Prev: Quantum Gravity 368.8: South Korea Relates QCD to Quantum Gravity
Next: Quantum Gravity 368.9: U.K. Relates Repulsion, (y + sqrt(2)i)(y - sqrt(2)i), Diophantine Equations
From: Puppet_Sock on 5 May 2010 11:37
On May 5, 9:34 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/5/10 8:28 AM, Marvin the Martian wrote:
>
> > First of all, solar cost about 30x more than current energy,
> > and the only reason why it is that cheap is because cheap energy makes
> > 30x solar affordable.
>
> ???

He may be off a bit on the factor of 30. In Ontario, solar is paid
about
70 cents per kWhr, while nuclear gets about 6. So it's round about
a factor of 10 or 11 here. Similar numbers apply in Europe, though
the "base" generation load is more expensive there. Plus, in both of
those areas, there are 20 year or more contracts to buy as much
power as the solar plants can produce.

Now, that 70 cents gets bumped up a bit for transmission costs.
So by the time it makes it to your wall plug it's about 75, plus
taxes and fees. Imagine that. You run your computer for 10 hours,
and your electric bill is $3 or $4.

Even at those rates the solar plants are not huge money makers.
If required to pay property taxes on the actual costs of their
installs,
most plants in Ontario don't make a profit.

Still, it has been ample payment for motivation of the cheaters. It
has
been discovered that several Spannish solar farms had outputs that
did not fall when the sun did. Turns out, they had diesel generators
in sheds, and fired them up as light levels fell. Now, diesel is more
expensive than typical generation from large electric plants, such
as coal or gas fired, or nuclear. But it's way cheaper than what the
solar plants get paid.

They were getting away with tweaking up their losses from clouds.
But they didn't account for the change of dawn and sunset times
as the seasons changed, and so got busted.
Socks
From: spudnik on 6 May 2010 01:54
natural gas pipelines were long-ago coated
internally with plastic, to prevent hydrogen embrittlement. now,
ask yourself,
why haven't the oil companies ever carbon-
dated Fossilized Fuels (TM) ??

answer: they have,
to get "fingerprints" of adjacent wells,
to see how connected they are; so,
where's the datum?

> What would it cost to rebuild the electricity grid or the network of
> pipes that carries water?   Include the rights of way.

thus:
yeah, that's the spirit. the problem is,
in developing a model of n-dimensional figurate numbers,
that could be used to make the F"L"T contradiction.
(Conway and Guy had a nice, elementary "Book
of Numbers" -- as I recall -- with lots of pictures
for 3D figurates; I even made some "new results"
using it .-)

thus:
the actual problem was in 1895,
when Svente Ahrrhenius didn't bother
to model an actual glass house
at a particular lattitude ... and
neither did anyone who had a computer
in the climate lab.

on the other hand,
he probably didn't get the first Nobel
for *that*, any way.

thus:
you mean, F"L"T is easy for the Sophie Germaine primes?

thus:
in contrast to Magadin's assertion,
below, the reality is that n=4 is the only case
that is truly special, which Fermat apparently
didn't notice, when he wrote the marginal note.
(may be, that's what blew him off,
when I noted it in another item .-)

Fermat apparently did not have to prove n=3, 5 etc.,
nor any other composite power (the "easy lemma"
in all elementary treatments of numbertheory
with F"L"T .-)

thus:
.... but, he did see one key (old) result,
that Fermat's "last" theorem is the same,
when applied to rational numbers,
as pairs of coordinates on the unit circle (or
the associated Fermat curves,
for powers greater than two. well,
it's quite trivial, as they say,
but it is a good way to attempt the problem,
a la Ribet, Frey etc. through
to Wiles' Secret Attic Project.

there's a really good expository book
on the stuff around Wiles "proof,"
_Fearless Symmetry_.

thus:
since Fermat made no mistakes, at all,
including in withdrawing his assertion
about the Fermat primes (letter to Frenicle), all
-- as I've posted in this item, plenty --
of the evidence suggests that the "miracle" was just
a key to his ne'er-revealed method, and
one of his very first proofs. (and,
I wonder, if Gauss was attracted to the problem
of constructbility, after reading of the primes.)

--Light: A History!
http://wlym.TAKEtheGOOGOLout.com
From: Arindam Banerjee on 6 May 2010 02:13

Irrelevant rubbish from the jBm, a crazy net stalker, spammer, liar,
etc. deleted
From: Benj on 10 May 2010 20:13
On May 5, 9:34 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/5/10 8:28 AM, Marvin the Martian wrote:
>
> > First of all, solar cost about 30x more than current energy,
> > and the only reason why it is that cheap is because cheap energy makes
> > 30x solar affordable.
>
> ???

Wassamatta "Sam"? Actual scientific analysis more than your AI
program can handle?

Tell us how you feel about truthful analysis of costs.
From: Mark Thorson on 10 May 2010 21:23
Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>
> Obviously the status-quoists will try their best to prevent the
> hydrogen economy, but the world wants change. Too much pollution from

Ah, that's right! Your lack of success is due to this
evil conspiracy of status-quoists, not any fundamental
defect in the economics of your business model. It's
a conspiracy of the oil companies and the Freemasons!

Darn those Freemasons!
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: Quantum Gravity 368.8: South Korea Relates QCD to Quantum Gravity
Next: Quantum Gravity 368.9: U.K. Relates Repulsion, (y + sqrt(2)i)(y - sqrt(2)i), Diophantine Equations