h a l f b a k e r yactual product may differ from illustration
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
This idea makes me so angry that i want to hit
something with a bone over and over again really fast
until it flies out of my hand and turns into a space
station!
Not really, i'm fine. Have i got this
wrong? Are you proposing a giant orbiting nuclear
battery eight light seconds from the planet beaming
power by microwave to electrical devices? If so, it's a
nice image and is maybe just crazy enough to work
[+]. |
|
| |
I was thinking more along the lines of never having to recharge my phone --- (although if I was orbiting just about the time my mum likes to catch up)... |
|
| |
[marked-for-deletion] no idea, or at least no explanation of the idea which may or may not be in the author's mind |
|
| |
Maybe, but i made sense of it as being a little like a
fission version of the sun: a humongous quantity of
radioactive material in space which could be
harnessed to transmit radiation to us but was safe
due to being outside the Van Allen belts and low-
maintenance because it's mostly just a big pile of
actinides getting really hot. |
|
| |
hippo --- there is sufficient here to describe the exact form of the battery... |
|
| |
For instance, Can you tell me how two objects are thermally coupled? |
|
| |
//Following natures example for ecologically sound nuclear energy...// |
|
| |
You mean Stanley's example, right? |
|
| |
Ummm not sure --- is Stanley devine? |
|
| |
By the way thank you nineteenthly... I always figured radiation transport was viable technotrickery... |
|
| |
Eight light-seconds is not a million miles away from...us. |
|
| |
It needn't be trickery in any arcane sense though,
because if you had a sufficiently large mass of
sufficiently radioactive material, say a mole of
oranges, it would release heat, and if you
dispensed with the oranges and replaced them
with something more sensible such as thorium,
you'd have a lump of stuff giving off heat, light,
electrons, alpha particles and gamma rays, and
even if it went critical it wouldn't be the end of
the world. Well, it might be, but you'd just need
to make it small and far away enough. Then it's
just a portable sun and you can stick solar panels
on everything. |
|
| |
Hmmm did any one actually understand the idea... ? Ok in the style of a swedish pastery chief... |
|
| |
--- Take a portion of your favorite radioactive element and roll it out flat
--- Take a portion of a dissimilar metal that exhibits the 'Seebeck Property' (with respect to the radioactive element above) and roll flat
--- Press out sections of these metals with your cookie cutter
--- Place layer apon layer of metal sections into your tray and seal |
|
| |
As you can see from the one I made earlier this is a thermal couple that does not require heating --- or in other words "radioative isotope coupled thermally for electrical potential"... |
|
| |
//did any one actually understand the idea//
About as far as // 8 light second barrier //.
Why so close? |
|
| |
Indeed 8.3 light minutes even... |
|
| |
I assume "coupled thermally for electrical potential" means using thermopiles (arrays of thermocouples) to generate electricity from the heat emitted by the decaying nuclear fuel. Presumably the cold nodes of the thermopiles would be dangled in space a little way from the monoliths, detracting somewhat from their monolithiness. |
|
| |
It all makes sense to me, but the language used is a little distracting. |
|
| |
What use is a battery that's 8.3 light minutes away? |
|
| |
//Jim is "confidant"// - who's passing him info? |
|
| |
This reminds me of a plutonium star idea I recently had. I didn't post it because it seemed so absurd. |
|
| |
//I didn't post it because it seemed so absurd.//
[marked-for-tagline] |
|
| |
[-] because 4 by 3 by 2 is silly. If the monolith was 1 by 4 by 9, it would be a different matter. |
|
| |
Regarding batteries and nuclear waste:
This is a letter that I received from our battery research department. Can anyone address the concerns: The nuclear battery concept has been around for some time. There is generally an immediate concern regarding potential leakage of radioactive material and the incumbent need for 100% hermetic sealing. This concern is heightened in battery applications, and especially for mobile and automotive uses, due to the risk of enclosure damage in the event of an accident. I recall there may also have been technical feasibility issues related to potential discharge rate limitations and performance degradation over time. This could reduce the potential number of applications and would effectively rule out automotive. If any of you are aware that the issues above, and other potential technical hurdles, have been resolved, I would be interested to learn more. Please feel free to forward any relevant data. |
|
| |
//Please feel free to forward any relevant data// |
|
| |
Translation: "please feel free to do my research for me". |
|
| |
Depends how you define research. Research involves investigation to accomplish a clearly defined initiative. I am looking for nuclear waste applications that maybe applicable to the car industry. Mine is not clearly defined nor is it an issue. It is more or less a brainstorming. |
|
| |