|
Post by shailynn on Nov 19, 2010 1:01:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mike on Nov 19, 2010 8:33:06 GMT -5
What's scary about it? Just to put things in perspective:
1 megaton nuclear blast = 4,184,000,000,000,000 Joules of energy
E = mc^2 =Mass x (299792458 m/s)^2 = 4,184,000,000,000,000 Joules
Mass of anti-matter/matter required to produce 1 megaton nuclear blast = 4.655 kg
Mass of anti-matter required = 2.328 kg
Mass produced by CERN through years of herculean efforts : 0.000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,063 kg
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Nov 19, 2010 10:13:54 GMT -5
Also, "It would take longer than the age of the universe to make one gram of antimatter," he said, calling the process "a losing proposition because it takes much more energy to make antimatter than you get out of it."
Granted, he's not accounting for theoretical future technological advances, but we don't know what those will be, and the scales we're talking about are still pretty redonkulus - it's like saying "hyperdrive is possible." Sure, some day maybe we'll have the understanding and technology to make hyperdrive (or antimatter bombs) viable, but that time is a long, long way off. It's still the stuff of Dan Brown books.
|
|
|
Post by shailynn on Nov 19, 2010 10:44:46 GMT -5
What's scary about it? Just to put things in perspective: 1 megaton nuclear blast = 4,184,000,000,000,000 Joules of energy E = mc^2 =Mass x (299792458 m/s)^2 = 4,184,000,000,000,000 Joules Mass of anti-matter/matter required to produce 1 megaton nuclear blast = 4.655 kg Mass of anti-matter required = 2.328 kg Mass produced by CERN through years of herculean efforts : 0.000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,063 kg That made my brain hurt. Perspective taken.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Nov 19, 2010 11:07:26 GMT -5
What's scary about it? Just to put things in perspective: 1 megaton nuclear blast = 4,184,000,000,000,000 Joules of energy E = mc^2 =Mass x (299792458 m/s)^2 = 4,184,000,000,000,000 Joules Mass of anti-matter/matter required to produce 1 megaton nuclear blast = 4.655 kg Mass of anti-matter required = 2.328 kg Mass produced by CERN through years of herculean efforts : 0.000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,063 kg That made my brain hurt. Dr. Mike does that from time to time.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Dec 2, 2010 16:32:28 GMT -5
In new news, NASA has discovered a new life form. From the article: In a surprising discovery, NASA scientist Felisa Wolfe Simon and her team have found a bacteria whose DNA is completely alien to what we know today. Instead of using phosphorus, the newly discovered microorganism—called GFAJ-1 and found in Mono Lake, California—uses the poisonous arsenic for its building blocks. (emphasis in original) Edit: Here's Bad Astronomer's take on the findings.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Dec 6, 2010 10:17:06 GMT -5
Dr. Mike does that from time to time. Some more perspective...The 1952 H-Bomb tested at Bikini Atoll had a 10.4 Megaton yield. So 1 megaton isn't even close to as powerful as a modern warhead can unleash.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Dec 8, 2010 11:06:26 GMT -5
In new news, NASA has discovered a new life form. From the article: In a surprising discovery, NASA scientist Felisa Wolfe Simon and her team have found a bacteria whose DNA is completely alien to what we know today. Instead of using phosphorus, the newly discovered microorganism—called GFAJ-1 and found in Mono Lake, California—uses the poisonous arsenic for its building blocks. (emphasis in original) Edit: Here's Bad Astronomer's take on the findings. Oooorrrrr not!
|
|
|
Post by mike on Dec 8, 2010 14:48:04 GMT -5
In new news, NASA has discovered a new life form. From the article: In a surprising discovery, NASA scientist Felisa Wolfe Simon and her team have found a bacteria whose DNA is completely alien to what we know today. Instead of using phosphorus, the newly discovered microorganism—called GFAJ-1 and found in Mono Lake, California—uses the poisonous arsenic for its building blocks. (emphasis in original) Edit: Here's Bad Astronomer's take on the findings. Oooorrrrr not!I HIGHLY recommend anyone who reads this follow up article that Bob posted in its entirety. The second page is much better and more important than the first. The problem is not the NASA scientists nor thier competitors. Its primarily scientific news reporting and a little bit of politics/funding. Scientists make mistakes, even peer reviewed articles are often wrong. That's all part of the process. News media short circuits this by publishing research before it's been confirmed by independent labs. Sometimes before it's even been published. We demonize the people who think vacines cause autism. The scientists who published (and later retracted) the one paper that rumor is based on were drummed out of science by the scientific community. But are there any consequences for the A-Hole reporters who pulled a chicken little before the centuries old scientific process had a chance to work? Now, to be fair, some scientists take what they have to the media, or at least don't shut them out when the media shows up at thier door. No matter how you slice it, that's probably wrong. But keep in mind with congress slashing budgets (industrial research has been virtually gone for decades (so much for the market taking care of things)) scientists take press (marketing) when they can.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Dec 15, 2010 11:59:50 GMT -5
In other news, doctors cured a man's HIV by wiping out his immune system and using donor stem cells to rebuild it. Basically, as I understand it, they wiped the hard drive. It's obviously far from perfect and not a cure-all, but it's a step in the right direction.
|
|
|
Post by mike on Dec 15, 2010 12:53:16 GMT -5
I surprised they didn't try this back in the late 80s early 90s when HIV was a death sentence. I suppose they didn't find the HIV resistant gene (that the donor had in this case), until later.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Dec 15, 2010 13:00:54 GMT -5
I surprised they didn't try this back in the late 80s early 90s when HIV was a death sentence. I suppose they didn't find the HIV resistant gene (that the donor had in this case), until later. They may have, or they may have figured that the risks nuking the patient's immune system outweighed the benefits (I don't see how - you're dead right now or you're dead 6 months from now). I didn't read the article particularly closely, but it sounds like they were treating him for the leukemia, not the HIV, when they bombed his immune system.
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Jan 6, 2011 10:26:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by John on Jan 17, 2011 14:40:45 GMT -5
If you could fly an airplane to the Sun, it would take 20 years.
|
|
|
Post by mike on Jan 19, 2011 9:14:46 GMT -5
I assume you are talking about a 747 at average cruise speed of 565 mph (taking 18.9 years to be more accurate). The SR-71 could do it in 4.9. Of course, you are making a lot of assumptions. Assuming the jets could work with no oxygen, that they would not burn up in the corona before they reached the sun. etc. etc. Of course, if they could work in a vacuum, they would not experience drag and so they could go a lot faster than their atmospheric cruise speed. A lot faster. The 747-400 maximum takeoff weight is 875,263 lbs (396,890 kg) with a thrust of (253,200 lbs) for a total acceleration of 0.29g. Over the course of 4 hrs, it would reach as speed of 40.1 km/s. Making the trip in just 42 days. Half this if you don't want to save fuel for a return trip or if you're simply planning to orbit the sun and slingshot back.
|
|