Of course it was never about the environment. That's why so many of these activists had stocks in these "green" companies. If it was about the environment, returns would never be a consideration and it would have been donated, not invested.
Speaking for myself, I don't really know what an endocrine is. So I wouldn't even know to ask that about green activists. But I searched endocrine system and the EPA(???) Has a webpage about it but doesn't mention why they have the page.
The green lobby's goal is the destruction of Western civilization through deindustrialization, so it wouldn't help them with any of their actual goals.
If you take one of the guy's accounts at face value he first identified it as a compound of interest in 1999, then 19 years later finally drummed up enough private funding to investigate and founded a company for it in 2018.
Which if true makes all the money wasted on social studies in the last few decades even more regrettable, if the offer of room temp super conductors was just sitting on the table like that
As unfortunate as it would be, one of the few ways markets don't work.
If it works it'll be stolen by all countries regardless of any patents and you'll get nothing, if not you might get some patent on a process and not lose everything.
Reminds me of the EMDrive. They always demonstrated some kind of effect, but it never actually levitated. At least room temperature superconductors are theoretically plausible.
Christ.. people in the comment section is retarded. They dont know how itll benefit humans. Lol. Even when someone else explains no electricity is loss through heat.
Science is only pushed by the winners. Isaac Newton had his contemporaries slandered and their works expunged because he wanted to be the gold standard.
Dunno how much the world of physics was set back because of those actions.
Destruction of something better than yours isn't surprising at all.
What actually is the benefit of superconductors? as I understand them it allows you to transfer electrical current from point A to B with far greater efficiency then currently. You can normally only do this near absolute 0 because it's a problem of entropy that energy is always lost in transfer. Is that correct?
How much more efficient is energy transfer from point to point with superconductors compared to normal conductors?
Total electricity lost in transport from powerplant to the home is about 10%. There is a test project for a superconductor 50km powerline in South Korea.
I don't think it will ever be cost and ressource-effective to switch electricity to that. It's also a nightmare scenario for cooling system failures causing very long blackouts.
Everything about repairing a broken cable will be alot more complex and expensive.
We're headed into a Competence crisis. Switching energy distribution to something so highly complex and delicate is begging for major fuck-ups.
High-voltage transport loss are small, 2% to 4%, the biggest loss is after the switch to low-voltage for close distribution.
You need to use alot of energy to cool the superconductor. Is it going to break-even? Scrape some energy after counting cooling? How is that going to justify the costs?
For now, under very high pressure, there is a superconductor under 92°K, which means it can be cooled to that state with liquid nitrogen (Nitrogen (edit :) boiling point is 77°K ), making its use financially accessible.
The need for very high pressure limits use.
Superconductors are already used for high definition Magnetic Resonance Imaging
CERN's Large Hadron Collider ( scientific research )
Thank God it wasn't a medical cure or he'd be flying out of an office building window.
If that's true, nuclear fusion might finally be achievable, as new design concepts would be possible. The green lobby is not going to like it.
Which is odd, because that would give them so many of their goals.
It was never about the environment.
Of course it was never about the environment. That's why so many of these activists had stocks in these "green" companies. If it was about the environment, returns would never be a consideration and it would have been donated, not invested.
Green is about control. Covid is about control. Tranny prounoun shit is about control. Rape is about control.
These scumbags get off on controlling people.
And the thing is they’re probably not mutually exclusive. Ever wondered why the “green” activists never talk about endocrine disruptor pollution?
Speaking for myself, I don't really know what an endocrine is. So I wouldn't even know to ask that about green activists. But I searched endocrine system and the EPA(???) Has a webpage about it but doesn't mention why they have the page.
link
Stuff that makes frogs gay.
The green movement will have to invent another reason to push communism
Never was. If that was the case, we would have nuclear thorium-salt reactors instead of glorified bird shredders by now
The green lobby's goal is the destruction of Western civilization through deindustrialization, so it wouldn't help them with any of their actual goals.
If you take one of the guy's accounts at face value he first identified it as a compound of interest in 1999, then 19 years later finally drummed up enough private funding to investigate and founded a company for it in 2018.
Which if true makes all the money wasted on social studies in the last few decades even more regrettable, if the offer of room temp super conductors was just sitting on the table like that
Not just social sciences. Almost all "science".
As unfortunate as it would be, one of the few ways markets don't work.
If it works it'll be stolen by all countries regardless of any patents and you'll get nothing, if not you might get some patent on a process and not lose everything.
Only philanthropy can fund this kind of research.
They wouldn't cripple an industry and give people more money. That'd hurt their interests.
It will be selectively used for specialty projects and the energy companies will pay bribes yearly to keep it that way.
Another video of the new conductor-
https://twitter.com/rainmaker1973/status/1684218600456876032
(superconductors should float on a normal magnet - this one almost does)
It's either a superconductor ( Type I or II ) below Critical Temperature, or it isn't.
This video is like saying humans have ''almost reached flying'' because a ballerina can stand on the toes of one foot.
Reminds me of the EMDrive. They always demonstrated some kind of effect, but it never actually levitated. At least room temperature superconductors are theoretically plausible.
Christ.. people in the comment section is retarded. They dont know how itll benefit humans. Lol. Even when someone else explains no electricity is loss through heat.
One of the comments points out how many businesses suddenly have something similar. As if they were sitting on it, or lying.
... again?
Yup, I'll believe it when I can hold it in my hand... and test it with my multimeter.
This guy is testing it and live tweeting his progress:
https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip/status/1684615817600880640
Science is only pushed by the winners. Isaac Newton had his contemporaries slandered and their works expunged because he wanted to be the gold standard.
Dunno how much the world of physics was set back because of those actions.
Destruction of something better than yours isn't surprising at all.
So, no flying to a faraway moon to kill blue aliens?
A room temperature superconductor?!
At this time of year?!
At this time of day?!
In this part of the country!?
Localised entirely within you kitchen?!
It probably was produced in an 1890’s lab, then quietly hidden away.
If I read and understood the abstract correctly. The temperature was 127C at "Room temperature"
The previous record was at -15’C but required massive pressure.
+127’C (and below) would be a massive improvement
What actually is the benefit of superconductors? as I understand them it allows you to transfer electrical current from point A to B with far greater efficiency then currently. You can normally only do this near absolute 0 because it's a problem of entropy that energy is always lost in transfer. Is that correct? How much more efficient is energy transfer from point to point with superconductors compared to normal conductors?
Total electricity lost in transport from powerplant to the home is about 10%. There is a test project for a superconductor 50km powerline in South Korea.
I don't think it will ever be cost and ressource-effective to switch electricity to that. It's also a nightmare scenario for cooling system failures causing very long blackouts.
Everything about repairing a broken cable will be alot more complex and expensive.
We're headed into a Competence crisis. Switching energy distribution to something so highly complex and delicate is begging for major fuck-ups.
High-voltage transport loss are small, 2% to 4%, the biggest loss is after the switch to low-voltage for close distribution.
You need to use alot of energy to cool the superconductor. Is it going to break-even? Scrape some energy after counting cooling? How is that going to justify the costs?
For now, under very high pressure, there is a superconductor under 92°K, which means it can be cooled to that state with liquid nitrogen (Nitrogen (edit :) boiling point is 77°K ), making its use financially accessible.
The need for very high pressure limits use.
Superconductors are already used for high definition Magnetic Resonance Imaging
CERN's Large Hadron Collider ( scientific research )
There are applications for nuclear energy.
A few short powerlines for testing technology.
Thanks, are you a bot though?
Not a bot, just an akward human.
Cheers.
Here’s the best list I found :
https://twitter.com/alexkaplan0/status/1684044616528453633
Here’s a more skeptical analysis:
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph240/mclaughlin1/
Uh-oh, has The Formula been discovered?