|
Knees aren't supposed to bend that way 
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 11:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 22:17 |
|
|
Machines don't give a poo poo about which way is the "right" way for some squishy being's puny anatomy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 13:03
|
|
|
Bugsy posted:A bit of osha.jpg, a bit of architecture failures, and possibly china/jpg as well. So someone thought it was easier to bore through concrete steps, than it was to go around the steps 2 feet to the right? I always seriously thought they should just shoot nuclear waste into the sun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
Did that thing just snap his leg? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 14:05
|
|
|
FrankeeFrankFrank posted:I always seriously thought they should just shoot nuclear waste into the sun. Rockets explode on launch all the loving time so you would be risking spreading all that waste over a huge area in a glorious fireball. It's obvious what we need is a space elevator.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 14:06
|
|
|
Last Transmission posted:Machines don't give a poo poo about which way is the "right" way for some squishy being's puny anatomy. Well uh....it did stop after the guys legs got stuck in it
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
That just means someone punched the Big Red Button. (When you think of accidents always remember, Punch The Big Red Button)
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 14:39
|
|
|
bon ape tit posted:Did that thing just snap his leg? The gif doesn't really show that he flips around and lands on his back, so it's bent the right way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxuhfqwpUrs
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
Dillbag posted:Rockets explode on launch all the loving time so you would be risking spreading all that waste over a huge area in a glorious fireball. gently caress that noise, Giant railgun to shoot that poo poo into the sun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
Why don't we just put republicans in charge of the nuclear waste and just let idiots 50,000 years from now die of radiation poisoning?  Space OSHA.jpg Thread 52015 is gonna need content, after all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
Lurking Haro posted:Hey, I have a crazy idea. Why not properly process the waste until what's left is harmless in a few hundred years instead of tens of thousand. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
Just stick it in chernobyl. I mean the area is contaminated as hell already, not like you can make it that much worse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
We are orbiting the Sun. In order to "drop" something into the sun, you have to generate enough delta-vee to escape earth's gravity, and then a whole shitfuck more delta-vee to slow down so that you can fall into the sun. You'd spend far more energy doing this then the nuclear fuel ever generated for you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:We are orbiting the Sun. In order to "drop" something into the sun, you have to generate enough delta-vee to escape earth's gravity, and then a whole shitfuck more delta-vee to slow down so that you can fall into the sun. With rockets, sure. But given a space elevator and a railgun...
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
tactlessbastard posted:With rockets, sure. But given a space elevator and a railgun... Energy is energy. Railguns aren't free to run.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
What was lathe-guy trying to accomplish by holding on to it anyway? Like, that's just dumb, but what was his intent?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
Spookydonut posted:Energy is energy. Railguns aren't free to run. And neither is the space elevator. You don't get orbital velocity for free from an elevator: all it does is allow you to to use energy sent from the ground, instead of having to carry your own fuel. You still have to accelerate. The fact you don't have to lift your own fuel means you have a lot less mass to lift, so it is cheaper energywise in that respect. Of course, space elevators are magic bullshit technology, so if you can build one, you probably have magic bullshit technology to deal with your nuclear waste anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
SopWATh posted:What was lathe-guy trying to accomplish by holding on to it anyway? Much honor for warrior stronger than machine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
SopWATh posted:What was lathe-guy trying to accomplish by holding on to it anyway? Exactly. Also that was some pretty  poo poo
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
Darth123123 posted:Exactly. Also that was some pretty Not really, it had the potential to be though. TBH I was hoping for lots of twisty limbs because that guy was obviously in need of some reeducation about how stupidity works.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
Idea: Make two underground vaults. Fill the first one with huge concrete thistles and poo poo to make it really difficult to move through it. Have the entrance to the second vault, that actually contains the radioactive materials, be like 9 meters from the floor and then break the stairs on both sides. That way if future humans do find it they're just going to find a big freaky room and probably not be able to access the dangerous radioactive poo poo. Unless they have jetpacks. FreudianSlippers fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Apr 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Dillbag posted:Rockets explode on launch all the loving time so you would be risking spreading all that waste over a huge area in a glorious fireball. Let's build an orbiting nuclear energy producing space station... that way the waste is already in space. Every 25 years you tie all the 55 gallon drums of nuclear waste in orbit together with nylon rope and shoot it at the sun under the power of a fire extinguisher, like in the movie Gravity. The energy produced at the station would be transferred to the surface via cordless cell phone charger technology.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
Just shoot all the waste to the moon, we don't need land there anyway. Besides, moon-water is so 90's.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
Whether you're serious or not, if you can build that you can build an orbital solar farm that doesn't produce hazardous waste at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
Crossposting this as it is appropriate to current discussion:quote:Fallout from the airburst tests at the Nevada test range typically blew northeast into the midwestern United States and southern Canada. Fallout intensity was not evenly distributed along the paths, but tended to be localized in areas where it rained. Significant amounts of radiation fell in many states east of the Mississippi River, including places as far away from Nevada as Maine and North Carolina. Estimates of long term fatalities from radiation in this fallout range up to 80,000 people in the United States. That is more than all American military combat fatalities due to enemy action since World War II. Also because it is definitely OSHA DOT JAY PEG.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
If you haven't seen it, this video is required viewing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY Most people are astonished to find out how many nuclear bombs have been set off. Before you watch, take a guess. ...this is also part of why people in America worried about the radiation that leaked from Fukushima are hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:If you haven't seen it, this video is required viewing: I'm disputing your argument, but I think these are two different things. How many of those detonations were underground? How much radioactive material exists (or is created) in a normal (say 20Mt) nuclear detonation compared to a commercial reactor meltdown and subsequent explosion? Doesn't a reactor have enough uranium to be equivalent to hundreds of bombs? SopWATh fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Apr 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
There was enough radioactive material released from those explosions that you can tell if steel was made before that time by its radioactive impurities that pollute literally every material made since then, including people's bones (old corpses don't have radioactive bones like young/living bodies do). I think there are even some applications that require pre-nuclear steel in order to work, like Geiger counters, so it's something of a limited resource. Also "Compared to a commercial meltdown", if we look at Three Mile Island (the weakest meltdown afaik), the several hundred people in the area were given the equivalent of a few dozen X-Rays, as compared to Hiroshima (one of the weakest nukes) that released enough radiation to cook people to death quickly and doom a generation or two of people to high cancer rates at best. Evilreaver fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Apr 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
they harvest steel from pre-1945 shipwrecks for low background steel. The wrecks of the German imperial fleet at Scapa Flow have been providing the bulk of this steel.
Raskolnikov38 fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Apr 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
SopWATh posted:I'm disputing your argument, but I think these are two different things. How many of those detonations were underground? A lot of them were underground, but enough were above-ground that radioactive material has been spread globally. Most of the tests prior to 1963 were above-ground. After that above-ground test-ban treaty, which France and China didn't sign, those two countries continued above-ground testing until '74 and '80, respectively. According to this article, quote:Altogether, 504 devices were exploded at 13 primary testing sites, yielding the equivalent explosive power of 440 megatons of TNT Here's another relevant quote: quote:In 1997, NCI conducted a detailed evaluation of dose to the thyroid glands of U.S. residents from I-131 in fallout from tests in Nevada. In a related activity, we evaluated the risks of thyroid cancer from that exposure and estimated that about 49,000 fallout-related cases might occur in the United States, almost all of them among persons who were under age 20 at some time during the period 1951-57, with 95-percent uncertainty limits of 11,300 and 212,000. The estimated risk may be compared with some 400,000 lifetime thyroid cancers expected in the same population in the absence of any fallout exposure. Accounting for thyroid exposure from global fallout, which was distributed fairly uniformly over the entire United States, might increase the estimated excess by 10 percent, from 49,000 to 54,000. Fallout-related risks for thyroid cancer are likely to exceed those for any other cancer simply because those risks are predominantly ascribable to the thyroid dose from internal radiation, which is unmatched in other organs. I-131 is only one of the radioactive isotopes - one of the shortest lived - that can cause cancers. Much longer-lived isotopes like strontium-90 and cesium-137 were globally dispersed by above-ground and (especially) upper-atmosphere testing. quote:A total of about 1,800 deaths from radiation-related leukemia might eventually occur in the United States because of external (1,100 deaths) and internal (650 deaths) radiation from NTS and global fallout. For perspective, this might be compared to about 1.5 million leukemia deaths expected eventually among the 1952 population of the United States. About 22,000 radiation-related cancers, half of them fatal, might eventually result from external exposure from NTS and global fallout, compared to the current lifetime cancer rate of 42 percent (corresponding to about 60 million of the 1952 population). By contrast: Fukushima didn't explode. It's leaked radiation into the air in the immediate vicinity of the reactor, and it's leaked radioactive isotopes into seawater, where it has been diluted. If you live in California, you are getting a higher dose of radiation from the Sierra Nevada then you are from Fukushima. By a lot. You get a massively higher dose every time you have a dental x-ray. The sun is irradiating all of us, right this second. Radiation can cause cancer, and the nuclear testing, statistically, probably killed, globally, hundreds of thousands of people from higher rates of cancer. By contrast, Fukushima by itself is likely to kill somewhere around zero Americans due to radiation leaked into the ocean and/or radioactive particles flying over on the wind. It's more dangerous to eat ocean fish due to the mercury levels than due to the radiation levels. You're at higher risk of getting cancer from eating charred red meat then you are from Fukushima fallout. The carcinogens in your household products you blithely use regularly are probably causing much higher rates of cancer than Fukushima. People just panic when they hear the word "radiation," it's the spooky invisible ghost that gives you cancer. We should be a lot more concerned about the poo poo we are smearing on our bodies and vaporizing in our homes daily and deliberately lacing our food with, instead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:they harvest steel from pre-1945 shipwrecks for low background steel. The wrecks of the German imperial fleet at Scapa Flow have been proving the bulk of this steel.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:The sun is irradiating all of us, right this second. Hah, jokes on you, I don't go outside! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
Ssthalar posted:Hah, jokes on you, I don't go outside! Whoops, radiation doesn't give a poo poo about your puny roof! If you want to get away from enough radiation to be able to detect neutrinos, you have to go several miles below the surface.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
CampingCarl posted:If I remember right a lot of the steel for experiments in the LHC are made of german battleships. I thought it even named the ship(s) used but now I can't find the source. I am interested if anyone finds specifics. I would have expected low background steel to be used for dark matter experiments, but not for the LHC since they have a very high luminosity beam.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
as things go in this thread, it seems not so bad
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:as things go in this thread, it seems not so bad you're right, sorry. Just saw that at work today and thought of the thread. That's the solution they came up with after people complained about the slippery path to the stairs. It was safer when it was just an ice ramp.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Yeah, I loved Legend of Korra
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 22:17 |
|
|
Leperflesh posted:And neither is the space elevator. You don't get orbital velocity for free from an elevator: all it does is allow you to to use energy sent from the ground, instead of having to carry your own fuel. You still have to accelerate. While your words are technically correct, you're missing an important point. We do get free orbital velocity if we build an elevator. Just not from the elevator itself. The whole construction 'sits' on the earth, so it would move along with the earth's spin. If the materials are strong enough, it's stable when it ends in a geostationary orbit. In this case, the further out you go, the faster you are spinning around (still 24 hours per rotation, but the circle gets larger and larger so more actual distance per rotation). At some point the centrifugal effect takes over and it just starts pushing you out faster and faster. The energy for this comes from the earth's spin. In other words, the rotation of earth will slow down a tiny bit every time someone goes up. The effect would be so small that it wouldn't even be noticable for ages... especially if people come back down, reversing the effect. Now you also know why these things need to be built on the equator: that's where the surface rotation is the fastest. By the way, once you have your space elevator built... you can extend the climbing pole a bit beyond geostationary. Put some kind of spaceship on that side of the pole and let it loose. At that distance, the centrifugal effect will actively accelerate it, making it shoot off into space faster and more efficient than any rocket could. Once again by taking some energy from earth's spin.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 09:16
|
|
