olofscience
-
Content
2,538 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11 -
Feedback
N/A
Everything posted by olofscience
-
And I recommend you read up on basic thermodynamics.
-
You don't seem to have the slightest clue about what greenhouse effect theory is. Sun ===(short wavelengths)===> earth ==(gets converted to longer wavelengths)====> space Now if you add CO2, a strong IR absorber, in the atmosphere, it lets the short wavelengths through, absorbs the longer wavelengths and keeps it in the atmosphere. (It re-emits in all directions, so overall the atmosphere gets warmer). That didn't even take 5 sentences to explain...
-
Why don't you provide the link here? Is english your first language? This paragraph is so disjointed. Is surface radiation longwave radiation too? What wavelength in nanometers? Where's your working? Garbage in, garbage out - this is the garbage out.
-
Oh, so the theory is what you say it is? FYI, you got the theory wrong. Get it right first. PS. Name-dropping Tyndall to impress doesn't really work, only actual arguments will - name-dropping is actually a sign you don't really have good arguments.
-
This is really funny you do know this is a skydiver's forum right? We know about thermal inversions, and no they're not required for all clouds. Not to mention that some of us are actual scientists and engineers. Who did quite a bit more than 7 semesters of science courses...
-
No, what? What I mean is absorption of that infrared radiation makes the ABSORBER warmer. Not the source. Did you really pass basic thermodynamics?
-
Aircraft, and their structures are usually designed for a particular engine. Since certification depends so much on that, it's pretty difficult to retrofit. The GTF I talked about took 20 years to develop, then Airbus spent about $1 billion and approximately 4 years from announcement to first flight to put it on the A320 NEO (new engine option). There had to be some structural reinforcements for the wing and changes to the pylon to accommodate it. But as billvon said, hybrids probably don't offer that much advantage for skydiving ops, especially for the smaller cessna operations I think those will go straight to full electric.
- 316 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- aircraft maintenance
- electric
- See more
-
https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C124389&Type=IR-SPEC&Index=1#IR-SPEC Seriously, it's not even debated in scientific circles now. Your sugar factory analogy is pretty funny in how convoluted you needed to make it. It could've been a lot simpler, but then it would show that you were wrong.
-
The fact that she has to attack an "amateur scientist" who posted what looks like a bad steel sphere analogy looks rather desperate, then she lumps all climate scientists, all their work with this person and declares them wrong. There's plenty of experimental evidence, and the thermodynamical basis of climate change is so simple, it doesn't even need those pretentious code snippets she has on her posts.
-
oh wow. Impressive. 7! That's 6 more than 1! That settles it then. Just a question...those 7 semesters, how many were retakes? Did you pass any of them?
-
Pratt&Whitney spent more than 20 years developing the GTF - geared turbofan - because it was a big improvement in fuel efficiency, by removing the requirement that the compressor run at the exact same RPM as the turbine. So a hybrid aircraft design could optimise its turbine for generating electricity, because electric motors can then easily rotate at any RPM needed by the aircraft, and batteries could buffer the variation in power needed. Whether a hybrid has an overall increased weight is to be determined - there are too many factors to determine right now, but hybrids will probably be more feasible with larger aircraft, and smaller aircraft will probably be more suited to full electric. CO2 is only one reason for going electric. The operations and maintenance savings are potentially massive - so if hybrids improve this, even if not as good as full electric, the market will adopt it. (Which is why Airbus is investigating hybrids right now)
- 316 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- aircraft maintenance
- electric
- See more
-
What is it with you and thinking we actually like problems? Look, we fucking hate lockdowns. We fucking hate climate problems too. We wish both didn't exist, and I really wish you were right. But I'm not stupid. Both with covid (500,000 dead so far) and climate (harder to count the cost, but it's rising) and you're saying "lalalala everything's actually fine" (switching to "even if it's not we can't do anything about it" if pressed enough) We're doing something about both problems. What are you afraid of, that we'll accidentally improve things? Do you have some emotional attachment to fossil fuel technology? Some of the tech is interesting, I've actually worked in that industry, but if you've developed an emotional attachment to it you need help.
-
So?
-
But you spoke in absolutes. There are differences in the distributions, but you're quite silent when I mentioned the possibility that there are at least a hundred women stronger than you. You're the one being sensitive to this issue. Hah, see your insecurity is starting to come out. I swam competitively and played water polo for my university, but sure I can live in your head rent-free too. Or at least a version of me that makes you feel good about yourself. But what's going to be better is those hundreds of women who can bench press more than you - you should think about them more. Especially as you get older and physically weaker.
-
Nice try. If you were being comprehensive with your reply, then you'd speak in terms of probability distributions, because that's how sexual dimorphism occurs. You're speaking in terms of absolutes - "biological females are not as strong as biological males" - and I can assure you, there are more than 100 biological females (which is an arbitrary, but I think acceptable definition of "plenty") that are physically stronger than you are, which would then disprove this absolute statement. Of course, if given those 100 examples you'll find a way to put them down, to preserve your sense of self-worth (despite your claims that it has nothing to do with it).
-
If physical strength has nothing to do with self-worth, and feminists are pushing for greater acknowledgement of female worth by equal rights, then why did you post a meme about physical strength attacking feminists? Admit it, at least some of your self-worth depends on your perceived physical strength. Newsflash - nobody cares. All you need to post here is to be strong enough to push keys on a keyboard.
-
Nice try. I was paraphrasing you. You were implying that by saying Why say "no...Unless" if you did consider trans women to be women?
-
So men who can carry women are strong, and women who can carry men are not really women at all. Got it. Interesting to see how much of your self-worth you attach to the particular gender you were born, and your race. My favourite definition of patriotism is "being proud of achievements you never did, by people you've never met". So my personal definition of misogyny and racism is - "thinking your gender or race is better than others, just because you don't have much else to be proud of". I'm not at all impressed by any of your boasting - the more you do it, the sadder I think you are.
-
Can you? If you really want to go down this road, there are plenty of women who can carry YOU carrying a child.
-
Still no proof coming, I see. Got anything? I thought so.
-
Nope, you try again. You haven't posted any proof.
-
Exactly this. People will realise electrics can act as massive battery storage for their home. It will also help meet power demand spikes (like Australia's massive Tesla grid battery).
-
Where have you been in the past 15 years? Trump was in charge for the past 4 years, and Republicans are STILL in charge of Texas, yet this is the fault of libs? Nice try.
-
The one important question that hasn't been answered is, "where's the evidence?" It's the Trump campaign's job to come up with the evidence IN COURT, and so far nothing. He lost, get over it.