Author Topic: The Gas prices...  (Read 13290 times)

The majority of people who drive SUVs and trucks don't need to. SUVs aren't good for anything except for off-roading, and even then only Jeeps and Hummers are really designed for that. If you aren't hauling equipment you use regularly in a truck you shouldn't be driving it. You should be utilizing your truck at least four days of the week. Extended cab trucks make no sense to me. A truck shouldn't be a family vehicle, and extended cab trucks add more weight to the truck and actually lower the amount of usable space in the bed.

But we're Americans! We can drive all the useless stuff we want because we rock!

USA! USA! USA!

The only legitimate reason for larger vehicles is that they are safer in collisions due to their larger mass and stronger frames. It's not an excuse though.

The only legitimate reason for larger vehicles is that they are safer in collisions due to their larger mass and stronger frames. It's not an excuse though.
If everyone drove smaller vehicles... ;o

The only legitimate reason for larger vehicles is that they are safer in collisions due to their larger mass and stronger frames. It's not an excuse though.
I don't mean to call you out on this, but large does not equal safe. There's some show on tv where smash lab they crash cars and find ways of preventing crap and whatnot and said the ratings of some larger vehicles are absolute stuff, and on Diggnation they were talking about it. Can't find the exact statistics, but I'm sure you can find it on Google. Also, you're saying that not dying is no excuse for having a larger vehicle :?

BUT FOR THE MOST PART YOU ARE RIGHT
« Last Edit: October 12, 2008, 05:56:05 PM by Phone »

I don't mean to call you out on this, but large does not equal safe. There's some show on tv where they crash cars and find ways of preventing crap and whatnot and said the ratings of some larger vehicles are absolute stuff, and on Diggnation they were talking about it. Can't find the exact statistics, but I'm sure you can find it on Google. Also, you're saying that not dying is no excuse for having a larger vehicle :?
You're right, even a larger vehicle in a high speed crash will often be fatal. Really this is why they don't mess around with speeding limits, its the maximum speed you can get in an accident with and still walk away from the crash.

SUVs are mainly used to drive kids to soccer practice. They can accomodate about 7 kids who carpool together, even though the kids have no loving clue who the other kids are. The mother, as custom, pulls out her make-up kit every red light in order to make sure she's the loveiest MILF in the neighborhood.

SUVs are mainly used to drive kids to soccer practice. They can accomodate about 7 kids who carpool together, even though the kids have no loving clue who the other kids are. The mother, as custom, pulls out her make-up kit every red light in order to make sure she's the loveiest MILF in the neighborhood.
SUVs aren't even that great for transporting large numbers of people.

I don't mean to call you out on this, but large does not equal safe. There's some show on tv where they crash cars and find ways of preventing crap and whatnot and said the ratings of some larger vehicles are absolute stuff, and on Diggnation they were talking about it. Can't find the exact statistics, but I'm sure you can find it on Google. Also, you're saying that not dying is no excuse for having a larger vehicle :?

BUT FOR THE MOST PART YOU ARE RIGHT

When a large vehicle hits a small vehicle, the smaller vehicle incurs more damage and feels a greater impact than that of the large vehicle. Also, smaller vehicles place the driver in a position right in line with the bumpers of larger vehicles making side-on collisions more risky.

Obviously, driving a massive truck just for safety isn't the most practical idea. There are other things you can do, like pay attention to the road, never drive while incapacitated, drive defensively, etc.

I realize I am sending a mixed message here so I'll be straightforward: Buying a large vehicle, regardless of the additional protection it affords, is not a sensible purchase if you do not need it for your daily life.

SUVs are mainly used to drive kids to soccer practice. They can accomodate about 7 kids who carpool together, even though the kids have no loving clue who the other kids are. The mother, as custom, pulls out her make-up kit every red light in order to make sure she's the loveiest MILF in the neighborhood.
Yeah... Soccer moms are crazy.

Already made. Still subject to the same laws of thermodynamics.

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

All machines that we have made, from heatsinks on computers to jet turbines, are all subject to the laws of thermodynamics. To oversimplify; no machine can exceed 40% efficiency. Of the energy that enters a system, only 40% of that energy can converted into a useful force (such as movement) while the other remaining total is wasted. Few machines truly even get close to 40%, the closest are the turbines used to generate power in various powerplants.
The 40% rule applies to machines, which are inefficient due to their size. Nano materials work both chemically and mechanically and don't have that problem as long as the required minimal energy is present. The chemical attributes enable them to work on the basis of chemical reactions, here's the basic example:

A + B --> C + D + energy

The product, releasing energy, is always favored (due to increase in stability, entropy of the system, other factors). So the reaction drives itself to the product side as long as there are enough reactants to meet the reaction rate. If there is an overflow of the reactants A or B or both, then the reaction drives itself to the products until balance is reestablished. This is the principle of all chemical reactions.

Nano materials behave this way, but with an added bonus of also behaving mechanically (spinning molecules, kinetic/steric molecule bumping, etc.). This means you can potentially make nano sized molecular machines like miniature electric generators. Then that generator is connected to another molecule that absorbs the impact energy via kinetic/steric bumping (since heat is really just excited molecules zooming all over the place that bump into other molecules, exchanging heat) to turn the motor. Another possibility is to forget the motor entirely and simply have a molecular material that absorbs kinetic molecular impacts to promote electrons into the system (thus creating a potential difference, and creating an electric current).

The chemical behavior is what can make this very efficient:

Energy (heat) + Molecule in conformation A <--> Molecule in Conformation B <--> Molecule in conformation A + energy (in this case, electrical)

As long as there is a specific amount of heat and a lack of electric potential in the system, a reaction like this would continue to absorb the heat energy and create electric potential. The only things that would stop it is if the heat energy were too low, or the battery this system was delivering energy to was full.

The mechanical factors of nano materials gives the possibility of such a reaction to become Irreversible (or atleast, demand a larger amount of electric energy on the right side to be reversed). Then the minimal amount of heat needed to drive the reaction will depend on the Rate (speed) at which the reaction progresses. It will get faster as heat rises.

Such a material could convert large amounts of heat into electric energy very very fast, so long as the circuit is closed. Open the circuit by turning the switch Off or something and this entire reaction will not be able to create the end product, and thus will cease.

Whoever makes and perfects something like this is going to be loaded.

This thread has been very informative. Well, I didn't learn any new general things, but I did learn a few specifics.

Electrical systems give me a hard on.

It's quite amazing that such an intellectual thread was able to sustain itself.

*high five*

@Muffin- I'd love to see that happen just as much as I'd love to see room-temperature superconductors but I'm not getting my hopes up.

@Muffin- I'd love to see that happen just as much as I'd love to see room-temperature superconductors but I'm not getting my hopes up.
Yeah I know, it's going to take a good while and allot of luck before this kind of stuff is developed. The problems are current, and these are far off, oh well.

Also grats on a great thread everyone. I love these threads because they force me to go look back into stuff I've long forgotten, plus I learned whole crapload of new things I've never even heard of.

Some jack ass in his class complained that the computer would go rogue and kill humanity. The computer idea he had didn't involve some sentient AI, and why would the computer need to take control? It would already have control.




My mom pays for my gasoline. ;D

I have a pretty fuel efficient car(that I bought myself) so it's not that much per week. My parents view school as my full time job so they don't really mind seeing me getting an education while they pay for my expenses.

Yeah, that "some Jackass" watched too much Terminator movies as a kid. It'd be centuries before we could make a computer that could make such an independent thought like that. At least as long as people in R&D funding get stingier each year.

lol your parents did that too, eh? Mine told me as long as I was in college, my gas was paid for. Didn't matter what I used it for, I just got it when I needed it. It was pretty kind of them considering how they always made me pay for everything in HS.

Computers collect information in the least biased way, unless the user wants to sift out results he doesn't like or something.

One thing you have to consider is the human society has been fairly well developed and connected. Using the internet alone a computer could go out and collect information and make fairly accurate predictions. The chance of error will lie in what information has been omitted (accidentally or on purpose), what information has been falsified, and in random events. The random events factor was a biggie until the internet connected everything together, now everyone knows what their neighbors are doing and thinking.

The factor that makes a human brain different from a computer's processor is that the human brain is designed to weigh a large number of inconsistent variables and make decisions which are not necessarily easily expressed mathematically.

A computer, unless programmed otherwise, takes a series of inputs and generates the demanded output based on the equation it has been given.

A human brain, however, takes the inputs it receives and evaluates each one against each other and resorts to assigning a value of importance to each one. It then weighs all the variables according to the arbitrary values it has assigned to each one. These arbitrary distinctions can be anything from taboos, societal beliefs, religion and even personal experience. Each acts as a filter upon the information we attempt to interpret.

brown townogy: You're trying to choose a car to buy but there are so many choices that you ask a computer and your friend to pick one for you.

The computer will take the parameters you have given it and find the optimal solution mathematically. So say you told it that you wanted a red car, no older than 2 years and for the cheapest price but less mileage is better. It would weigh all those options equally, cutting out all but red cars and finding a car that is both cheap but has the least amount of mileage possible for the price.

Your friend, however, will take your requests (red, not older than 2 years, cheap, mileage) and apply his own filters to the problem. He will of course choose a red car no older than 2 years, but when it comes time to choose the car based on mileage and cost, he will base his decision on his personal experience and beliefs. Perhaps he thinks a cheaper car may be more preferable over a car with less mileage so he would lean towards one end of the scale over the other.


The only conceivable way you could create an artificially intelligent computer is to give it the ability to learn. By allowing it to generate it's own filters (morals, weights, beliefs) you allow it to make conscious decisions. When that ability to reason is coupled with the immense power that computer contain, there is the potential for danger. The real challenge is in replicating some of the basic instincts of an animal (or a human) that prompts learning and exploration. Just as we do, the computer must have some directive to motivate the observation and categorization and brown townysis of the world.