WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

1.3K

(post is archived)

[–] 6 pts

have harnessed fission

The reality is that we have only harnessed steam power. Much of the energy in fission reactors is lost to us because we use the heat from fission to make steam to power turbine generators. That's the equivalent of using a river of gasoline to turn a waterwheel. We aren't able to use the fission reaction in a direct manner and are therefore using it in a very primitive way. The same will happen with fusion if we don't develop a direct energy conversion technology that isn't based on making steam. This is probably why aliens haven't invited us to join their federation. We're just cavemen using physics like morons.

[–] 5 pts

Modern turbogenerators are far from primitive.

The most effective way to generate electricity is by spinning a generator. Generators can be built as small or as large as required, provide VAR sinks for grid voltage stability, and are a physical spinning mass for grid frequency stability.

The most effective way to spin that generator is with a turbine. Turbines too can be built as small or as large as required. Modern electro-analog-hydraulic or electro-digital-hydraulic control systems can precisely control turbine speed, allowing dependable grid frequency control. Turbines can be build to a wide variety of working fluids, whether steam, water, or 'gas' (air+combustion products).

Water is cheap. It is abundant. Its thermodynamic properties are a known quantity. It boils and condenses at useful temperatures and pressures here on Earth. While corrosive at higher temperatures, it is not obscenely so. Simple stainless steels are all that is required. As a useful working fluid, you can heat it using any method you desire. Fission, coal, gas, sunlight, wood - whatever.

As far as the nuclear side of things, most of the energy of fission is released as kinetic energy of the fission fragments - that is, heat. So using a more 'exotic' energy capture mechanism such as the photoelectric effect would be less efficient than steam power.

[–] 0 pt

On top of all that, most of the safety issues that are complained about have been solved. You can literally blow up a pebble bed reactor and the result would require a minor clean-up. Meltdowns aren't possible.

[–] 0 pt

Modern turbogenerators are far from primitive.

The most effective way to generate electricity is by spinning a generator. Generators can be built as small or as large as required, provide VAR sinks for grid voltage stability, and are a physical spinning mass for grid frequency stability.

I don't disagree with these statements one bit. Their uses in stability and control of reactive/apparent power and spinning generation for frequency maintenance are both vastly important and useful. The problem I have is in the conversion of fission energy to electricity through the water intermediate. Water is not terribly efficient with heat transfer, but it's the best we have for simplicity, cost and maintenance.

Since there is no direct atomic or nuclear to electricity conversion that we know of, the use of steam holds us back. Perhaps this is the real test for the aliens. If we cannot master the physics to harness the fission/fusion energy directly, then we are not ready to join their club. Water is the best we have, but I suspect we will discover more about other methods in the future.

[–] 0 pt

Water is an effective heat transfer agent. convective heat transfer is a function of fluid flow rate, fluid density, and fluid heat conductance. Water i fairly high with all of these (though of course less than, say, liquid metals). Where water really shines is the boiling heat transfer coefficient, which is about an order of magnitude higher than convective alone.

Since there is no direct atomic or nuclear to electricity conversion that we know of, the use of steam holds us back.

There is, it's called the photoelectric effect. As noted above. But very little of fission's energy is released as gammas so it'll never be worth it.

[–] 1 pt

I believe we need FTL travel to join their club.

That's what Star Trek taught me anyways.

[–] 1 pt

I believe we need FTL travel to join their club.

That's what Star Trek taught me anyways.

But the UFOs go to where our reactors and nuclear missile are but never make contact. They see how primitive we are and just go back home to take us off the list of possible advanced species. We have a long way to go.

[–] 1 pt

If you had a good telescope and FTL tech, you could take arial pictures of Earth's past.

[–] 5 pts

Aliens exist. They are watching us and waiting. They will not do anything that could result in humans venturing out of their Solar system until the jew and nigger problems are dealt with. No alien would risk the amount of shit they would be in if they allowed either of those groups to escape. We are effectively under quarantine, we must come to realise what the problem is, and why and solve it ourselves. This cannot be done for us.

[–] 1 pt

I think unrestrained expansion is their concern.

Blacks will just increase their population without regard to anything else and Jews will try to parasitize any societies they come in to contact with.

Beings undergoing a permanent population boom and beings who refuse to only live off their own production are probably viewed as bad neighbors.

[–] 1 pt

And other such ponders as:

"Why are the humans trying to get monkeys to live with them?"

"Are some of them trying to mate like that? You don't get offspring that way just repulsive disease."

"How the heck did they build satelites when they don't understand the math that the people just making up money and charging interest on it only keeps everyone poor?"

"Oh I get it now. The ones with the big snouts are a real problem. They should do something about that."