|
-
Apr 28th, 2000, 07:01 AM
#1
Is Cold Fusion possible? And if so, how would you destroy the world with it?
-
Apr 28th, 2000, 07:40 AM
#2
Hyperactive Member
This thread should go in chit chat.
If cold fusion were possible, it would be happening randomly all the time. The forces required to condense two atoms close enough together that their nuclei fuse are massive. We're talking about overcoming the Strong Nuclear force, the strongest of the four forces, and it doesn't happen at room temperature.
Besides, why would you destroy the world? Then my current project would be worthless.
bob
-
Apr 28th, 2000, 05:43 PM
#3
Of course cold fusion is possible, every week i actively try to prevent cold pizza fusing to my carpet. On numerous occasions I have almost resorted to strong nuclear forces!
heheheheheh
-
Apr 28th, 2000, 07:24 PM
#4
transcendental analytic
Cold fusion is possible, i'm just working on an application with some API's that calls them self i an order that starts some coldfusion in the electronic circuits at R2D2C3P0 in the mainboard. Occasionally i blow up the computer too.
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Apr 28th, 2000, 10:14 PM
#5
I agree with yu as well. Cold Fusion is possible, maybe in the near future we can prove it.
-
May 1st, 2000, 11:04 PM
#6
Hyperactive Member
What exactly would you like to do? Blow up the world? If so, I don't want to help you. What I need to know is what's meant by "fusion". Is this the release of energy though two atoms combining? If so I think that squaring the force of the individual atoms's resistence would counteract their ability to split apart, but I don't know how you could make the shells envelope their selves.Thanks for letting me babble.
-
May 2nd, 2000, 02:18 AM
#7
Fanatic Member
Cold fusion is impossible
I am a scientist.
Well, not really. But I know enough.
The thing is that at Kelvin 0 (c. -273 degrees celsius)
all atoms stop moving.
The temperature for cold fusion to occur is below -273, but
since all atomic and subatomic movement ceases at -273 there
is now way to get colder, and therefore no way to have cold
fusion.
-
May 2nd, 2000, 02:46 AM
#8
Why does it have to be below 0 Kelvin?
-
May 2nd, 2000, 03:03 AM
#9
Frenzied Member
There's no such thing as below 0 Kelvin, or do you mean a negative temprature (-ve tempratures are wierd quantum things that are actually very hot indeed), below zero tempratures is like saying bigger than infinity. (Gen-X leave it.) it just doesn't make sense.
-
May 2nd, 2000, 09:19 PM
#10
transcendental analytic
0K is not the same as -273C, its -273,15... a Real constant
But in my computer it went below 0K
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 02:50 AM
#11
Is there any limit to the hottest temperature?
-
May 3rd, 2000, 03:07 AM
#12
Frenzied Member
Nope as long as you can keep the heat pumping in.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 03:09 AM
#13
heh  I wonder how hot it was at plank time (A couple of seconds after the big bang)
-
May 3rd, 2000, 03:23 AM
#14
Frenzied Member
If it wasn't for this sentence I wouldn't have a signature at all.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 03:31 AM
#15
you could be fried in a second.
Another thought about cold fusion: It could help us
with our energy problems a lot!! We wouldn't have to
worry about nuclear wastes etc. etc.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 04:20 AM
#16
transcendental analytic
 HEhehe, youre wrong Sam
Megatron: Is there any limit to the hottest temperature?
Sam Finch: Nope as long as you can keep the heat pumping in.
Yes there is a limit, if we use all the energy in universe including all heat, movement, matter (E=MC^2), exactly everything to heat up something, and we take the smallest particle in universe, and see how "hot" it gets. Well that would be pretty hot i think, but you can't exceed that temperature.
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 04:29 AM
#17
Frenzied Member
Why does Cold Fusion produce less waste than Hot Fission?
If it wasn't for this sentence I wouldn't have a signature at all.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 04:52 AM
#18
I think because the joining of the atoms can cause the "waste" to be reused.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 05:14 AM
#19
Frenzied Member
I'd disagree with that, we havn't even decided what atoms are best for cold fusion(or have we? I don't know about these things)
-
May 3rd, 2000, 05:19 AM
#20
Probably Hydrogen, since 90% of the universe is hydrogen.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 05:40 AM
#21
transcendental analytic
0% is of universe is hydrogen you mean, 90% of universe matter.
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 05:42 AM
#22
90% of matter is hydrogen
-
May 3rd, 2000, 05:45 AM
#23
Frenzied Member
-
May 3rd, 2000, 05:54 AM
#24
transcendental analytic
The thing is that i need to get more posts, youre way to close. When i wake up tomorrow youre long way up 700 posts, and thats unfair
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 06:50 AM
#25
Frenzied Member
don't worry, I'm still 17 posts behind.
-
May 3rd, 2000, 06:52 AM
#26
What's this about Cold Fusion?
-
May 3rd, 2000, 03:09 PM
#27
transcendental analytic
15 posts actually, but I was really afraid you would take over this night, batsam
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 4th, 2000, 02:25 AM
#28
Nobody stay up all night just to post (or do they...)
-
May 4th, 2000, 03:53 AM
#29
transcendental analytic
Yes, I am, and its your fault megatron, youre overposting this site, i got a bunch of 14 replies to, and guess what, they where all from megatron!
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 4th, 2000, 03:54 AM
#30
-
May 4th, 2000, 04:09 AM
#31
transcendental analytic
It is here, 24:00, and guess what, im going up 6 to work
Use
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
May 4th, 2000, 06:03 AM
#32
You should get some sleep
-
May 4th, 2000, 06:43 AM
#33
Frenzied Member
any comments about cold fusion?
-
May 4th, 2000, 06:47 AM
#34
Oh yeah, I forogt what the whole point of this subject was!
Some posted, awhile back that the temperature has to be 0 Kelvin to achieve Cold Fusion. Why does it have to be that low?
-
May 4th, 2000, 08:12 AM
#35
Frenzied Member
Having looked at that again, That's stupid, cold fusion is aboud getting nuclear fusion at atainable tempratures. At the moment we use nuclear fusion in nuclear weapons, but you need a normal nuclear bomb to get the temprature hot enough to achieve fission.
-
May 5th, 2000, 02:13 AM
#36
It is stupid, 0 kelvin means that the atoms are absolutley still.
-
May 5th, 2000, 06:04 AM
#37
Frenzied Member
I don't know exactly how you're going to get them to fuse without them being able to move close to each other.
-
May 5th, 2000, 06:07 AM
#38
It doesn't have to be 0 Kelvin though. They can virtually stop wobbling at -250 C.
-
May 5th, 2000, 06:30 AM
#39
Frenzied Member
-
May 5th, 2000, 06:36 AM
#40
Frenzied Member
Just make sure nobody knows
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|
Reply With Quote
