From: Christopher Jarosz (cajarosz@attbi.com)
Date: Tue Oct 29 2002 - 04:57:25 GMT-3
Interesting subject.......
However Cisco **is** now using plutonium in the latest modules of the 8500
GSR as a stable clocking source. The only down side of this enhancement is
that when the router crashes, all life within a 15 mile radius (including
CCIEs) are vaporized. Cisco is working with the GSR engineering team to
minimize this inconvenience....
sorry gang....I couldn't help myself ;-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Snyder" <msnyder@revolutioncomputer.com>
To: "'Steve Cobb'" <steve.cobb@murraystate.edu>
Cc: <eyewdall@gonzaga.edu>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 6:13 PM
Subject: OT: RE: Unique Fuel Cell Feasibility Request
> Thanks, Dr. Cobb.
>
> I didnt realize that my request would go directly to your college
> students. My email would have been in a different form had I had.
>
>
>
> Can I ask your students three questions?
>
> 1) How much of the worlds oceans come from the Carbon14 cycle? I
> cant find a reference to this subject in the material I can access.
>
> Yet we know that the cycle takes neutrons from deep space and then
> releases them as hydrogen on earth. And because the carbon14 is always
> bound to something, I believe that the space neutron to earth hydrogen
> cycle, produces water in our environment. With a net mass gain for
> earth.
>
> Possible Subquestion(s)
>
> a) How long has the neutron to hydrogen cycle operated on earth?
> b) Has the rate always been constant?
>
>
>
> 2) Couldnt a normal fuel cell operate from hydrogen released from
> Cabon14? Also could you capture the charge released during the change
> from C14 to N14?
>
>
>
> Possible Subquestion(s)
>
> a) How much charge is released during of the conversion of C14 to
> N14?
> b) How much hydrogen?
> c) Please express the answers in watts per pound per year.
>
>
> 3) Which of following C14 production strategies would product the
> most amount of C14 fuel over a hundred year period?
>
>
> a) Low pressure Nitrogen balloons in the Suns orbit. Assume a 1
> mile balloon radius with 4 pounds of pressure. Are some places in near
> earth space better than others to capture slow neutrons?
> b) High pressure Liquid Nitrogen tanks in the Suns orbit, heat
> shielded. Assume 10 tons of Nitrogen.
> c) Liquid nitrogen tanks placed in nuclear fission power production
> plants. Assume that the thermal shielding will slow the needed
> neutrons. Assume safe venting and beneficial thermo properties during
> nuclear emergences. An -210.1 0C bath could be a good thing to have as
> a last resort in an emergency. Lets assume 10 tons of nitrogen.
> d) Military grade fission material stored in a normal pressure total
> nitrogen atmosphere. Assume one thousand years with one pound of
> fission material, with neutron slowing shielding. Assume safe hydrogen
> venting and C14 recovery operations.
>
>
> These are the questions I wanted to ask a pair of your Physics students.
> I truly think I have a unique idea with a Carbon-14 fueled battery
> connected to a hydrogen powered fuel cell. I believe C14 could be
> produced in the amounts needed, or removed from the yearly yield of
> naturally produced C14 in the atmosphere.
>
> After all, the Earth is a neutron attractor because of its mass and we
> do have a 78% nitrogen atmosphere.
>
> Heck, let me point out that would couldnt stop C14 production if we
> wanted too. Now that time needed may be measured in human life times,
> but then, the energy output from such a cell could be in thousands of
> years. Imagine a fuel cell that takes two hundred years to collect the
> needed fuel for, but then produces 1 kilowatt for two thousand years.
> The more we produced, the easier it would be make more fuel. Also we
> have tons of military fission material that will be around for the
> foreseeable future. We have all the time, and slow neutrons needed for
> such a project.
>
> Other points I can think of.
>
> a) C14 is very safe material, easy to shield. Mobile power
> production is quite possible.
> b) C14 is present in every human. Its hard to protest a nuclear
> fuel cell fuel when youre made of some of the fuel.
> c) I can imagine a space propulsion drive that uses fission material
> to boil liquid nitrogen to drive generators, uses deep space condensers
> to cool the nitrogen back to liquid. It also collects the C14 and uses
> it to produce hydrogen for the life support systems, and uses any extra
> hydrogen at driven at sub C speeds for propulsion. Imagine a 50,000
> year trip using such a system. Even a semi closed fission -> C14 -> H
> -> fusion loop comes to mind.
> d) Man already changes the C14 ratio on earth by using fossil fuels
> on a daily basis, the ratio as been dropping for the last 100 years not
> counting the nuclear tests in 1950s which raised the ratio. The 1950
> tests also prove that large scale C14 production is possible. In the
> proposed fuel cells, C14 releases could be avoided by careful shielded
> battery design. Remember we only want to collect the charge and the
> gas, building a very strong enclosure to house the fuel is quite
> acceptable. Human hands never need access the cells once produced.
> e) Also note that Mars only has a 3% nitrogen atmosphere and no
> visible water on the surface. Wouldnt it be strange that nitrogen
> turns out to be the Earths greatest natural resource? It clearly
> affects evolution by producing C14 that limits maximum cell life, by
> breaking down the needed cell dna, it forces cells to copy dna on a
> regular basis. Wouldnt not be funny that if it also produced the some
> of the hydrogen needed for the life processes on earth over the last 4
> billion years.
>
>
> Well, thats about it. I may be completely off base with these ideas.
> I may also be reinventing the wheel. Their may be ten well know books
> in print focusing on similar ideas. If this is so, Im sorry for taking
> up your time. Then again, thats the reason I requested the feasibility
> study. Nearly all my questions can be worked out using basic college
> math to figure out the long term energy yields.
>
> My expertise is in another field, and it will be a few years before I
> can attend college again to get my own answers. Thats the reason I
> emailed you.
>
> Thanks Again for Your Time,
>
> Michael Snyder
>
> P.S. Please feel free to forward this email to anyone you think would
> be interested. I do reserve my rights for commercial processes using my
> ideas, but educational and non profit research is very welcomed. BTW,
> my price for using my ideas in a commercial field is .001 % of the net
> profit. Its been my experience that ideas are cheap; making them work
> is the expensive part.
>
> Also I carbon copied this email to some of my friends in order to
> document the time and date I composed it.
>
> To the Groupstudy list, Im very sorry for this spam. Talk about way
> off topic email. Thought I think Ive seen worst and less worthy spam
> posted. Please think of it as a please delete test message.
>
> Paul I wont send anything like this again to the list, I just needed to
> document that I composed the above email. If anyone wants to flame me,
> please do it directly, off the list. Otherwise please delete this email
> and get back to studying. (smile)
>
> msnyder@revolutioncomputer.com
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Cobb [mailto:steve.cobb@murraystate.edu]
> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 11:16 AM
> To: Michael Snyder
> Subject: Re: Unique Fuel Cell Feasibility Request
>
> Mr. Snyder:
> Sorry for the delayed response. I had a faculty member bring this
> before our advanced thermodynamics students, but no one felt that they
> had the background, expertise, or time to tackle another project at this
> time. The students are very busy with their assignments and courses, so
> there was little interest in taking on additional responsibilities. It
> is also out of my area, so I am not much help either. You might try the
> ME program at PCC, where there are more mechanical engineering faculty
> than we have here.
> Best wishes as you pursue your ideas.
> Steve Cobb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 05 2002 - 08:35:58 GMT-3