Blakut
Blakut t1_jedl6x3 wrote
Reply to comment by netz_pirat in The European Union to nearly double the share of renewables in the 27-nation bloc's energy consumption by 2030 amid efforts to become carbon neutral and ditch Russian fossil fuels. by chrisdh79
I quoted the next paragraph sorry. The previous one showed that the 45 percent figure is solar and wind at 35, biogas at 8 and hydro etc for the rest. So biogas is considered renewable.
Blakut t1_jec05ho wrote
Reply to comment by netz_pirat in The European Union to nearly double the share of renewables in the 27-nation bloc's energy consumption by 2030 amid efforts to become carbon neutral and ditch Russian fossil fuels. by chrisdh79
what's in renewable? Does it include gas? nvm, found:
Overall generation from conventional energy sources totalled 272.9 TWh in 2022 (-5.7% compared to 2021). However, generation from natural gas was 1.7% higher than in 2021, generation from lignite increased by 5.4% and generation from hard coal increased by 21.4%. This is due to the fact that Germany allowed coal-fired power plants to return to the electricity market to be less dependent on natural gas amid strained relations with Russia. Nuclear generation declined by 49.8% in 2022.
Blakut t1_jebfcjq wrote
Reply to comment by netz_pirat in The European Union to nearly double the share of renewables in the 27-nation bloc's energy consumption by 2030 amid efforts to become carbon neutral and ditch Russian fossil fuels. by chrisdh79
what target has germany hit?
Blakut t1_jebf9hx wrote
Reply to comment by Scytle in The European Union to nearly double the share of renewables in the 27-nation bloc's energy consumption by 2030 amid efforts to become carbon neutral and ditch Russian fossil fuels. by chrisdh79
uhm when the outside is hot enough to not cool your reactor anymore we'd all be dead.
Blakut t1_je1d9ih wrote
Reply to comment by Paaaaap in Is NaCl relatively common in the galaxy/universe? by PHealthy
What matters is how stars fuse them. Iron, nickel, neon, are more common than chlorine.
Blakut t1_jdusvyv wrote
Reply to comment by mfb- in Can you entangle more than two particles? Can entanglement be produced on a macroscopic scale to observe new physical interactions? by and-no-and-then
afaik one can't even tell if two specific particles are entangled just by measuring them.
Blakut t1_jduspez wrote
Reply to comment by mfb- in Can you entangle more than two particles? Can entanglement be produced on a macroscopic scale to observe new physical interactions? by and-no-and-then
so there is no |101> state?
Blakut t1_jdpy8xc wrote
Reply to comment by Fenrisvitnir in The two retinas are tied/linked together in the brain. Are they tied 1:1, so that each retinal point corresponds to the same retinal point in the other eye? I.e., each retinal point from one eye shares the same binocular neuron with its counterpoint in the other eye? by ch1214ch
> Convolutional networks are simply fully connected a
uhm no.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolutional_neural_network
Convolutional networks were inspired by biological processes[10][11][12][13] in that the connectivity pattern between neurons resembles the organization of the animal visual cortex. Individual cortical neurons respond to stimuli only in a restricted region of the visual field known as the receptive field. The receptive fields of different neurons partially overlap such that they cover the entire visual field.
Blakut t1_jdo8b2z wrote
Reply to Thousands rally in Tel Aviv against Benjamin Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul | Further demonstrations come after Israeli prime minister vowed to press on with changes despite international concern by misana123
how the fuck is this guy still in power?? Like is he made of teflon?
Blakut t1_jdo7dkp wrote
Reply to comment by _AlreadyTaken_ in The two retinas are tied/linked together in the brain. Are they tied 1:1, so that each retinal point corresponds to the same retinal point in the other eye? I.e., each retinal point from one eye shares the same binocular neuron with its counterpoint in the other eye? by ch1214ch
afaik the first convolutional neural networks in AI were modelled to mimic the retina (cows in particular? idk)
Blakut t1_jdo76jp wrote
Reply to comment by Zondagsrijder in The two retinas are tied/linked together in the brain. Are they tied 1:1, so that each retinal point corresponds to the same retinal point in the other eye? I.e., each retinal point from one eye shares the same binocular neuron with its counterpoint in the other eye? by ch1214ch
yes, but it's not the right or left eye, it's the left or right side of each eye. So if you cover the left side of both eyes or the right side of both eyes, you isolate one hemisphere or the other.
Submitted by Blakut t3_11mpj0v in askscience
Blakut t1_jbdz7yj wrote
Reply to comment by quantumyourgo in [D] I'm a dentist and during my remaining lifetime I would like to take part in laying groundwork for future autonomic robots powered by AI that are capable of performing dental procedures. What technologies should I start to learn? by Armauer
I expect a human to stop when I flinch and I'm in pain. I don't expect a robot to do that. At least not until I see thousands of operations done automatically with no victims.
Blakut t1_jbdu8zu wrote
Reply to [D] I'm a dentist and during my remaining lifetime I would like to take part in laying groundwork for future autonomic robots powered by AI that are capable of performing dental procedures. What technologies should I start to learn? by Armauer
idk why the idea of a robot digging into my teeth while i'm strapped to a chair seems terrifying.
Blakut t1_jars76x wrote
Reply to comment by 4a61756d65 in Why does a Thorium gas mantle, when incandescent, emit more light in the visible spectrum than in infrared, when compared with a black body with the same temperature? by [deleted]
no they are not, i was thinking of something completely different. The stuff i work with, astrohysical sources, usually have two kinds of spectra: continuum which can come from a few things, such as free free emission, synchrotron emission, thermal emission from dust, and spectral line emission. The thermal part of the spectrum is usually very close to the ideal black body and deviations happen moslty because of geometry of particles (such as dust) and other stuff along the way, so i can separate the continuum from the spectral part. This of course gave me the wrong impression that most objects (also on earth) must have a spectrum close to a black body, and deviate from that only slightly because of things "around" the emitting body, such as gases absorbing/emitting, without considering that of course, Kirchoffs law applies to solids and everyday objects too (i only studied this in relation to gasses and some line emission scenarios).
Blakut t1_jarouro wrote
Reply to comment by 4a61756d65 in Why does a Thorium gas mantle, when incandescent, emit more light in the visible spectrum than in infrared, when compared with a black body with the same temperature? by [deleted]
But the planck spectrum uses quantum physics... It cannot be explained classically.
edit: idk why i considered gases (which i thought i know) and solids (which i know i don't know) as so different. Kirchoffs law applies to solids too, so if a solid is a poor absorber at a wavelength, it must be a good emitter.
Blakut t1_jarmjpp wrote
Reply to comment by 4a61756d65 in Why does a Thorium gas mantle, when incandescent, emit more light in the visible spectrum than in infrared, when compared with a black body with the same temperature? by [deleted]
>Electron gets excited, likely through atom/atom collision, either through literal collision in a gas or vibrations in a solid.
>
>Electron comes back down and emits a photon
You can have thermal emission only from point charged particle, you don't need electron levels, no? I don't have experience with solids, but this was my understanding, that it is proportional to the distirbution of velocities of atoms in the object, much like the free-free emission is a continuous spectrum too. I understand that different objects have different emissivities, and that emission at different wavelengths is different, but why would that be the case outside electron transitions? Could a possible crystalline lattice play an effect in this, restricting movements of individual atoms?
Blakut t1_jarimk4 wrote
Reply to comment by LexiconDul in Why does a Thorium gas mantle, when incandescent, emit more light in the visible spectrum than in infrared, when compared with a black body with the same temperature? by [deleted]
The problem is the wiki article alludes that this line emission from atoms breaking off from the material and having chemical reactions in the flames around it is not entirely responsible for enhancing its glow.
edit: idk why i considered gases (which i thought i know) and solids (which i know i don't know) as so different. Kirchoffs law applies to solids too, so if a solid is a poor absorber at a wavelength, it must be a good emitter.
Blakut t1_jarhvo7 wrote
Reply to comment by PlaidBastard in Why does a Thorium gas mantle, when incandescent, emit more light in the visible spectrum than in infrared, when compared with a black body with the same temperature? by [deleted]
>A true perfect blackbody emits EVERY energy of photon along the curve, real matter in our universe can only do it at discrete energy levels on the curve
The energy levels of individual atoms have little to do with black body emission, no? You mean to tell me that the black body spectrum of real objects is choppy? Isn't the planck spectrum the result of taking into consideration the quantum nature of light, i.e. as discrete oscillators? Can you please give me a link where these steps arising from thermal velocities are observed and their mathematical description please? Also, keep in mind we are talking about solids here, not gases or plasmas.
The problem is the wiki article alludes that line emission from atoms breaking off from the material and having chemical reactions in the flames around it is not entirely responsible for enhancing its glow.
Blakut t1_jargfol wrote
Reply to Why does a Thorium gas mantle, when incandescent, emit more light in the visible spectrum than in infrared, when compared with a black body with the same temperature? by [deleted]
Nevermind, found the correct answer: glow is due to oxides and chemical reactions AROUND the solid block of metal. However, the wiki article lists this effect as distinct from the black body spectrum of the object, and leaves the impression that even without it, the solid metal would glow more than a black body at those temperatures.
"Candoluminescence is the light given off by certain materials at elevated temperatures (usually when exposed to a flame) that has an intensity at some wavelengths which can, through chemical action in flames, be higher than the blackbody emission expected from incandescence at the same temperature.[1] The phenomenon is notable in certain transition-metal and rare-earth oxide materials (ceramics) such as zinc oxide, cerium(IV) oxide and thorium dioxide."
Whereas the wiki article for thorium says:
"A mantle glows brightly in the visible spectrum while emitting little infrared radiation. The rare-earth oxides (cerium) and actinide (thorium) in the mantle have a low emissivity in the infrared (in comparison with an ideal black body) but have high emissivity in the visible spectrum. **There is also some evidence** that the emission is enhanced by candoluminescence, the emission of light from the combustion products before they reach thermal equilibrium."
Blakut t1_jarffae wrote
Reply to comment by GypsyV3nom in Why does a Thorium gas mantle, when incandescent, emit more light in the visible spectrum than in infrared, when compared with a black body with the same temperature? by [deleted]
No it's not combustion without oxygen. Spectral line emission usually originates from diffuse gases and plasmas, which exist also in flames, i.e. combustion, but not from solids. It is in the gas form that an atom can be excited, and then deexcite by emission of a photon, with little collisions happening while in the excited state. A solid block of metal (or other material) has a continuous spectrum, resulting from the velocity distribution of atoms in its composition, which usually resembles the Planck profile. Gases (plasmas!) also have a continuous spectrum, but that's a different story. If it was like the other poster said, a hot rod made of copper would glow blue when heated, while in reality the glow color depends on temperature of the rod.
Why does a solid block of thorium, when heated, emit more in the visible spectrum than in the infrared when compared to a black body of the same temperature? Is this claim even accurate?
Nevermind, found the correct answer: glow is due to oxides and chemical reactions AROUND the solid block of metal. However, the wiki article lists this effect as distinct from the black body spectrum of the object, and leaves the impression that even without it, the solid metal would glow more than a black body at those temperatures.
"Candoluminescence is the light given off by certain materials at elevated temperatures (usually when exposed to a flame) that has an intensity at some wavelengths which can, through chemical action in flames, be higher than the blackbody emission expected from incandescence at the same temperature.[1] The phenomenon is notable in certain transition-metal and rare-earth oxide materials (ceramics) such as zinc oxide, cerium(IV) oxide and thorium dioxide."
Blakut t1_jaraqch wrote
Reply to comment by SirHerald in Why does a Thorium gas mantle, when incandescent, emit more light in the visible spectrum than in infrared, when compared with a black body with the same temperature? by [deleted]
I don't think so, there is no burning involved. I don't think this is line emission, this is a solid incandescent piece of metal.
edit: why i said i don't think so is because the wiki mentions this effect as separate and distinct from the thermal emission of the solid.
Blakut t1_jadafb4 wrote
Reply to comment by Quantumdrive95 in The European Hyperloop overtakes Elon Musk’s: 500 km of tunnels under Swiss soil by CelebrationDirect209
it's not validating him, since it's not a hyperloop.
Blakut t1_ja3d023 wrote
Reply to comment by OMightyMartian in Treaty of Versailles being ‘too harsh’ by -Mothman_
Having an army is not a crime, unless we're taking Versailles into account, so I'm not sure one should blame Weimar government for pursuing this.
Blakut t1_jedtkkn wrote
Reply to Portland man laughed ‘maniacally’ while chasing pedestrian in stolen $80k forklift, police say by Jorgyjorg32
driving a forklift without a certification, that's life in prison buddy