>> ^rottenseed:

So the limiting reactant would be the starter fluid and the air in the tire. Oxygen to be more exact. Because you want enough forces to seat the tire, but not so much it removes all of the gases from the tire, maybe they should have tried less starter fluid. If that's depleted in the reaction quickly leaving enough energy to seat the tire, but also enough oxygen left over from the reaction, you might end up with a working tire.
Somebody please double check my thought process, but I think it's definitely worth more experimentation.

Would be one to test, but I think you'd end up with the same problem. End of the day to jump the tyre back on the rim you are going to be filling quite a lot of the inside of that tyre with the hot gases from the combustion. You might get less deflation with less accelarant, but I'd think you'd start with a lower pressure within the tyre even before the gases cool, so you wouldn't gain much. Thats my guess anyway.


Now maybe if you did this, and at the same time dropped just the right amount of dry ice in with it you could get the tyre back on the rim AND get it pressurised without the need for some sort of pump. Ofc, dry ice is not exactly something you tend to have stored in the glove compartment...

It's all a fraud, but a voluntary one. The CSA is unscientific and doesn't abide by its own classifications... but has been adopted by the States, who now don't question it.

Since 2003, the US Govt, through the DHHS, owns a patent on Cannabidiol - a main ingredient in the cannabis plant and component of the smoke from combustion of the plant -- thus invalidating the claim against medicinal value. Patent Number 6630507. So why is it illegal? Guess who is in charge of authorizing the studies?

You will have to look it up, because for all intents and purposes it is actually the DEA who sets AND enforces drug policy in our country. (of course, they swear they are just followin the orders which come right from our citizens! they are doin the good work by keepin us from getting free medicine. don't you remember asking them to ruin your life just for fun?)

The current DEA director LYINGHEART actively blocks all attempts at scientific discourse regarding marijuana, yet screams the sky is falling because of synthetic cannabinoids that have been available for over a decade, proving that the DEA is up its own ass, at least partially enough to block hearing and sight. They can still smell pot smoke though.


Marijuana is not a drug. The plant isnt a drug. The chemicals inside it are... and they have medicinal value. So why make the plant illegal? Because its free. Number one, period.

prescription pain killer abuse is at an all time high and rising with the population... so one has to question the motivations of people who keep a free effective drug illegal. The most therapeutically safe substance known to man is classified with Heroin in terms of impact on health and society. That alone should be a warning flag to any thinking citizen.

Sickening, yet the only logical conclusion in light of all the facts.

I remember seeing a documentary on Spontaneous Human Combustion a few years ago and one of the cases cited was a woman who had collected some seashells and stones from a California beach and suffered the same thing. The shells and stones were suspected but nothing was found.

What a superb Tour de FAIL [despite the Blair Witch video stylings]. There must have been a mile wide testosterone slick mixed in with the combustible engine fluids after all was said and done =oO

This is yet another nail in the coffin for the internal combustion engine.

>> ^Porksandwich:

Too bad the shields it put up around the 2 minute mark failed shortly after.


Looked more like a Metreon Cascade to me.

Your video, Slow Motion Lithium Combustion, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

(from YouTube)

Movies in order of appearance:

Halloween
Freddy VS. Jason
Resident Evil
The Amityville Horror
Night of the Demons
Christine
Shocker
From Dusk Till Dawn
Planet Terror
Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood
The Thing
Alice Sweet Alice
Don't Look Now
The Town That Dreaded Sundown
Madman
The Shining
The Exorcist
Poltergeist
Child's Play
28 Days Later
Psycho
Cemetery Man
Salem's Lot
Hellraiser II: Hellbound
Bram Stoker's Dracula
Jacob's Ladder
Suspiria
Slither
Trick R Treat
Re-Animator
Killer Klowns From Outer Space
Creepshow
American Psycho
Leprechaun
The Dark Half
The Hitcher
The Final Destination
Zombi 2
Audition
The Changeling
The Omen
Drag Me To Hell
The Crazies
The Ring
Jaws
The Descent
When a Stranger Calls
Dawn of the Dead
The Devil's Rejects
The Exorcist
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Near Dark
Motel Hell
Carrie
Spontaneous Combustion
An American Werewolf in London
The Blair Witch Project
[REC]
Paranormal Activity
Day of the Dead
Cube Zero
Ichi the Killer
Dead Snow
The Machine Girl
Wrong Turn 2
Poultrygeist: Night of the Chicken Dead
Black Sheep
Saw III
Freddy VS. Jason
Hatchet II
The Descent
Braindead (Dead Alive)
Day of the Dead
Troll 2
Shaun of the Dead
Phantasm
Profondo Rosso (Deep Red)
Return of the Living Dead
Evil Dead II: Dead by Dawn
C.H.U.D.
Baby Blood
Slugs
Tales From the Crypt: Demon Knight
Bride of Chucky
976-EVIL
Tremors
The Devil's Backbone
Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare
A Tale of Two Sisters
Jeepers Creepers II
Basket Case
Alien
Cujo
Rosemary's Baby
Interview with the Vampire
Let the Right One In
Halloween III: Season of the Witch
Scream
Chakushin Ari (One Missed Call)
Ju-On (The Grudge)
House on Haunted Hill
Hostel
Candyman
Insidious
The Orphanage
Black Christmas
Pet Semetary
Fright Night
The Exorcist
Mother's Day
Scanners
The Shining
The Evil Dead
The Exorcism of Emily Rose
Chopping Mall
Braindead (Dead Alive)

Hahah! I love how the black guy has a dark suit.

And the gunshot, as someone said. But also the fact that internal combustion engines even work on the moon.

...the nerd in me would like to point out that Combustion quite possibly the best spell in the entire game.

>_>

@Spacedog79

Indeed, this takes a different approach than a LFTR, I wasn't meaning to suggest this would solve a parallel set of problems. And I don't know if the complexity of it should be a deal breaker right away, look at combustion engines, Diesel is by far simpler than Gasoline engines, however both have their uses; complexity alone can't be the deciding factor.

Also, from my understanding...and let me point out again that I am no expert, but it seemed that while they are indeed firing protons, they are firing them at a heavy metal, and through the spallation effect, producing a beam of neutrons (or that is the plan, they currently are just beaming electrons I believe). Either way, it is a complex way to go about fission; but very much like Gas Vs Diesel with the lack of a perfectly sustained reactor (Uranium or Thorium) of perfect ability, research in this quasi-dieselesk solution might not be a terrible waste of time and money.

There is also a "problem" of using the fissile we have today, as far as I understand it. As they are mixed with many other undesirable fissile and non-fissile fission products in a chemical stew. So to use that, you would need a secure, safe, and practical way to go about reconditioning and reconstituting it in a form you could use. Once again, not a deal breaker for that to happen either, but you have to keep your mind and options open for good technologies that offer a different game plan. Ultimately, I think a critical reactor is the way you want to go if you can get the engineering and physics behind you, if not, or in certain situations, perhaps sub-critical will offer some unique solutions.

Thanks for the well wishes, apparently, one of the better nuclear schools is in my state...score! And one of the others is near my family...double score!

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Actually more CO2 emissions come from big power plants than cars. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/co2_human.html#fossil CCS is about capturing the CO2 in the smoke stack of big energy plants, transporting it and pumping it underground for long-term geological storage. It's not really about planting and burying trees. Sorry for the spammage, but here's a good overview of it: http://www.globalccsinstitute.com/ccs/what-is-ccs >> ^bcglorf:

>> ^dag:
How about carbon capture? Any thoughts on that? (my day job is here: http://www.globalccsinstitute.com/)>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Peroxide:
@bcglorf Your argument is the same tired old bullshit. It isn't us, don't feel guilty, and SWEET JESUS don't do anything to stop the industrial engine of economic growth that is spewing the CO2 in the first place.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-ev
idence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect-advanced.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/a-comprehensive-rev
iew-of-the-causes-of-global-warming.html

Actually, I strongly encourage that we stop burning coal and oil, which would virtually eliminate our CO2 emissions. I am a big proponent of pushing battery research the 10% further it needs to go to replace gas powered cars with electric. I am a big proponent of replacing dirty coal and oil based power plants with clean running brand new nuclear plants. If the future pans out as I hope, the next 20 years will see a dramatic drop in our CO2 emissions.
I do NOT argue for that because the sky is falling and we're all gonna die if we don't. I advocate for it because it would reduce really bad pollutants AND save us a fortune very quickly.
If you feel the need to throw out a few web links instead of addressing my statements of facts, backed by peer reviewed science I think you've forfeited the intellectual and scientific high ground.


If I'm to be really blunt, carbon capture seems like a terrifically expensive make work project. With most of our carbon emissions coming from combustion engines and with companies like Tesla already coming very close to being competitive with purely electric alternatives I think our time, money and energy much better spent there. Creative carbon capture ideas like simple tree planting and other means of increasing plant capture has it's benefits, but the capture of CO2 is really low on the list. I'd say championing that sort of thing as carbon capture is just gimmicky when the most significant benefits are a multitude of other more direct things.

>> ^dag:

How about carbon capture? Any thoughts on that? (my day job is here: http://www.globalccsinstitute.com/)>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Peroxide:
@bcglorf Your argument is the same tired old bullshit. It isn't us, don't feel guilty, and SWEET JESUS don't do anything to stop the industrial engine of economic growth that is spewing the CO2 in the first place.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-ev
idence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect-advanced.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/a-comprehensive-rev
iew-of-the-causes-of-global-warming.html

Actually, I strongly encourage that we stop burning coal and oil, which would virtually eliminate our CO2 emissions. I am a big proponent of pushing battery research the 10% further it needs to go to replace gas powered cars with electric. I am a big proponent of replacing dirty coal and oil based power plants with clean running brand new nuclear plants. If the future pans out as I hope, the next 20 years will see a dramatic drop in our CO2 emissions.
I do NOT argue for that because the sky is falling and we're all gonna die if we don't. I advocate for it because it would reduce really bad pollutants AND save us a fortune very quickly.
If you feel the need to throw out a few web links instead of addressing my statements of facts, backed by peer reviewed science I think you've forfeited the intellectual and scientific high ground.



If I'm to be really blunt, carbon capture seems like a terrifically expensive make work project. With most of our carbon emissions coming from combustion engines and with companies like Tesla already coming very close to being competitive with purely electric alternatives I think our time, money and energy much better spent there. Creative carbon capture ideas like simple tree planting and other means of increasing plant capture has it's benefits, but the capture of CO2 is really low on the list. I'd say championing that sort of thing as carbon capture is just gimmicky when the most significant benefits are a multitude of other more direct things.

I can upvote snowboarders, but not snowmobilers. Internal combustion engines are just so passe.