Durden
Created 08/06/2013 - 20:42
"Many people still refuse to work in Germany; it's the language and demons of the past," but for many, crossing the Rhine is now the only option to escape the dismal depression-like economic environment that is engulfing France (as we most recently discussed here [1] and here [2]). As one border-crossing employee noted, "in Germany, they take people more easily and train them for new work even if you have worked in a totally different area than the one asked for," and with unemployment in Alsace (France) at about 10% and the jobless rate in the bordering German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg at a mere 4%, it is little wonder that an increasing number - around 24,000 French people (from this 'symbolic' region) are crossing over for work.
Links:
[1] http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-09/charles-gave-france-brink-secondary-depression
[2] http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-06/charles-gave-get-out-banks-get-out-france-get-out-euro
[1] http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-09/charles-gave-france-brink-secondary-depression
[2] http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-06/charles-gave-get-out-banks-get-out-france-get-out-euro
Most polls say we are on the wrong track, but do you know why?
How many of those polls ask why?
Why are we on the wrong track?
I'd bet less than 1 in a million will know the true reason why we are on the wrong track.
If I'd guess about the zeitgeist, the majority might say that the rich is getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. This is misleading. The truth is that everybody is getting poorer, but the rich suffer the least. So, the resentment focuses in on the rich. Taxing the rich more isn't the answer anymore than killing the goose that lays the golden egg will produce more golden eggs.
I think that we are on the wrong track because the zeitgeist has drunk the kool aid of the Limits to Growth crowd. So, we end up with politicians who want to spread the wealth as opposed to creating new wealth. What we get is less wealth and more equality, but that equality comes at a fearful price. That price will get more and more fearful as the Limits to Growth philosophy becomes hard wired and institutionalized. We are almost there now.
This Limits to Growth zeitgeist has all but rejected nuclear power. But the rejection of nuclear power all but guarantees that future growth will become impossible. Read the link above to see my reasoning upon this subject. Boiled down to its most salient point is this: an advanced society requires kinetic energy, which can only be supplied by nuclear energy. The physics of this cannot be willed out of existence. It cannot be bargained with or reasoned with. It cannot be fudged. There is no other way to continue growth but by embracing nuclear energy. It's all in the physics.
So, we have to make a choice. Go backwards into chaos and self-destruction, or forward into a new golden age of growth and prosperity. The way towards that is nuclear energy. It is against the paradigm at the moment, but that can change. The only way to change that paradigm is to get the message out. You can be sure that the Limits to Growth crowd do not want this message to get out.
Why are we on the wrong track?
I'd bet less than 1 in a million will know the true reason why we are on the wrong track.
If I'd guess about the zeitgeist, the majority might say that the rich is getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. This is misleading. The truth is that everybody is getting poorer, but the rich suffer the least. So, the resentment focuses in on the rich. Taxing the rich more isn't the answer anymore than killing the goose that lays the golden egg will produce more golden eggs.
I think that we are on the wrong track because the zeitgeist has drunk the kool aid of the Limits to Growth crowd. So, we end up with politicians who want to spread the wealth as opposed to creating new wealth. What we get is less wealth and more equality, but that equality comes at a fearful price. That price will get more and more fearful as the Limits to Growth philosophy becomes hard wired and institutionalized. We are almost there now.
This Limits to Growth zeitgeist has all but rejected nuclear power. But the rejection of nuclear power all but guarantees that future growth will become impossible. Read the link above to see my reasoning upon this subject. Boiled down to its most salient point is this: an advanced society requires kinetic energy, which can only be supplied by nuclear energy. The physics of this cannot be willed out of existence. It cannot be bargained with or reasoned with. It cannot be fudged. There is no other way to continue growth but by embracing nuclear energy. It's all in the physics.
So, we have to make a choice. Go backwards into chaos and self-destruction, or forward into a new golden age of growth and prosperity. The way towards that is nuclear energy. It is against the paradigm at the moment, but that can change. The only way to change that paradigm is to get the message out. You can be sure that the Limits to Growth crowd do not want this message to get out.
A nuclear reactor that burns its own waste?
theglobeandmail
quote:
comment:
The "miracle" has already existed for 40 years. It is called the molten-salt reactor. No mention of it in this article. The article also states that light-water reactors require "highly enriched uranium". That's factually incorrect. It requires enrichment that is reactor grade, which isn't particularly scary or dangerous.
The Candu reactor requires no enrichment at all.
It doesn't help to have science writers who don't include all the facts.
The Limits to Growth gang have successfully stopped the nuclear industry in this country.
quote:
The Microsoft founder is looking for an “energy miracle” – or several – that can power a 21st-century economy without emitting greenhouse gases that contribute to catastrophic climate change.
comment:
The "miracle" has already existed for 40 years. It is called the molten-salt reactor. No mention of it in this article. The article also states that light-water reactors require "highly enriched uranium". That's factually incorrect. It requires enrichment that is reactor grade, which isn't particularly scary or dangerous.
The Candu reactor requires no enrichment at all.
It doesn't help to have science writers who don't include all the facts.
The Limits to Growth gang have successfully stopped the nuclear industry in this country.
Rasmussen: To See Where Country is Heading, Ignore Washington
Free Republic
quote:
This may be wishful thinking. Since 1968, the economy hasn't grown at all in terms of gold. A lot of other economic measurements confirm the finding that the economy is stuck in the mud. The only thing that has really grown is debt. This "Limits to Growth" phenomenon has existed regardless of the tax rates. It has existed with high tax rates of 70% in the seventies and lower tax rates of 28% in the eighties under Reagan.
Ignore DC at your own peril. It can swamp anything good that may come along.
Update:
Psst! DC is The Matrix.
quote:
For those activists who cling to the view that politics drives the future, consider the 1970s, when politicians grappled with an energy crisis, Watergate, high inflation, high unemployment and more. The policy debates led to the tax revolt and the election of Ronald Reagan as president.comment:
This may be wishful thinking. Since 1968, the economy hasn't grown at all in terms of gold. A lot of other economic measurements confirm the finding that the economy is stuck in the mud. The only thing that has really grown is debt. This "Limits to Growth" phenomenon has existed regardless of the tax rates. It has existed with high tax rates of 70% in the seventies and lower tax rates of 28% in the eighties under Reagan.
Ignore DC at your own peril. It can swamp anything good that may come along.
Update:
Psst! DC is The Matrix.
Immigration Supporters Plan to Turn Up the Heat on House Republicans
yahoo
quote:
comment:
Why is that true? My information is that Hispanics are not that keen upon the idea. Is this purely manufactured, or is it real?
There is not economic reason why Hispanics should want additional competition for already scarce jobs. Also, why would any working class group favor this bill? Jobs are scarce. It makes little sense to add more immigrants to an already crowded field.
Why do Democrats get credit for being for the little guy when they burden the little guy with higher costs of living and a more difficult job market?
Seems to me that the GOP needs to answer more effectively. But neither party gives a damn about the working man.
quote:
The districts where lobbying campaigns make the most sense are in areas where a sizable percentage of the voters are Hispanic
comment:
Why is that true? My information is that Hispanics are not that keen upon the idea. Is this purely manufactured, or is it real?
There is not economic reason why Hispanics should want additional competition for already scarce jobs. Also, why would any working class group favor this bill? Jobs are scarce. It makes little sense to add more immigrants to an already crowded field.
Why do Democrats get credit for being for the little guy when they burden the little guy with higher costs of living and a more difficult job market?
Seems to me that the GOP needs to answer more effectively. But neither party gives a damn about the working man.
GM cuts plug-in Volt's price by $5,000
detroitnews
quote:
It's still an expensive car for someone like me. It doesn't offer much of a financial incentive to buy it.
Maybe GM should have made it a Cadillac instead. A high end vehicle wouldn't have the same obstacles. That's the approach Tesla has taken.
If you are going to sell to the broader public, the price must come down a lot more.
quote:
Don Johnson, U.S. vice president, Chevrolet sales and service. “We have made great strides in reducing costs as we gain experience with electric vehicles and their components.”comment:
It's still an expensive car for someone like me. It doesn't offer much of a financial incentive to buy it.
Maybe GM should have made it a Cadillac instead. A high end vehicle wouldn't have the same obstacles. That's the approach Tesla has taken.
If you are going to sell to the broader public, the price must come down a lot more.
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
Oil giant, developer George Mitchell dies at 94
chron.com
Not exactly news since the story was on July 26th.
There's a memorial service about this time as I write this. It is being held in his hometown of Galveston. I was in Galveston today. If it weren't for that, I wouldn't have known.
Mitchell was quite important in these parts. A few things I didn't know:
Not that I was completely unfamiliar with the man. I recognize his picture, of course.
The Club of Rome and Limits to Growth occurred at about the same time that the economic clout of the USA peaked. A mere coincidence?
Certainly, Mitchell was a giant in his field and a very powerful man. But the connections to Limits to Growth was not one of his better ideas.
Not exactly news since the story was on July 26th.
There's a memorial service about this time as I write this. It is being held in his hometown of Galveston. I was in Galveston today. If it weren't for that, I wouldn't have known.
Mitchell was quite important in these parts. A few things I didn't know:
- He was a pioneer of "fracking", which is helping the US reach energy independence
- He was born in Galveston. He helped revitalize the city. He brought back Mardi Gras, a tradition that had faded after World War II
- He sponsored Dennis Meadows' work, which is connected to the Club of Rome. He contributed greatly to the concept of sustainable development.
Not that I was completely unfamiliar with the man. I recognize his picture, of course.
The Club of Rome and Limits to Growth occurred at about the same time that the economic clout of the USA peaked. A mere coincidence?
Certainly, Mitchell was a giant in his field and a very powerful man. But the connections to Limits to Growth was not one of his better ideas.
Manipulating the U.S. Intelligence Community Shouldn’t Be This Easy | Online Library of Law and Liberty
Manipulating the U.S. Intelligence Community Shouldn’t Be This Easy | Online Library of Law and Liberty
comment:
The Embassy closings and such were a political act, not a governing act. What I mean is that the politics are meant as a distraction from what the politicians don't want to talk about or have anyone talking about.
The government doesn't work properly, but that isn't the point.
comment:
The Embassy closings and such were a political act, not a governing act. What I mean is that the politics are meant as a distraction from what the politicians don't want to talk about or have anyone talking about.
The government doesn't work properly, but that isn't the point.
Survey of the big picture
One could fail to see the forest because of the trees. The trees are current events as it flows along. The forest is what it all means.
This is a prediction post. After all, the blog's overall intent is to try to fathom the course of events, and predict the future so as to profit from that. If not profit, then to minimize losses.
Just before the New Year, I predicted that we may find out if the GOP is a me-too party or an opposition party. It wasn't clear which way that one was going to go. It looks to me that now the main body of the party wants to be an opposition party, but the head at the top of the party wants to be a me-too party. Which one wins? No prediction here, but the struggle for control will continue.
As for the economy, it looks dead in the water. The real meaning of Obama's administration is that it seeks to grow the government, not the economy. This puts the political struggle into context. The lack of growth in the economy is the pivot point on which the politics will turn. If the truth matters, the Democrats will lose the struggle. That's the key thing to remember, "if the truth matters". For the culture seems to be moving into the direction of untruth. The evidence of this spans the entire culture, there can be no doubt about this. A prime example of this is the Zimmerman trial and its aftermath. The body still follows the truth as shown by the verdict. Yet the head wants us to believe the untruth that this was a racially motivated crime. This assertion may not seem relevant to economics, but it is. It is cultural and the culture will determine the politics and thus the economy.
The head wants quantitative easing. This will continue since the economy is not responding. The propaganda of an improving economy will continue. The blaming of the GOP for the lack of growth will continue and the demand for more government to fix the lackluster economy will intensify. The head already has an alibi for its failures--- it's the other guy's fault--- meaning the GOP. The body will be pounded with propaganda in order to get it to go into the direction the head wants to go.
The head doesn't want the truth about the scandals. The body does want the truth about the scandals. The head may do just about anything to divert attention from any new revelations that may unravel its control over the enough of the body so that it can keep itself in control. Hence the panic over terrorism even though the head assured us less than a year ago that Al Qaeda was in decline.
Thus we will find out if the truth matters anymore in this country. If it does, then Obama and his brand of politics is finished in this country. For Obama and his cohorts are not about truth, but are about control. The outcome of this struggle will determine the future of the country.
This is a prediction post. After all, the blog's overall intent is to try to fathom the course of events, and predict the future so as to profit from that. If not profit, then to minimize losses.
Just before the New Year, I predicted that we may find out if the GOP is a me-too party or an opposition party. It wasn't clear which way that one was going to go. It looks to me that now the main body of the party wants to be an opposition party, but the head at the top of the party wants to be a me-too party. Which one wins? No prediction here, but the struggle for control will continue.
As for the economy, it looks dead in the water. The real meaning of Obama's administration is that it seeks to grow the government, not the economy. This puts the political struggle into context. The lack of growth in the economy is the pivot point on which the politics will turn. If the truth matters, the Democrats will lose the struggle. That's the key thing to remember, "if the truth matters". For the culture seems to be moving into the direction of untruth. The evidence of this spans the entire culture, there can be no doubt about this. A prime example of this is the Zimmerman trial and its aftermath. The body still follows the truth as shown by the verdict. Yet the head wants us to believe the untruth that this was a racially motivated crime. This assertion may not seem relevant to economics, but it is. It is cultural and the culture will determine the politics and thus the economy.
The head wants quantitative easing. This will continue since the economy is not responding. The propaganda of an improving economy will continue. The blaming of the GOP for the lack of growth will continue and the demand for more government to fix the lackluster economy will intensify. The head already has an alibi for its failures--- it's the other guy's fault--- meaning the GOP. The body will be pounded with propaganda in order to get it to go into the direction the head wants to go.
The head doesn't want the truth about the scandals. The body does want the truth about the scandals. The head may do just about anything to divert attention from any new revelations that may unravel its control over the enough of the body so that it can keep itself in control. Hence the panic over terrorism even though the head assured us less than a year ago that Al Qaeda was in decline.
Thus we will find out if the truth matters anymore in this country. If it does, then Obama and his brand of politics is finished in this country. For Obama and his cohorts are not about truth, but are about control. The outcome of this struggle will determine the future of the country.
Daniel Henninger: Obama's Creeping Authoritarianism
wsj
quote:
It's getting a bit more serious than just "creeping authoritarianism". He's doing this in the face of mounting scandals. The scandals aren't phony at all. He's trying to brazen his way through it. Something's gotta give.
quote:
Mr. Obama is pushing in a direction that has the potential for a political crisis...Republican opponents should force the party's incumbents to defend the president's creeping authoritarianism.comment:
It's getting a bit more serious than just "creeping authoritarianism". He's doing this in the face of mounting scandals. The scandals aren't phony at all. He's trying to brazen his way through it. Something's gotta give.
Benghazi: A New Iran-Contra Scandal? Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!
Benghazi: A New Iran-Contra Scandal? Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!
comment:
What's to be done about this? Anything?
comment:
What's to be done about this? Anything?
Monday, August 5, 2013
40 Percent Of U.S. Workers Make Less Than What A Full-Time Minimum Wage Worker Made In 1968
Economic collapse blog
comment:
There's that date again. It seems that this was the year that things started falling apart. I've posted on that idea fairly recently.
Many of the comments are familiar. There were those back then who were warning about this, but nobody listened. Still true today.
comment:
There's that date again. It seems that this was the year that things started falling apart. I've posted on that idea fairly recently.
Many of the comments are familiar. There were those back then who were warning about this, but nobody listened. Still true today.
Test tube beef gets taste test
http://m.usatoday.com/article/news/2618599
Doesn't taste like chicken. Not yet, but they are working on it.
Rossi's 1 MW device
Way back in October 2011, Rossi had a demonstration of his 1 megawatt device. Let's say it was all on the level. Let's say that the thing really worked as advertised.
What exactly would you have with such a device?
The device looked like a conex thingy that I've made deliveries to. You could fit it on a semi rig and haul it around that way. This gives an idea as to its dimensions. Not too terribly big.
Let's say you can get 1/3 of its thermal energy converted to electricity. That may be way too optimistic. But let's use that number.
There's no information that I know of with regards to manufacturing cost. But let's speculate on that a bit in terms of a useful device to make hydrogen for sale for fuel cell cars.
In my delivery business, I have an idea of how much revenue I can get from a vehicle. Using some of Rossi's numbers, and hydrogen production numbers, I can guesstimate how much revenue from hydrogen sales that I might get. Let's say you can get about a half million dollars a year in revenue from this device. That, by the way, is wildly optimistic. For the sake of argument, though, let's use that number. Now, in order for it to be as profitable as my delivery vehicle is, the cost of the entire apparatus would have to be rather small in order to make it all worthwhile. I'm thinking no more than a half a million for the entire shebang. Even that number would be much higher than what I spend for my delivery vehicle.
Now, with this reasoning, I'm guessing that this isn't worth the effort. Not enough revenue for the amount spent. The more the apparatus costs, the more impractical it becomes. If you could get the numbers for the device way down, it may start to make some sense. But this seems unlikely. To get a number like I'm getting for my van, the apparatus would have to be dirt cheap. Not likely.
In order to reach a final verdict, I'd have to know how much one of Rossi's 1 MW devices costs. The range could be anywhere to 50k to 500k. Probably as close to 50k as you can get. That wouldn't be all. Then you'd have to make a custom made device to make electricity from the heat. The price for such a device would also have to be kept down as low as possible as well.
This does not seem encouraging.
However, if you could pull it all off, and if you had a customer base, the sky would be the limit.
As usual for any business, costs are key. You'd have to be very, very sure of the costs.
I'd say this potential venture is most unlikely. At this point, not impossible. lol
What exactly would you have with such a device?
The device looked like a conex thingy that I've made deliveries to. You could fit it on a semi rig and haul it around that way. This gives an idea as to its dimensions. Not too terribly big.
Let's say you can get 1/3 of its thermal energy converted to electricity. That may be way too optimistic. But let's use that number.
There's no information that I know of with regards to manufacturing cost. But let's speculate on that a bit in terms of a useful device to make hydrogen for sale for fuel cell cars.
In my delivery business, I have an idea of how much revenue I can get from a vehicle. Using some of Rossi's numbers, and hydrogen production numbers, I can guesstimate how much revenue from hydrogen sales that I might get. Let's say you can get about a half million dollars a year in revenue from this device. That, by the way, is wildly optimistic. For the sake of argument, though, let's use that number. Now, in order for it to be as profitable as my delivery vehicle is, the cost of the entire apparatus would have to be rather small in order to make it all worthwhile. I'm thinking no more than a half a million for the entire shebang. Even that number would be much higher than what I spend for my delivery vehicle.
Now, with this reasoning, I'm guessing that this isn't worth the effort. Not enough revenue for the amount spent. The more the apparatus costs, the more impractical it becomes. If you could get the numbers for the device way down, it may start to make some sense. But this seems unlikely. To get a number like I'm getting for my van, the apparatus would have to be dirt cheap. Not likely.
In order to reach a final verdict, I'd have to know how much one of Rossi's 1 MW devices costs. The range could be anywhere to 50k to 500k. Probably as close to 50k as you can get. That wouldn't be all. Then you'd have to make a custom made device to make electricity from the heat. The price for such a device would also have to be kept down as low as possible as well.
This does not seem encouraging.
However, if you could pull it all off, and if you had a customer base, the sky would be the limit.
As usual for any business, costs are key. You'd have to be very, very sure of the costs.
I'd say this potential venture is most unlikely. At this point, not impossible. lol
Manufacturing jobs v. food stamp recipients
Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Spot The Mirror Image
By Tyler Durden
Created 08/04/2013 - 13:20
Presented with little comment aside to note that there appears to be another, far more structural, great rotation under way in America.
- Jim Cramer NOT
Sunday, August 4, 2013
What are the properties of a Bose Einstein Condensate?
uni-muenster.de
Nice set of posts to educate yourself on this subject ( in case you're interested ).
Following this thread
That's the theory, anyhow.
A BEC doesn't have to be near absolute zero. Room temperature BEC's have been observed.
Nice set of posts to educate yourself on this subject ( in case you're interested ).
Following this thread
- What are Magnons?
- Magnon Bose Einstein Condensation
- How can one achieve a Bose Einstein Condensation of Magnons?
- How can one raise the chemical potential of a quasi particle gas?
- What are the creation and destruction mechanisms for magnons?
- How does a magnon gas reach a statistical energy distribution?
That's the theory, anyhow.
A BEC doesn't have to be near absolute zero. Room temperature BEC's have been observed.
Why revisit cold fusion?
Audience numbers are way down. Look, I've just about given up on getting a big audience for this blog. So, the audience can go to zero for all I care. I don't write in order to build an audience. I write for whatever interests me.
Cold fusion interests me now. But, it isn't unique for me. I'm interested in all energy sources. The key thing here to me is that no energy source should be frowned upon. Or favored especially over another. What should count is its effectiveness. That is, does it supply the necessary energy for a reasonable price? Is it reliable?
I'm critical of ITER because it is receiving favorable treatment. It is getting that favor on the presumable grounds of being safer and potentially more abundant. But you can't run ITER without tritium and that has to be made because it doesn't exist in nature. Not to mention that tritium is dangerous stuff. Yet, our government has sponsored ITER even though it doesn't work and won't sponsor molten-salt reactors even though it does work ( in laboratory ). That ought to strike people as odd, but for some strange reason, people won't question what the government does and doesn't do. It is an almost childlike quality that is not usually found elsewhere. One may ask the question--- what gives?
The thing that comes to mind immediately is corruption. That is, there's money at stake, and the politicians are on the take. Therefore, anything that won't work isn't a threat to special interests. It can get plenty of taxpayer money, and no objections from "you know who". But anything that does work is definitely a threat, and that has to be suppressed at all costs. Follow the money. That's why you can't count on politicians to solve any problems. Chances are, there's money to made in causing problems, not in fixing them. Wars or the threat of wars makes the military necessary, don't you know. It isn't only wars, but any government program exists only to enrich those who advocate for it. This is against the interests of everybody else. For someone who isn't a totally clueless chucklehead who depends upon the msm to supposedly give them the news, this isn't a surprise at all.
I don't know if Rossi has anything real or not. It just seems to me that the cold fusion folks are chasing up the wrong tree. You shouldn't look to the establishment for validation. You should just develop a product for sale and then sell it. Once it's available to the public, the science can then scramble to figure out how the gizmo works. Instead, it seems that all the cold fusion people are doing is arguing with an establishment that will never give them recognition. The establishment should have to deal with a fait accompli, then adjust itself to the new realities. But that reality has to exist. If Rossi doesn't have anything, their skepticism will have been validated. If Rossi does have something, but is allowing them to dictate to him, then shame on him. For that wasn't necessary.
I don't know which it is, but I'd like to see it if it does exist. If somebody has got something, they should be producing a product for sale. Otherwise, how do you know?
Seems to me that an energy source should be able to produce hydrogen. Hydrogen would be a product that could be sold just about anywhere as long as you have a cheap energy source and water.
Put up or shut up. If you've got something, then make hydrogen and sell it. There exists a market for it.
Cold fusion interests me now. But, it isn't unique for me. I'm interested in all energy sources. The key thing here to me is that no energy source should be frowned upon. Or favored especially over another. What should count is its effectiveness. That is, does it supply the necessary energy for a reasonable price? Is it reliable?
I'm critical of ITER because it is receiving favorable treatment. It is getting that favor on the presumable grounds of being safer and potentially more abundant. But you can't run ITER without tritium and that has to be made because it doesn't exist in nature. Not to mention that tritium is dangerous stuff. Yet, our government has sponsored ITER even though it doesn't work and won't sponsor molten-salt reactors even though it does work ( in laboratory ). That ought to strike people as odd, but for some strange reason, people won't question what the government does and doesn't do. It is an almost childlike quality that is not usually found elsewhere. One may ask the question--- what gives?
The thing that comes to mind immediately is corruption. That is, there's money at stake, and the politicians are on the take. Therefore, anything that won't work isn't a threat to special interests. It can get plenty of taxpayer money, and no objections from "you know who". But anything that does work is definitely a threat, and that has to be suppressed at all costs. Follow the money. That's why you can't count on politicians to solve any problems. Chances are, there's money to made in causing problems, not in fixing them. Wars or the threat of wars makes the military necessary, don't you know. It isn't only wars, but any government program exists only to enrich those who advocate for it. This is against the interests of everybody else. For someone who isn't a totally clueless chucklehead who depends upon the msm to supposedly give them the news, this isn't a surprise at all.
I don't know if Rossi has anything real or not. It just seems to me that the cold fusion folks are chasing up the wrong tree. You shouldn't look to the establishment for validation. You should just develop a product for sale and then sell it. Once it's available to the public, the science can then scramble to figure out how the gizmo works. Instead, it seems that all the cold fusion people are doing is arguing with an establishment that will never give them recognition. The establishment should have to deal with a fait accompli, then adjust itself to the new realities. But that reality has to exist. If Rossi doesn't have anything, their skepticism will have been validated. If Rossi does have something, but is allowing them to dictate to him, then shame on him. For that wasn't necessary.
I don't know which it is, but I'd like to see it if it does exist. If somebody has got something, they should be producing a product for sale. Otherwise, how do you know?
Seems to me that an energy source should be able to produce hydrogen. Hydrogen would be a product that could be sold just about anywhere as long as you have a cheap energy source and water.
Put up or shut up. If you've got something, then make hydrogen and sell it. There exists a market for it.
Rossi: Can’t Find Stirling Engine Fit for Purpose
ecatworld via pesn lenr to market weekly
comment:
What the article says is that there's no "off the shelf" Stirling engines that can work with the e-cat.
Does that mean that one could be developed for the express purpose of working with the e-cat? Or does Rossi rule this possibility out?
As for me, my understanding of Stirling engines is vague. It is my understanding that you need at least 400 degrees Farenheit in temperature difference so that a Stirling engine could be sufficiently efficient. Since the "cold" e-cat doesn't produce that difference, it is understandable that such a device would not exist.
How to get the temperature gradient necessary? An idea that no doubt occurred to somebody else could be this one: make one through the use of cryogenic gases for the cold side. The gases would have to regenerated, and that would entail a parasitic drag on energy production. The device would not be very efficient, but it may be feasible. Combined with the hot side of the cold cat with the cold side of the cryogenic gas would give 600+ degree Farenheit temperature gradient---plenty to spare. The engine would supply the energy necessary for the production of electricity, and to regenerate the cryogenic gas.
What would I do with this electricity? One possible application would be the production of hydrogen for fuel cell cars. This would thus be a product that could be sold directly. Simply crack the water with the ecat/Stirling engine, and then save the hydrogen for sale.
Let's say you were to put these in 200 mile distances from each other all over the USA. By linking these all together, a person could drive all the way across the USA on a whim. Quite a demonstration of cold fusion applied to a real world application.
comment:
What the article says is that there's no "off the shelf" Stirling engines that can work with the e-cat.
Does that mean that one could be developed for the express purpose of working with the e-cat? Or does Rossi rule this possibility out?
As for me, my understanding of Stirling engines is vague. It is my understanding that you need at least 400 degrees Farenheit in temperature difference so that a Stirling engine could be sufficiently efficient. Since the "cold" e-cat doesn't produce that difference, it is understandable that such a device would not exist.
How to get the temperature gradient necessary? An idea that no doubt occurred to somebody else could be this one: make one through the use of cryogenic gases for the cold side. The gases would have to regenerated, and that would entail a parasitic drag on energy production. The device would not be very efficient, but it may be feasible. Combined with the hot side of the cold cat with the cold side of the cryogenic gas would give 600+ degree Farenheit temperature gradient---plenty to spare. The engine would supply the energy necessary for the production of electricity, and to regenerate the cryogenic gas.
What would I do with this electricity? One possible application would be the production of hydrogen for fuel cell cars. This would thus be a product that could be sold directly. Simply crack the water with the ecat/Stirling engine, and then save the hydrogen for sale.
Let's say you were to put these in 200 mile distances from each other all over the USA. By linking these all together, a person could drive all the way across the USA on a whim. Quite a demonstration of cold fusion applied to a real world application.
Cold Fusion is REAL (fire from water) Part 4 of 4
At the beginning of this video is a brief shot of Les Case's device. This is a four part video series that condenses the original video down to bite sizes fragments. The original video ( Fire from Water ) was over an hour long.
EGO OUT: A VETERAN’S VOICE
EGO OUT: A VETERAN’S VOICE: Interview with Professor YEONG E. KIM It is a self-assumed task of this blog(ger) to provide young LENR researchers with the best in...
comment:
After posting yesterday on the ITER, a number of things occurred to me. Amongst these things, the pursuit of hot fusion is not the panacea that has been attributed to it. It too, will produce dangerous wastes. It is not as clean as it being hyped as being.
As a consequence, I turned my attention back to cold fusion. One aspect of the discussion has fascinated me, and that is Yeong Kim's theory of a Bose Einstein condensate as the theory for cold fusion. I even made a separate category for it on the blog.
A perusal of google searches lead to nothing much on the subject. I was particularly interested in a discussion of Les Case's work on his device. There was some speculation that Case's work was related to Rossi's work.
I did find the video below, but I had already posted this video before. Here it is again.
Before I show that, the above link is to an interview of Kim by Peter Gluck of the blog "EGO OUT".
I found no additional information in the interview, sadly. I am hungry for more.
comment:
After posting yesterday on the ITER, a number of things occurred to me. Amongst these things, the pursuit of hot fusion is not the panacea that has been attributed to it. It too, will produce dangerous wastes. It is not as clean as it being hyped as being.
As a consequence, I turned my attention back to cold fusion. One aspect of the discussion has fascinated me, and that is Yeong Kim's theory of a Bose Einstein condensate as the theory for cold fusion. I even made a separate category for it on the blog.
A perusal of google searches lead to nothing much on the subject. I was particularly interested in a discussion of Les Case's work on his device. There was some speculation that Case's work was related to Rossi's work.
I did find the video below, but I had already posted this video before. Here it is again.
Before I show that, the above link is to an interview of Kim by Peter Gluck of the blog "EGO OUT".
I found no additional information in the interview, sadly. I am hungry for more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)