• 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 8 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 25th, 2024

help-circle




  • The point of my comment is that if trees wouldn’t exist, they would seem like some futuristic sci-fi solution too good to be true. Just because something is shiny new tech, it isn’t automatically better. Sure, just planting trees won’t save us if we release all the carbon that is already captured in the form of fossil fuels, but how about we stop releasing all the carbon that is already captured in the form of fossil fuels?


  • excral@feddit.orgtoScience Memes@mander.xyzEntropy? Never heard of it.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    I’ve heard there’s a practical green solution to carbon capture. The units are practically maintenance free and power themselves with solar energy. This allows to deploy them on many small patches of land. The captured carbon is stored in solid organic compounds that may be used as building materials. It may sound to sci-fi to be true, but it’s actually just trees.







  • excral@feddit.orgtolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldVim go brr
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 months ago

    The Windows Devs probably shot for the Ballmer Peak and missed by so far, it’s not even funny. But seriously, look at the history of Microsoft. Even back in the early days, MS-DOS was basically plagiarized from CP/M but Microsoft maneuvered themselves to a market controling position through aggressive marketing and business strategies. Overall they leeched off the emerging PC market and probably hindered innovation more than driving it.



  • excral@feddit.orgtomemes@lemmy.worldTime is a circle
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Self driving cars will allways use far more energy and space per passenger than a train or light rail. And personally owned cars will spend more than 90% of their time just standing around, being useless and wasting space. If you propose self driving taxis, you’re just another step closer to trains.



  • That’s the beauty about open source: it isn’t beholden to the whims of anyone. If disagree with the Linux Foundation, you’re free to make your own independent fork. Others that agree with you can then start contributing to the fork. And this isn’t a purely theoretical scenario as it has happend with other open source projects before.





  • excral@feddit.orgtoScience Memes@mander.xyzLaunches
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    To escape a body of mass you need to have enogh velocity (kinetic energy) to overcome the gravitational pull of that body. You can imagine it like a ball sitting in a bowl. With little velocity it will just roll back and forth but if it’s fast enough it can roll out of the bowl and escape it’s influence.

    That critical speed is called “escape velocity” and it depends on mass and distance from a body. The escape velocity of earth (from the surface) is about 11.2 km/s and the sun’s escape velocity (from earth orbit) is about 42.1 km/s. Earth orbits around the sun at about 29.8 km/s. If you launch in the direction of Earth’s orbit, you will orbit the sun already at about 41 km/s, so you “only” need 1.1 km/s more to escape the sun, too.

    If you tried to reach the sun, you could launch in the opposite direction leaving you orbiting the sun at about 18.6 km/s. Since there is almost nothing in space you won’t slow down from friction and the orbit won’t decay. Instead you’d have to accelerate opposite the direction you’re traveling. Now, calculating exactly how much you’d need to decelerate isn’t trivial since you don’t want a stable orbit but an elliptical orbit that just touches the sun at the closest point (perihel). I don’t know how much deceleration that takes, but it’s propable that it’s easier than accelerating by 1.1 km/s to escape the sun.