Ban the bulb and text generators

I noticed a nice use of a blog for campaigning on http://www.banthebulb.org. This is a web blog campaigning for energy efficient light bulbs (very good idea in my opinion).



I've been thinking that I might get back into my self appointed roll as evangalist for Personal Rapid Transit. http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/ .



While looking at the banthebulb I noticed a link to WriteToThem.com which had this advice for campaigns. "Do not give people text to paste into their messages.



Spamming lots of representatives with near-identical messages is definitely bad behavior in our book. Please be aware that if you do this, most of the duplicate messages will be filtered out automatically and will never get to the representatives. We will let all the people who sent identikit messages know that their messages have been blocked, and we will tell them that it is because you broke our terms and conditions."



Makes me wonder if I could create a PHP generator which would generate large numbers of messages which people could cut and paste and add there own text/details too. Would the real people that read them smell a rat? Still I think most people have bit of writers block and something which might suggest what they might want to rewrite in there own words might not come a miss. Still I like the idea of building the PRT post generator.

id cards

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4625971.stm I was checking
out the BBC website and hit the conversation on ID cards.

One of the reasons for ID'cs is identity fraud. Question How does a
physical thing like an ID card help with online identity fraud ?

If the government wants to stop identity fraud they should try this.

Set up a central website for on line Idenities. A huge repository of
PGP digital signature net. Give away free the software to let
websites check if you are you ( in the UK ) so that this becomes a
popular way of checking.

As pointed out the French don't seem to have any less identity fraud
( on line ) than we do.

Microwave

One day someone will invent a microwave which will be linned with a box. This box will be easily removed ( from the front). You could then take this inner box out of the microwave and dish wash it.

who says I never think of useful things ?

aero spike.

While sketching I wondered what would happen if you built a solid
rocket booster that had an aero-spike ( an inside out rocket engine ).

One of the advantages of an aero spike engine is that the engine does
not loose efficiency as the external air pressure changes. A 'normal'
rocket engine like the space shuttle engines looses efficiency (
specific impulse ) between ground level and vacuum. The aero spike is
designed to maintain efficiency at all heights.

The kinds of engines which are commonly transfer between sea level
pressure and vacuum are solid rocket boosters. These are the boosters
which are very common on many space rockets ( space shuttle/Ariane).

The idea was that you build a solid rocket booster with a aero spike engine.

Nasa got there first
http://www.nasa.gov/missions/research/aerospike_rocket.html

So I want that but bigger.

more info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerospike_engine

http://www.orbitalvector.com/Orbital%20Travel/Aerospike%20Rockets/Aerospike%20Rockets.htm

Excellent detailed info.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/design/aerospike/main.shtml

jet pack - not rocket science

I remember that there was an article in the new scientist about the
return or the jet pack.

The core argument of the article was that the kinds of jet packs you
might have seen where powered by the decomposition of hydrogen
peroxide. The argument was that the 60 second flight time was mostly
a function of poor efficiency of the hydrogen peroxide fuel.

The reason for using hydrogen per oxide fuel was the safety ( non
toxicity ) of something which was so close to human flesh.

Clearly what was needed was something which is both safe ( or safer )
and yet more powerful.

I also remembered that Scale Composits makers of SpaceShipOne used
nitrous oxide ( laughing gas) and solid HTPB (rubber) propellant.
The big advantage of this is that the products are safe and can be
stored and used at room temperature. I hope that the NO/HTPB would
have a higher Specific impulse than the decomposition of hydrogen per
oxide ("The Isp of a LOX/HTPB hybrid motor is comparable to solid
propellant motors and LOX/kerosene rocket booster") ( see
http://www.spacedev.com/newsite/templates/subpage3.php?pid=185 )

Clearly the idea is that we should use a small hybrid rocket engine
on a rocket pack.

The combustion happens in side the rocket tube so I hope the reaction
would not have too extreme a hot exhaust. If not why not try to
figure out a way to handle it.

Fluorine Drive

I was thinking about Space exploration (as
usual), when I noted an interesting article on
the Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_fuel

It mentions "The highest specific impulse
chemistry ever test-fired in a rocket engine was
lithium and fluorine, with hydrogen added to
improve the exhaust thermodynamics (making this a
tripropellant). The combination delivered 542
seconds (542 lbf·s/lb, 5.32 kN·s/kg, 5320 m/s)
specific impulse in a vacuum."

The specific impulse is a measure of propellant
performance hydrogen/oxygen has 460 seconds.
Due to the conditions small changes in specific
impulse give much bigger returns over the ratio
of IPS.

So why not use fluorine ? Well the rocket
exhaust is highly toxic. If you have to destroy
the rocket incase of emergency then you get even
more toxic elements.

One potential solution would be to forget
launching the whole rocket using whole
fluorine,lithium,hydrogen(FLH) propellant.

Why not launch a fluorine,lithium,hydrogen(FLH)
third stage on top of a normal
hydrogen/Kerosen/oxygen booster. The third stage
would then fire outside the earth's atmosphere
not polluting.

This would give quite a good insertion boost, but
ignores the problem of what happens if the
booster has to be (unfortunately) self destroyed ?

So this is my solution. Take off with the third
stage fuel of an inert lithium and fluorine
compound. Once safely in orbit the solar cells
are deployed (needed for the command space). The
solar cells power a small package which turns the
inter compound into the fuel. This runs for a
number of weeks until all the inert compound
turns into fuel.

When complete the crew are launched separately(
as per current NASA plan) the crew transfer to
mars transfer vehicle. The fluorine, lithium,
hydrogen(FLH) propellant is started up and the
crew go to Mars.

Confused ?

Let use an analgy - imagine if hydrogen and
oxygen where poisonous materials. Launch a third
stage to orbit full of water (the safe compound).
In orbit electrolyze the water back into hydrogen
and oxygen ( then cool it down and liquefy both
gases). A bit too much effort with non poisonous
fules.

Alternatives

a) While in orbit convert Oxygen to Ozone.
b) Use a space station to hold and process the ingredients before launch.

see http://www.braeunig.us/space/propel.htm for info

Sea Furnace

People who know me know I am writing a book ( or books) for Barnaby called 'Lord Beardsmore'.

The original idea was that I expect Barnaby to match my levels of dyslexia . I wanted to write something which would be interesting for a dyslexic to read.

Part of this was a number of strongly visual technologies which serve as spaces for the adventure to continue. For example we have a fight scene on an airship. We have a chase on hydrofoil boats. Things are more complicated by the fact that the world is a slightly alternative version of the 1930's. This restricts how advanced the technology can be.

Last night I came up with the concept of a huge solar furnace. It was partly inspired by http://www.stirlingenergy.com/ and the Engergy innovations page at http://www.energyinnovations.com/tech.html


The solar furnace concept I have come up with is a large parabolic mirror. This mirror floats in a lake or a protected part of the ocean. One of the places I see this is Ceuta - an ocean city visited in the first book.

Imagine a huge bowel floating in water. The inside of the bowel is mirrored and focuses the sun's rays on to a central point. This point can either be a stirling engine generator or a very high temperature furnace. One problem with all solar furnaces is to make something which moves with the sun and does so cheaply enough. With the sea furnace buoyancy tanks fill with air or water to shift the center gravity of the furnace and so move the furnace its self.


While thinking about this I realized that if the central focus of the sun's rays where surrounded by secondary collectors then the air in the secondary collector would expand when heated by the sun moving off the center of the primary collector. The secondary collector would then be plumbed to the buoyancy tanks so that as the sun's rays moved for the central point then the appropriate buoyancy tank would fill with air. This would tilt the solar furnace back to the correct position to focus the rays of the sun on the primary collector.

I like this concept in that it has no moving parts - nothing to wear out and go wrong.

The sea furnaces ( or lake furnaces ) tend to heat Sun-salt ( 60% sodium nitrate and 40% saltpeter ). This creates a liquid salt at 565 C which can be stored ( in a hot tank) and used to generate steam later. The sun-salt can also be used to fuel chemical reactions. Direct high temperature heating would be used to smelt iron and other metals - the French Heliostat reaches 3800 degrees Centergrad ( hot hot hot ).

So In Beardsmore's 30's universe I like a huge array being used by the heavy industry in Ceuta. Makes you wonder what dangers you could get into. The dangers would be similar to the Man with the Golden gun and Sahara. Perhaps I can think of something better.



Wonderful link to a home page on heilostats - http://www.redrok.com/main.htm

Finally found a link to the french site http://www.imp.cnrs.fr/foursol/index.shtml

Solar Mirror Revelation!

I have always wondered why people never put a couple of mirrors above
and below the solar cells. After all the Photo voltaic solar cells
are quite expensive per square meter. If the cost of reflective film
is cheap so why not improve the peak power output by using some cheap
mirrors ?

My musings have now been answered.

If the sunlight falls disproportionately onto a solar cell (parts
brighter than others) then the parts change their impedance. This
makes some parts of the cell absorb electricity while others
generate. You can get hot spots which then make the material 'brake
down'. This can damage the PV cell.

All explained at
http://www.redrok.com/up980301.htm

Practical Photovoltaics apparently explains why and introduces some
electronics to sort it out too.

You would think that the space people for whom cost is no problem but
weight is would see the advantages of having a double/triple the
power for no practically no increase in mass.

You can see why a thermal panel would benefit little from the use of
mirrors. The increase in heat would come at the hot point in the year
and the decrease ( in non direct sunlight ) would come at the lowest
point. If you where storing energy over the year ( few Danish systems
do system store ) then the over production in the summer is a
different matter.

still mystery solved.

Television show idea

Last night I was thinking about television and public access to the
workings of science. This inspired a simple idea for a weekly TV show.

I remember a radio program about the cost being the prime driver for
television programming.

This is quite a simple one but certainly has a stronger visual quality.

Everyweek a number of scientists and interested parties come together
to discuss either a topical issue or some core question. Each speaker
get's an accompanyist , that is someone who sits behind them and
surfs the Internet for images/media while the speaker is talking. The
accompanyist is primed with a list of bookmarks from the speaker. The
speaker also has a laptop and can stuff while not speaking.

When the speaker speaks what ever is on his/her the accompanyist's
screen is projected on the the blue screen walls behind them.

The idea is provide a more visual program where the speakers talk but
they also provide links ( for watch and surf people at home). People
from home can also use online chat to project comment on the blue
screen. The people can ask questions or make quite on line comments.
These comments are moderated and then put to the screen space behind
them.

Perhaps the programs home page provides a explainometer - A slider on
a webpage which anyone at home can turn. Far left means can you
explain that and far right means go faster. The sum of all the
viewers explainometers are used to control a meter. This meter can be
used by the speakers to judge how much they are leaving the public
behind or how much they can assume as general knowledge.

Perhaps I will add a few sketches and send it to Jenny's sister.

Presenting science

I often think that we have lost the ability to present science. For
many people science is like magic. The one thing people want to know
when magic is performed is 'how is it done?' When arts graduates
present science the impression is that it is boring and the public
must be protected at all times from anything complex.

Imagine what would be more frustrating than a show which had
magicians promising to reveal their secrets and then just before they
show the trick getting cut off by presenters because 'The
complexities might put people off'. After all television is not here
to make people feel stupid is it?

I think what makes a book like 'A Brief History of Time' is that yes
we might not understand it but that's not the issue. At least you
have tried to broaden your universe by attempting to understand it.
Remember more people bought books about Physics ( the Breif History
of Time by Hawkings ) than bought books about Sex ( Sex by Maddona).

I will rant about this issue again and again until I am not heard.
sheep

Horizon disapointment

I watched http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/space.shtml and was slightly disappointed. Perhaps I am getting old but Horizon used to be really cool.

This Horizon was about space Torisum and tried to identify the history of space flight by talking about the history of space tourism. This was ok but the program totally ignored Dennis Tito.
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/missions/tito_crew_postflight_010516.html

The implication from the program was that all this space tourism was pie in the sky and the entrepreneurs involved where naive. The lack of reference to Tito made the whole program look very cheap and amateurishly put together.

Nothing on the BBC web page does not give a way of giving any feedback.