Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Were it not for massive government funding combustion gas turbineselectronics is
accessible and fun.
We need a motor - generator that is efficient over a broad rpm range
and doesn't require rare earth elements.
Why? Where would you get the batteries to run it?
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/23877/?a=f
Cool. They do a press release a week after they get a grant, about the
thing they hope they can invent.
The axial flow machine now used in most commercial aviation was firstelectronics is
accessible and fun.
We need a motor - generator that is efficient over a broad rpm range
and doesn't require rare earth elements.
Why? Where would you get the batteries to run it?
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/23877/?a=f
Cool. They do a press release a week after they get a grant, about the
thing they hope they can invent.
Were it not for massive government funding combustion gas turbines
would never have been developed, certainly not in a timely fashion.
Absurd.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_turbine#History
You sound like a typical leftist: don't really understand technologyelectronics is
accessible and fun.
We need a motor - generator that is efficient over a broad rpm range
and doesn't require rare earth elements.
Why? Where would you get the batteries to run it?
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/23877/?a=f
Cool. They do a press release a week after they get a grant, about the
thing they hope they can invent.
Were it not for massive government funding combustion gas turbines
would never have been developed, certainly not in a timely fashion.
Absurd.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_turbine#History
The axial flow machine now used in most commercial aviation was first
proposed in Paris in 1853.
No commercial development whatsoever for 90 years.
After massive governmental spending in the 1940s GTs were developed
enough to become a commercial success.
We see the same thing with Stirling except the time lag is 200 years.
The Swedes spent a lot of taxpayer money and developed a 200 bar
engine for their submarines which was further developed by Sandia
[more gummint funding] and a utility, San Diego Gas and Electric
[quasi gummint].
Some transportation breakthroughs might be done privately, i. e.,the
wheel motor, but it's crazy to think that all energy solutions can be
developed in the garage following the software model.
Bret Cahill
Anyone, good or evil, can prevail when his opponents all cut and runOn Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:40:17 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
electronics is
accessible and fun.
We need a motor - generator that is efficient over a broad rpm range
and doesn't require rare earth elements.
Why? Where would you get the batteries to run it?
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/23877/?a=f
Cool. They do a press release a week after they get a grant, about the
thing they hope they can invent.
Were it not for massive government funding combustion gas turbines
would never have been developed, certainly not in a timely fashion.
Absurd.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_turbine#History
The axial flow machine now used in most commercial aviation was first
proposed in Paris in 1853.
No commercial development whatsoever for 90 years.
After massive governmental spending in the 1940s GTs were developed
enough to become a commercial success.
We see the same thing with Stirling except the time lag is 200 years.
The Swedes spent a lot of taxpayer money and developed a 200 bar
engine for their submarines which was further developed by Sandia
[more gummint funding] and a utility, San Diego Gas and Electric
[quasi gummint].
Some transportation breakthroughs might be done privately, i. e.,the
wheel motor, but it's crazy to think that all energy solutions can be
developed in the garage following the software model.
Bret Cahill
You sound like a typical leftist: don't really understand technology
or economics, yet determined to have dominant political control over
both.
The first two are pre-requisites for the third.Bret Cahill <BretCahill@aol.com> wrote:
After massive governmental spending in the 1940s GTs were developed
enough to become a commercial success.
We see the same thing with Stirling except the time lag is 200 years.
The Swedes spent a lot of taxpayer money and developed a 200 bar
engine for their submarines which was further developed by Sandia
[more gummint funding] and a utility, San Diego Gas and Electric
[quasi gummint].
Some transportation breakthroughs might be done privately, i. e.,the
wheel motor, but it's crazy to think that all energy solutions can be
developed in the garage following the software model.
You sound like a typical leftist: don't really understand technology
or economics, yet determined to have dominant political control over
both.
Wheel motors are not a breakthrough. vis Lohner Porsche. Hub motors.John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:40:17 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
Some transportation breakthroughs might be done privately, i. e.,the
wheel motor, but it's crazy to think that all energy solutions can be
developed in the garage following the software model.
Nobody can prevail over evil physical limits.You sound like a typical leftist: don't really understand technology
or economics, yet determined to have dominant political control over
both.
Anyone, good or evil, can prevail when his opponents all cut and run
from the issues.
Everything was a breakthrough once upon a time.Some transportation breakthroughs might be done privately, i. e.,the
wheel motor, but it's crazy to think that all energy solutions can be
developed in the garage following the software model.
Wheel motors are not a breakthrough.
Talking about unsprung weight!vis Lohner Porsche. Hub motors.
Over 100 years ago.
Oh really? There was a lot of private enterprise developing gaselectronics is
accessible and fun.
We need a motor - generator that is efficient over a broad rpm range
and doesn't require rare earth elements.
Why? Where would you get the batteries to run it?
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/23877/?a=f
Cool. They do a press release a week after they get a grant, about the
thing they hope they can invent.
Were it not for massive government funding combustion gas turbines
would never have been developed, certainly not in a timely fashion.
We already know the dead ends, The fundamental, physical limits.Eventually they'll develop a cost effective battery or they'll prove
that it's impossible.
Nope. it just speeds up people who don't know any better, and thhoseThe funding speeds things up.
Just no commercial success stories until _after_ the massive gummintelectronics is
accessible and fun.
We need a motor - generator that is efficient over a broad rpm range
and doesn't require rare earth elements.
Why? Where would you get the batteries to run it?
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/23877/?a=f
Cool. They do a press release a week after they get a grant, about the
thing they hope they can invent.
Were it not for massive government funding combustion gas turbines
would never have been developed, certainly not in a timely fashion.
Oh really? There was a lot of private enterprise developing gas
turbines and a great deal of competition within the industry.
Which only happened _after_ massive gummint spending.The
physical limits of early implementations were understood and were
known to be resolvable by using more esoteric materials.
Yup.Eventually they'll develop a cost effective battery or they'll prove
that it's impossible.
We already know the dead ends, The fundamental, physical limits.
The funding speeds things up.
Nope.