OP, you have just spammed the same post to 9 communities. The document you posted is from year 2016. I should note that a few things have changed since them. Iran has massacred over 1000 protesters during the Mahsa Amini rebellion. Iran has supported the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Iran has had a war with Israel (but I can’t really blame them, since escalation was mutual). And most recently, Iran has massacred what’s likely several thousand protesters during the past few days.

I should note that Iranian people, all of them, also have plans. The US isn’t the only organization on Earth with ability to plan things, and attempt to fulfill their plans.

Some ayatollahs plan to keep ruling with an iron fist, killing thousands if needed. Some leftists joined them in revolution decades ago, but were surprised to see that the ayatollahs hijacked state. Those leftists used to blow the ayatollahs up (in scores) decades ago, but had to retreat out of the country. Some king used to rule before the revolution, and surprisingly some people think the king’s son might be a suitable person for a transition government. I notice that he seems intelligent, but I don’t think he’s suitable. He’s just their best known opposition figure currently…

…but of course, talk of a transition goverment is pie in the sky fantasy as long as 12.7 mm flies on streets.

The most pressing problem is that protesters have lost over 10 000 people as prisoners (likely to be excuted as “enemies of god”) and likely several thousand as dead, while the Basij and IRGC have lost less than 100 members.

The most pressing problem is that Iranian protesters aren’t armed, don’t have explosives, don’t have decent communications and most of them don’t know how to improvise weapons, explosives and communications. As a result, they’re getting slaughtered.

There is also a secondary problem. A US president promised to protect them, and it seems they believed him. They shouldn’t have. Even if he intends to do something, they’ll be dead by that time.

OP, you have just spammed the same post to 9 communities. The document you posted is from year 2016. I should note that a few things have changed since them. Iran has massacred over 1000 protesters during the Mahsa Amini rebellion. Iran has supported the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Iran has had a war with Israel (but I can’t really blame them, since escalation was mutual). And most recently, Iran has massacred what’s likely several thousand protesters during the past few days.

I should note that Iranian people, all of them, also have plans. The US isn’t the only organization on Earth with ability to plan things, and attempt to fulfill their plans.

Some ayatollahs plan to keep ruling with an iron fist, killing thousands if needed. Some leftists joined them in revolution decades ago, but were surprised to see that the ayatollahs hijacked state. Those leftists used to blow the ayatollahs up (in scores) decades ago, but had to retreat out of the country. Some king used to rule before the revolution, and surprisingly some people think the king’s son might be a suitable person for a transition government. I notice that he seems intelligent, but I don’t think he’s suitable. He’s just their best known opposition figure currently…

…but of course, talk of a transition goverment is pie in the sky fantasy as long as 12.7 mm flies on streets.

The most pressing problem is that protesters have lost over 10 000 people as prisoners (likely to be excuted as “enemies of god”) and likely several thousand as dead, while the Basij and IRGC have lost less than 100 members.

The most pressing problem is that Iranian protesters aren’t armed, don’t have explosives, don’t have decent communications and most of them don’t know how to improvise weapons, explosives and communications. As a result, they’re getting slaughtered.

There is also a secondary problem. A US president promised to protect them, and it seems they believed him. They shouldn’t have. Even if he intends to do something, they’ll be dead by that time.

OP, you have just spammed the same post to 9 communities. The document you posted is from year 2016. I should note that a few things have changed since them. Iran has massacred over 1000 protesters during the Mahsa Amini rebellion. Iran has supported the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Iran has had a war with Israel (but I can’t really blame them, since escalation was mutual). And most recently, Iran has massacred what’s likely several thousand protesters during the past few days.

I should note that Iranian people, all of them, also have plans. The US isn’t the only organization on Earth with ability to plan things, and attempt to fulfill their plans.

Some ayatollahs plan to keep ruling with an iron fist, killing thousands if needed. Some leftists joined them in revolution decades ago, but were surprised to see that the ayatollahs hijacked state. Those leftists used to blow the ayatollahs up (in scores) decades ago, but had to retreat out of the country. Some king used to rule before the revolution, and surprisingly some people think the king’s son might be a suitable person for a transition government. I notice that he seems intelligent, but I don’t think he’s suitable. He’s just their best known opposition figure currently…

…but of course, talk of a transition goverment is pie in the sky fantasy as long as 12.7 mm flies on streets.

The most pressing problem is that protesters have lost over 10 000 people as prisoners (likely to be excuted as “enemies of god”) and likely several thousand as dead, while the Basij and IRGC have lost less than 100 members.

The most pressing problem is that Iranian protesters aren’t armed, don’t have explosives, don’t have decent communications and most of them don’t know how to improvise weapons, explosives and communications. As a result, they’re getting slaughtered.

There is also a secondary problem. A US president promised to protect them, and it seems they believed him. They shouldn’t have. Even if he intends to do something, they’ll be dead by that time.

OP, you have just spammed the same post to 9 communities. The document you posted is from year 2016. I should note that a few things have changed since them. Iran has massacred over 1000 protesters during the Mahsa Amini rebellion. Iran has supported the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Iran has had a war with Israel (but I can’t really blame them, since escalation was mutual). And most recently, Iran has massacred what’s likely several thousand protesters during the past few days.

I should note that Iranian people, all of them, also have plans. The US isn’t the only organization on Earth with ability to plan things, and attempt to fulfill their plans.

Some ayatollahs plan to keep ruling with an iron fist, killing thousands if needed. Some leftists joined them in revolution decades ago, but were surprised to see that the ayatollahs hijacked state. Those leftists used to blow the ayatollahs up (in scores) decades ago, but had to retreat out of the country. Some king used to rule before the revolution, and surprisingly some people think the king’s son might be a suitable person for a transition government. I notice that he seems intelligent, but I don’t think he’s suitable. He’s just their best known opposition figure currently…

…but of course, talk of a transition goverment is pie in the sky fantasy as long as 12.7 mm flies on streets.

The most pressing problem is that protesters have lost over 10 000 people as prisoners (likely to be excuted as “enemies of god”) and likely several thousand as dead, while the Basij and IRGC have lost less than 100 members.

The most pressing problem is that Iranian protesters aren’t armed, don’t have explosives, don’t have decent communications and most of them don’t know how to improvise weapons, explosives and communications. As a result, they’re getting slaughtered.

There is also a secondary problem. A US president promised to protect them, and it seems they believed him. They shouldn’t have. Even if he intends to do something, they’ll be dead by that time.

deleted by creator

True.

Given that…

The potential energy carried by Liquid Air/Nitrogen is just over 200 Wh/kg (watt hours per kilogram). source

…this is roughly equal to battery storage, but likely doesn’t need any scarce minerals.

This is a bunch of scaremongering.

Then you should also remove my post about it being possible to blow out a wall with a gas stove. It might also scare people. It’s here, I kindly request that you review it:

https://slrpnk.net/comment/19887409

Moderation practises should be consistent, in my opinion.

After thinking about this for a while… I can’t say I agree with that.

Sensors can fail. Some companies may even produce sub-standard sensors or faulty logic. I think it’s OK to tell people that copper and aluminum aren’t allowed on an induction top, and the makers of induction tops seem to think similarly, they just add a sentence “unless equipped with a magnetic base”.

Let’s take a manual of a randomly chosen induction cooker:

https://www.caple.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/C850I-Instruction-manual-May-2017.pdf

Let’s examine what it says:

Cookware made from the following materials is not suitable: pure stainless steel, aluminum or copper without a magnetic base, glass, wood, porcelain, ceramic, and earthenware

On one hand, an aluminum pot won’t heat. On the other hand, aluminum foil will melt, or if placed somewhat closer, catch fire. I think I should be allowed to claim that “aluminum is forbidden” on induction tops and add that “aluminum foil is extra forbidden”.

Will you kindly restore my post? People can downvote or argue it if they don’t like my interpretation, but I don’t think it’s misinformation. It explains some things they might not even know about. I would be sad if people think that ferromagnetism is required for induction heating to happen. It would be nice if people understood how their cooker accomplishes heating in more depth than “if a magnet sticks, it’s OK”.

Thanks for correcting.

There seems to be contradictory information on the subject.

Aluminum foil is proven to melt on induction cookers (see attached photo). But that’s because foil is thin.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Foil_on_induction_cooktop.jpg

A photo I suggest taking a look at: induction heater burning aluminum foil. Taken from the publication “Practical Course on School Experiments for Future Physics teachers”.

…as for thick aluminum cookware, or copper cookware, I was not implying that they would overheat themselves, I was implying that the induction cooker would overheat its coil attempting to work with them, because they conduct current better than the coil. But perhaps that’s prevented by protection circuits or a process I haven’t taken into account. I can’t test since I don’t have an induction cooker at home.

EM-fields induce current in copper and aluminum perfectly fine, no ferromagnetism is needed. You can build a coreless transformer for example, ordinary tranformers simply benefit from having a core (the core is separated into thin layers to reduce heating). Copper and aluminum simply conduct current very well, so appreciable heat does not appear at everyday levels of field strength and current. Steel and cast iron, having considerable resistance, heat up in a similar field, conducting similar amounts of current. There’s a potential gap in my understanding of the process, however - perhaps I’m failing to take into account the frequency of a cooking field in an induction cooker. The frequency determines whether current wants to travel in the depth of the conductor or on the surface of the conductor.

Simple experiments that I can recommend:

• take a circuar magnet and let it drop along a copper pipe -> you will observe that it drops slowly, braking itself by inducing current in copper

• spin a rotor with magnets next to a plate of copper -> you will observe mechanical resistance to spinning, because it induces current in copper

I can also recommend an interesting Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_current

Quoting from the article (emphasis mine):

For example, a nearby conductive surface will exert a drag force on a moving magnet that opposes its motion, due to eddy currents induced in the surface by the moving magnetic field. This effect is employed in eddy current brakes which are used to stop rotating power tools quickly when they are turned off. The current flowing through the resistance of the conductor also dissipates energy as heat in the material. Thus eddy currents are a cause of energy loss in alternating current (AC) inductors, transformers, electric motors and generators, and other AC machinery, requiring special construction such as laminated magnetic cores or ferrite cores to minimize them. Eddy currents are also used to heat objects in induction heating furnaces and equipment, and to detect cracks and flaws in metal parts using eddy-current testing instruments.

I also recommend this source and will quote them below:

Induction heating utilizes electromagnetic fields to heat conductive materials without any direct contact. Aluminum, although non-magnetic, heats effectively because of its high electrical conductivity. However, it produces weaker eddy currents in comparison to ferrous metals.

As an added benefit besides the environmental ones - you can’t blow out a wall and collapse a house with careless use of an induction cooker. :)

Removed by mod

In the “smaller vehicles” part, great obstacles need to be overcome.

I would be content with doing only the parts that are reasonably economical and efficient:

• produce it, store it as a compressed gas
• if CO2 is available, convert it to methane (can be liquefied for distribution) or even bigger molecules
• if there is demand, use it to reduce steel
• if storage maxed (no CO2, no ore to reduce) burn it back to water in a turbine, selling electrical power when the market needs it

Economically, this would likely make ends meet - and keep hydrogen away from consumers (consumers are careless and their systems often faulty, while hydrogen is demanding and dangerous).

I would especially want to comment about:

Norway

A country that swims in oil, and has few other natural resources of comparable value, so indeed nearly all parties support using it.

What example will he bring next, Saudi Arabia?

That aside, Norway has a huge electric vehicle adoption rate. They will sell you oil, but have themselves almost stopped using it.

Chatbots have a built-in tendency for sycophancy - to affirm the user and sound supportive, at the cost of remaining truthful.

ChatGPT went through its sycophancy scandal recently and I would have hoped they’d have added weight to finding credible and factual sources, but apparently they haven’t.

To be honest, I’m rather surprised that Meta AI didn’t exhibit much sycophancy. Perhaps they’re simply somewhat behind the others in their customization curve - an language model can’t be sycophant if it can’t figure out the biases of its user or remember them until the relevant prompt.

Grok, being a creation of a company owned by Elon Musk, has quite predictably been “softened up” the most - to cater to the remaining user base of Twitter. I would expect the ability of Grok to present an unbiased and factual opinion degrade further in the future.

Overall, my rather limited personal experience with LLMs suggests that most language models will happily lie to you, unless you ask very carefully. They’re only language models, not reality models after all.

Solvay’s factory reported only 56 kilograms of SF₆ emissions for 2023 to Germany’s industrial emissions register. The scientist’s estimates are 500 times higher: around 30 tons. Its effect on the atmosphere is more than that of 700,000 tons of CO₂ due to the high global warming potential of SF₆, comparable to a coal-fired power plant.

So, in terms of how much they probably lied: really bad.

In terms of whether this one factory could significantly screw up climate: not as bad. Footprint is roughly the size of a large coal-burning plant going at full load.

They obviously have to fix their leaks + pay for their emissions + pay a large fine + show their internal documents to make it clear if this was intended.

The cause is uncertain for now.

It’s known with certainty that polar ice did not exist then - so it was not Antarctic melting giving a feedback bump. Besides the feedback bump caused by Antarctic melting is speculated to be on the order of 2 degrees.

It could have been partly volcanic, but not mainly volcanic. It certainly wasn’t tectonic, as the event was a brief spike of “only” ~200 000 years.

The study below, somewhat speculative in nature, proposes that bottom water warming occurred 3000 years before the carbon trip, and decomposition of methane hydrates could have been the amplifier of the process. Which, to me, suggests that maybe the cause was geological.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18097406/

A hypothesis referenced in Wikipedia: a lot of high-carbon rock (kimberlite) experienced a volcanic eruption that released much CO2, and brought oceans above the theshold where methane hydrates decomposed and supplied methane.

Although the cause of the initial warming has been attributed to a massive injection of carbon (CO2 and/or CH4) into the atmosphere, the source of the carbon has yet to be found. The emplacement of a large cluster of kimberlite pipes at ~56 Ma in the Lac de Gras region of northern Canada may have provided the carbon that triggered early warming in the form of exsolved magmatic CO2. Calculations indicate that the estimated 900–1,100 Pg[194] of carbon required for the initial approximately 3 °C of ocean water warming associated with the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum could have been released during the emplacement of a large kimberlite cluster.[195] The transfer of warm surface ocean water to intermediate depths led to thermal dissociation of seafloor methane hydrates, providing the isotopically depleted carbon that produced the carbon isotopic excursion. The coeval ages of two other kimberlite clusters in the Lac de Gras field and two other early Cenozoic hyperthermals indicate that CO2 degassing during kimberlite emplacement is a plausible source of the CO2 responsible for these sudden global warming events.

Pretty damn neat.

If it’s expensive, I would still think that people needing to charge cars, power up boats or supply electricity to high altitude pseudo-satellites (read: balloons that are permanently up there) or satellites will buy some.

If the price drops, solar power with far less surface is nice to have elsewhere too.

(Myself, I’ve sometimes thought of autonomous communications networks entirely powered by the sun, no grid required. The efficiency of solar panels, or the lack of it, has been a considerable obstacle in calculations.)