Double Action Arcade Hoops Basketball Arcade Gam

Emergency measures the Spanish government to save energy - February 25, 2011.

apparent conflict between what you want and what you can.

Dear readers,

This past week he has had to reach the peak Libya of food riot (and prelude of chaos). Is the leading exporter of oil affected by the crisis of legitimacy of political regimes in the Arab world (the first oil producing country to be affected, Egypt, no longer exporting in 2009 and currently allocates its nearly 600,000 barrels a day production to consumption by its 80 million people - if only a quarter of English per capita consumption). Meanwhile, it remains unclear who will win the incipient civil war if Libya and the regime it will emerge will be able to resolve social inequalities that fueled the rebellion, failing fall in it (the same doubt in Tunisia and Egypt) as the festering conflict increases the risk of the country's oil infrastructure is severely affected, in the worst case scenario, a mad and almost defeated Qaddafi could his threat to destroy the infrastructure of oil exploration, or rather the lack of absolute power might bring in a few months to fighting between different tribes, which form the closest thing to a social fabric that has a Libya- several bands armed conflict and plunge the country into chaos, in either of these scenarios black oil production would fall to zero and the conflict would result in an even more terrible toll of suffering and destruction for the Libyan people. Meanwhile, more and more analysts complain that the lack of reaction from OPEC, which is not significantly increasing its production to compensate for the missing Libyan be because Saudi Arabia has any spare capacity (amount of oil could produce additional 30 days before and for a period of at least 90 days) of boasting. There is also a problem of fungibility : Libyan oil is low sulfur content, while the Saudi surplus is high and it can not be processed in the same refineries. In this scenario

of uncertainty, with the price of a barrel of crude oil ever closer to the highs (Brent barrel yesterday arrived sometime in $ 120) and the prices of petrol and diesel are already at their maximum 2008 (due to, among other factors, the extra pressure that China is buying increasing amounts of these fuels in the international market), the English Government has decided to approve today a package of emergency measures to prevent increased oil bill will finally bring the country to debt levels, given the confidence of international investors in Spain, would be impractical. In what follows I make a brief analysis of these measures and a preliminary assessment of its impact. Because I fear that in future it may take more measures of this kind I have included the same date in the title, God will say what the future holds.

first thing that stands out is that the proposed measures, which are of a certain caliber, have not been agreed with other European countries to be taken by all of them in tandem. Spain forming part of a common economic space, does not seem to make much sense to make decisions unilaterally, without waiting for consensus on a position with its economic partners. This urgency to the regular time in a country that has not characterized as the most proactive in taking anti-crisis measures conveys a certain anxiety to a server that write these lines I do not know if in this case have sought to demonstrate that for once we could anticipate the problems and is certainly the continued impact of rising oil and fuel was about to pass a bill lethal to Spain. We'll have to wait and see what host European leaders give to our actions.

The measure that has been most prominent in the English press is to reduce the speed limit of 120 kilometers per hour (only possible on highways and motorways) to 110 kilometers per hour. This measure stands while it was temporary and indefinite, which is inherently contradictory (a measure does not have an indefinite time frame set, then decided in the course of events, and therefore can not be sure if it's temporary or not). The Government argues that with this measure will reduce gasoline consumption by 15% and diesel by 11%. We do not know how is based reports to make this assertion, which is difficult to compare and quantify. On the one hand, in addition to losses due to friction with the road always present, depending on the car at speeds exceeding 80 kilometers per hour is subjected to a deceleration caused by turbulent drag (drag ), which depends among other factors, its coefficient of drag and the square of the speed at which you try to move. Since these speeds this turbulent friction is the dominant contribution to the resistance to movement of the vehicle, a speed reduction of 8.33% as the proposal would mean 16% reduction in energy consumption for other factors being equal and the same way (remember: work is force times distance , and with the throttle you do is make the work of friction against the movement of the vehicle). However, depending on the car the torque ratio is better for speed of 120 km / h to 110 km / h, so that going to 120 km / h, about 110 km / h, consumption is improved somewhat for this item. These differences should be the couple that justify the difference reported by the Government between the impact on savings of this measure as if the car is petrol and diesel. An interesting observation: the lower efficacy of this measure on diesel cars (ironically, by the better exploitation of the torque) provides a political incentive to in the future, imposing a lower speed limit for diesel cars over the gas, keep in mind that there are now greater pressure on the world market for diesel that on gasoline, as China, whose consumption is more industrial than recreational, buying more and more (maybe that extra pressure on diesel has led to some recent news that highlights the character most polluting diesel cars?) . However, in the real world there are other factors that influence one way or another possible efficiency gains for the ride: The engine, the conservation status of the vehicle ... and especially the style of driving. The blog EcoLab gives us some data to suggest that there may be a gain had significantly , here expressed in terms of reducing CO2 emissions, with this decrease in speed. Without knowing the technical source that justifies the government's decisions, there may be a decrease in consumption and to move in the ranges proposed by the Government.


A different question is the effectiveness of this measure. In Spain, people tend to lead to between 130 and 150 km / h on highways, 130 km / h is typical for that is within the range of uncertainty of radar and avoid a fine. A good friend of mine points out that perhaps that is what it is intended: to stop people from running on 130 and go to move to 120 (always abusing the inaccuracy of the radar) that implies an even greater fuel economy and might serve to justify the Government's figures. Anyway, does not seem likely to have much effect if there is a serious deployment of resources for control, and that exacerbated the unpopularity of the measure, which will be seen as tax collection. As for the economy of the measure, some argue rightly taxes that since over two-thirds of the price of fuel and therefore 2 / 3 of savings is actually income redistribution, since the opportunity cost of to slow the measure is, in fact, economically negative. Other means more belligerent with the Government reported whole package as inefficient as it prevents the free market arbitrage. The reality is that this measure makes sense only as a partial ration car use over long distances, which are not looking for economic efficiency but use restraint to avoid most of the inefficiencies of the market: shortages, even when the local measure to combat the effects can only cause local shortages. As we discussed at the time, to live a free market system with rationing may end up destabilizing a state , so that also has to think very well.



The second of the measures, the reduction of 5% of the bills from the state railway company, RENFE, in their journeys of transport equipment, aims to boost fuel economy indirectly used cars passing through the cities. Instead of operating by way of rationing the previous case, it operates by way of subsidy. Without doubt a market inefficiency forced, and certainly in the same spirit: to prevent shortages. It will be about the financial cost to the State of such action. Interestingly, the reduction does not extend to the Long Distance tenes, making clear that this measure complements to the above (*).

Finally, the third of three measures announced is that less has been said and yet the most serious of the three: the Government will force " increase to 7% the biodiesel in gasoline and diesel so far was 5.8% "(sic). Leaving aside the bad effect that makes the technical error (no doubt that they ought to mean is the "percentage of biofuels" blend gasoline with biodiesel does not think it's a good idea), this bill is a disaster. The funny thing is that probably has been well received by society, especially the latter clouded for the loss of paradise "limit of 120", according to the comments I read everywhere, in the end, are not the future of biofuels?. The reality shows that the three measures, this is the one that has more edges and side effects, some of which may have gone unnoticed by the Government itself:

1. This measure is a subsidy to the production sector biofuels, since by law they have to buy a larger production than today. Need to know if they can react in such a short time, and if that improvisation will have serious consequences in other sectors.
2. This measure is also an implicit rationing: bioethanol and biodiesel tend to, on average, 70% of energy from fossil equivalents, so going from 5.8% to 7% of the volume the new energy mix will increase from 98.26% of current fossil equivalent (98.3% of the heat content of conventional gasoline and diesel) to 97.90%, a loss of 0.36% of fossil heat content and reduction on the current mix of 0.37%. It is a small loss, but it is a loss to the end of the day: your car will be 0.37% less than miles.
3. The most serious of all consequences is that the increased demand for English introduce biofuels even more pressure on the international food market, as this article explains Washington Post, the consumption of biofuel crops in the world last year accounted for 6.5% of global grain and vegetable oil 8%. If even Krugman acknowledges that the price of food has been the trigger of conflict in North Africa , building on this road, which has a TER above very low (so that you are not gaining power, and apart from other problems already discussed ) is nonsense. Especially taking into account as we saw, that transition increases the risk of abrupt and chaotic global .

In short, the English Government is beginning to see the ears of the wolf now reacts with the hope that future circumstances allow you to retreat to a more comfortable setting (which may happen, indeed, after the following price spike, the second, but only until the third). Their proposals may fall short and will generate unwanted effects. It is clear that both kinds of timing should be carefully studied, for example, as did the International Energy Agency for many years with his report "Saving oil when we are in a hurry" (read it if you have time, it is very interesting, especially coming from a body that advises the governments of the OECD on these issues). or the British Chambers with the system as TEQs or tradable energy quotas .

regard to ordinary people: Printing and improvisation of government ineptitude. And as for the peakoiler, restlessness. We will have to remain vigilant.


Salu2,
AMT

(*) (Updated 26-II-2011, 22:30): A reader has informed me privately that the measure may not extend to the long distance because of the rules of competition in the European Union.

Main Components Of Fire Extinguisher

The right side of the Hubbert curve utility and futility

copyright: @ flickr macnimation

Dear readers,

On several occasions we have discussed here on non- -linearity of the processes that are implied by the arrival of Peak Oil or peak oil production. This non-linearity explains that the evolution of the variables we use to diagnose the behavior of the crisis is not a simple rule of three, but sometimes trigger large perturbations small effects, while at other times small perturbations trigger large effects. Worse, our diagnostic variables may have a poor ability to describe the situation. For example, we have discussed here several times the price of a barrel of oil, which is the variable preferred by economists because they expect that market signals unequivocally manifested by changes in price, has a confusing behavior because of the large of market volatility medium term, eg, the duration of the last period of stability until 2000, the price of oil did not exceed 20 dollars, from 2000 to 2007 was rising steadily, to around $ 100 in early 2008, in July of 2008 was worth almost $ 150 to drop to about $ 36 six months later and has since gradually increased again to just over $ 100 today. If 2011 is a remake of 2008 , with its new price spike and subsequent fall, recession means (such calculation with fingers that seemed to anticipate did here) is something that remains to be seen, given the multitude of actors and factors involved, and say anything for sure in this regard, even though it says it is quite impossible. What happens is that the signal sent prices amid global Peak Oil is not what economists expected, ie the same as sent during the 70 crisis: a lasting high prices. The difference is that in the 70's restriction of production was voluntary on the part of the Arab countries, and the variable used to control the restriction was just the price (increasing production if the price rose much, decreasing it if down) thus able to maintain high prices that squeezed a lot but without to choke off the western economy. Currently, no such control over production, so prices go up and up until a sufficiently large bursts importing economies, at that time, demand drops sharply.

So what characterizes the behavior of oil prices in the era of global production constraint is the volatility in the medium term (ie sharp ups and downs when you look within the range of years) with a increasing underlying trend for most of the time in the short term (on a scale of days, weeks and months) and a stable trend in the long term (the average price during periods of several years did not change significantly.) In short, the price series will take the form of irregular sawtooth. In addition, at a later stage and most degraded of the situation, where the proportion of production that OECD countries reduced even more important - by falling production and rising consumption in emerging countries - will have to impose restrictions on oil consumption in importing countries, either by way of ration declared (as the British proposal of TEQ) or discouraging consumption through increasingly complex regulations and laws that are justified to combat pollution, reduce traffic accidents, to promote the deployment of electric cars or any other excuse to use (that way a deterrent to tackle the problem without recognizing it seems to be why it has chosen Spain), there is also the option of doing nothing and let things alone collapse of the invisible hand of the market, but only in countries where democracy is weak we will choose that option. Therefore, no variable is the price that we should look to understand what is happening, but the total oil production.


However, the presence of other nonlinear effects but also make continuous Total oil production is an effective variable in determining what the situation is what really matters to our society and is the amount of net energy available to move our economy. On the one hand, because the effect of increased absorption capacity in emerging economies binds the effect of "Export Land Model" (Export Land Model), which we discussed here whereby producing countries are leading to steady exponential consumption to satisfy its own population, and this entails a reduction in exports (alarming sign of this trend, Saudi Arabia fell nearly 5% of its exports oil during the month of December ; to know what the economic situation and what the structure of this decline will have to wait a few months). To this must be added that the net energy available from various sources of energy, and oil in particular, is decreasing with time, as a result of increasingly poor Energy Rate of Return (ERR, in English the acronym used is EROEI), whose lethal effects were also discussed in this blog . Thus, we have the impression that the production of oil and similar fluids is maintained, even increasing, yet the energy that represents this volume may be decreasing without us noticing. This is for example the case with the production of ethanol from corn as fuel, especially in the U.S.; recent studies show that in the U.S. corn as an energy source has an EROEI of about 1 (with no wins energy produced), maybe even less (so it actually loses energy, but because of the subsidies is a profitable activity.) Taking into account that a quarter of grain production in the U.S. is intended to produce biofuels is another perverse feedback of the energy crisis: they spend X barrels of oil equivalent to produce same X barrels of oil equivalent, or even less, from cereals, for accounting purposes, the same power available has been recorded twice (ie, the official accounting record 2 X barrels of oil equivalent when in fact the first half was used to produce the second half), so that statistics show an encouraging message ("we are increasing our oil production") that is not reflected in the energy available in the street, and worst of all foods on the market retreated international prices exacerbating the crisis and unstabilized countries rely heavily on imported food.

If all these nonlinear effects complicate the understanding of the phenomenon we are experiencing a global scale, other effects affecting our ability to predict future events rigor and show that our security in our daily lives can be completely unfounded. Effects are denominated in Physics phase transition. A phase transition is a point in the evolution of one of the variables of the system, which the system reached radically change their behavior. All the world has ever experienced what is a phase transition: if you look at the temperature of a glass of water and lowered, to reach 0 degrees Celsius water behavior change radically stops flowing and becomes in a solid, ice. If one heats the water in a kitchen fire when it reaches 100 degrees Celsius will experience a change and turn to steam, which will be leaving the pot. The formation of rain, seed germination, death, all these natural processes are phase transitions. What characterizes phase transitions is that they are like a wall, a discontinuity, it was worth before remains true, and things become radically different. The reality is that our system has so much tension built up inside, so many things that hang by a thread, a small-or no-alteration much extra can trigger such a wave of changes that alter the landscape permanently.


a few weeks ago we analyzed the case of the current food riots in North Africa. Decades of bloody dictatorship, misery for most people, just exploiting synchronously in a dozen countries, and many others are in a very tense situation. Why now, why all at once? As already explained, the sudden rise in food prices in these countries with the removal of subsidies at the beginning of the year has been the most over the edge, despair, and despair, to revolt. In Tunisia and Egypt their leaders have been deposed, and in the West that has no conscience and attention has turned to other bastions of fueled us oil and gas could fall: Libya, Algeria , Oman, Yemen, Iran, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Morocco (which has no oil but phosphate) ... the list is endless. However, the game is not over in Egypt or Tunisia, followed by strikes and riots in developing countries. In essence, the iron falling to their princes, these countries have gone straight near the end of phase 3 of the collapse at least over large areas. Libya can be concluded from a stroke this stage, if it ends up in the civil war that could unleash. And no one knows where to complete this process.


In our previous analysis , we found a strong correlation between oil prices and food seems to be the trigger for these riots, after long decades of brutal repression. But it is also that in order to maintain our global oil production will need to discover and develop new fields, continuously, to be offsetting the decline of the wells already in operation; Look in the graphs that showed dramatic the last report of the International Energy Agency . But amid the current unrest, not only has nullified the Formula 1 Grand Prix of Bahrain, but the oil companies are evacuating their staff in Libya, which produces 1.8 million barrels per day, 2.1% of world production. If the situation is normalized in the coming months we will find that oil production next year will, of necessity, significantly lower than this. Following this loop, that will push oil prices upwards, dragging the food and worse, further, the stability problems of the countries. Eventually the tension is such that a new country to fall will not result in a small variation of the situation, but an abrupt, large-scale disruption, a regional war that blocking access to a new product but oil to the West ... any of those things would be a phase change, the move to a different state in which things no longer work as they had become accustomed in recent decades. At the moment it is transferred to that point of no return, things will change in a more sharply than many people realize.


Dimitri Orlov argues that the Hubbert curve, the model used to describe the evolution of oil production, is an idealization that is far from reality, especially in regard to the decline global production. The key is to make the system work as expected each subsystem must operate in an equally reliable, and that means that it continues to look for new wells, building new production facilities, keeping the lines of distribution and refining, etc. However, all facilities which are all depends on the physical world, and apart from those that were damaged by the riots, others will be affected by the volatility of prices listed above and do not invest enough in them, just when most needed. Therefore, the ideal limit of Hubbert will be difficult to accomplish, and most likely we rushed on that side much more quickly than we would like. Because the problem is fed back, and when lower the production cost significantly overcome it. This will lengthen the time that oil will last, but based on creating a greater or earlier shortages.

The final problem of this phenomenon is the predictable tendency of economists to guard explanations focus on the symptoms, without going into the substantive issues, and that leads to an inability inability to understand that the economic crisis / social / humanitarian perceive on the surface is at bottom a crisis resources. And that continually focus on the symptoms and not the illness we will likely lead to ineffective implementation of measures, focusing heavily on the productive side, not understanding that the raw materials now lost and can not recover. As Vesper complaint Nada, unconscious or deliberate misinformation on the structural component of this crisis that never ends inevitably leads to another vicious cycle that will aggravate the problems to reach the phase transition and the collapse of our system.

The fights its kind since the oil shortages of the fate of each country will depend on whether a producer or not, how close it is to the producers and their relationship with them ... Also, if you know how to implement measures decided on savings, contingency against shortages and social protection. That, or wait our particular Tahrir Square. Hopefully for once we are smart.

Salu2,
AMT

Cervix Low Soft Before Period

What is the energy

Are you talking to me? ... So, tell me a good ear

Dear readers,

a couple of weeks ago I wanted to write this post but emerging issues did not allow me to stop typing. Suddenly, some events of a personal nature, and dressing the insistent urging of a newcomer on issues as varied and quirky peripintada give me a chance for the following discussion.

In my personal relationship with the problem of Peak Oil there have been several milestones that have marked the course definitely for my actions. 11 years ago I was where you might be one of the readers, a newcomer to these shores. A casual conversation, a link to dieoff.org , a first glance, an understanding of the problem that is described may be true, an initial repulsion how to count on that page but also the inconvenience of that fact .. . was the seed of concern. I had a second approach, a few years later, through LATOC (now after conversion of its author Matt Savinar to astrology, bizarre, or perhaps ominously-converted on a page that sells fraud). There the case was better presented, more structured, with links to reliable sources, with a thorough dismantling of all shelters where complacency seeking refuge, and for the first time I felt the palpable urgency. From that moment I was like, periodically, to know "what was the oil," how much was the price per barrel. When for the first time since I remembered the price passed $ 50 I realized that this would be precisely the type of sign would be expected if we were coming the zenith. I began to speak openly about my family and friends, only to insist a little more than has the closest, but spent weeks or months without thinking about it. I continued my life, my career progressed, and oil continued to rise and with it my concern, I began to see almost daily prices ... Reached 2008 and then I realized that there was no plan B in my heart of hearts that governments had wanted. Thanks to the insistence of a fellow I decided to investigate further, to learn more about the subject I studied books, articles, official reports ... and what I found left me cold. There was no plan B because you can not have plan B if they are to maintain the status quo, and our current path leads straight to disaster, a disaster that anticipated the current unrest in the Arab world and the growing instability in the world, from Latin America to the Far East. Then I prepared my first speech to introduce you to my colleagues in the department, I spoke briefly with Pedro Prieto-who was very kind during a conference organized by CADS , then set before my lab, and then through contacts and friends spontaneously began to repeat it in various forums, with the help of other colleagues who have joined in to what we call the OCO (in Catalan is more fun: l'OCO). Quim convinced me to start this blog , and gradually make disclosure of the issue of Peak Oil and its consequences, the Oil Crash, has grown into a sort of personal project, and also gradually , combining it with my usual business activity, I'm becoming the subject of energy in a research topic itself, with the invaluable help of my colleagues, especially Antonio García Olivares.


I did not know, but since the day I first read Peak Oil about my fate was sealed. I was actually like a marble slightly separated from my position of equilibrium, unstable without my knowing it at the top of a peak, and gradually, imperceptibly, I've been sliding toward the valley floor adjacent to the perception of a certain bleak future, to the questioning of social approaches for most of my life I gave - albeit with some criticism - for more or less valid, into consciousness, first diffuse and increasingly alarmed emergency in which they live our ecosystems essential to activism first reluctant, then ways and that increasingly tends to be belligerent. Simply a little bump initial a reasonable doubt, that has slowly dug into the shell with that clogs our perception and has begun to envision a future much more uncertain and less certain of what the media sweeteners persistently presented.

explain all this history to give context to the following statement: I have not much faith in the usefulness of what I do, in fact, I've never had. Let me explain. I am not the first to attempt to make disclosure on the energy crisis, and the clearest insight into the subject, or anything else. I'm just one more, with some training to understand and know how to explain, like so many others. For it will never I expected more successful than others individually. But individuality is a virus over the irrational consumerism that serve both our economic system needs to inflation, so it does not matter, the important thing is to augment a collective movement to help the needed change. What happens is that in that sense I do not think we get to anything useful. For decades been warning about the limits of the terrestrial biosphere to support our economic development model and such warnings have always been scorned as alarmist and defeatist. A little more than a decade, picking up the thread of the outreach work of Marion King Hubbert , reputable geologists Colin Campbell as , Jean Laherrère , Kenneth Deffeyes and many others have shown, with detailed analysis of the data, that sooner or later the oil could not continue our consumption curve. Shortly thereafter, physical and I at the University of Uppsala, led by Kjell Aleklett , began to make more rigorous analysis than would be expected from oil and other energy commodities, with disappointing results. All of them have been published in refereed journals have published press releases have appeared in numerous media, including national chains and global television. If we restrict ourselves to Spain, we have Mariano Marzo to study these problems for decades and is a recognized eminence in the field, also representatives of ASPO-Spain (AEREN): Pedro Prieto, Daniel Gomez, Marcel Coderch ... and many other promoters, among whom I am just a newcomer. Also they have made numerous public appearances in different media (try a Google search: "Mariano Marzo ). We have many associations (you can find a English census of some of these web pages in http://www.cenit-del-petroleo.info/ ). There are many public institutions concerned with the problem: addition to the public but not publicized information , there are some institutions more visible as the bicameral committee on U.S. Oil Peak , counterpart in the UK (higher executive capacity), and others in other countries, not Spain, of course, but here is the Advisory Council for Sustainable Development Observatory or the Energy Crisis and Catalan Society alternatives. But the latter instance no longer has an active website and surely (do not know their history, if any readers can tell us ...) has somehow ceased their activities (possibly assumed by the CADS) and that may be the future of many other initiatives pro bono born that remain as long as the enthusiasm of its promoters did not wane. And I have very clear from the beginning that this is exactly the situation of the initiatives that I promote and in which I participate, that their promoters may become demoralized and end up leaving ( what has not happened already, in some way? ). In fact, being aware of the problem, the company's enormous limitations is necessary but not sufficient to avoid abandonment.


And it is very easy to become demoralized. Years and years of outreach and awareness task (such as the Web makes Energy Crisis) serves to attract a few thousand maybe, but what about thousands of English are compared with a population of around 45 million? A one per ten thousand, a paltry 0.01%? And among them, are not those who live their majority status peakoiler in hiding, like a shameful fact, tired of the lack of understanding of his inner circle? Admit it: we can not fight the propaganda machinery of the unbridled consumption of the invincible faith in human progress and prosperity, understood as the exponential growth of GDP inevitable. We can not do as well, trying to use the channels that it controls: what good comes out of the world's foremost expert on television and explain in clear and understandable that we can not continue, they'll give us, and then cut the program to a television spot where we try to squeeze through the eyes a late-model car and a dishwasher efficient and quiet? The dissonance between the two message is clear: if what the expert had told the importance and seriousness that seems to describe then it would make sense to continue to spread a message of unrestricted consumption. Worse, trademarks and prostitute appropriated elements of speech pro-sustainability, and trivialize concepts that add, as another layer, its projects, creating more value by integrating new elements into their plans for diversification and market penetration ... in short, to continue the exponential growth. That leaves the viewer even more perplexed, reduced by the media to a consumer, that to reconcile the irreconcilable ends up believing that the tagline "eco-" green, "sustainable" that attach to these products are responding correctly expert claims cited above, and therefore there is nothing to worry about, everything is under control of superiority. Add to this a world where information - Actually, the raw data-flow in a continuous manner, leaving no time for people to assimilate, and the constant flow creep away, like water in the bilges, any concerns it had begun to wrap (it's for all these reasons Noam Chomsky never granted interviews on television).

Certainly we have internet, the panacea of \u200b\u200bfreedom of expression, but behold his grief in the same medium are turning absurd conspiracy theories and endless just causes, all stirred into a sea of \u200b\u200bpages about food, family recipes, motor racing, travel, hobbies, bird watching, the association National Pediatrics, the club of hunting enthusiasts and the association to protest the fourth ring road of Barcelona. In the midst of such gibberish, how to efficiently transmit a message tough but necessary to hear the anguished cry of what happens? The calling in this or other similar sites are essentially shipwrecked one day accidentally stranded on these beaches, simply because statistically there will always be some that do. In addition, the vice of our society, its complete shallowness, makes the lower level of care that entails a minimum and more difficult to convey complicated messages, as shown, a button: due to some action of mine - now and then do some-one old post on the feasibility of nuclear fusion energy has been more visited than usual during the past 24 hours. The usage statistics blog tells me that this page has had 16 views in the period with an average length of stay in it for a minute and a half. That's a post quite long and complicated, which is impossible to read in such a short time, and I know at least a couple of people have been there between five and ten minutes, which leaves less than a minute on average for the rest. I fear that what has happened is actually two or three people will be drawn between five and ten minutes to read, and the rest have jumped from there in seconds, even if they have reached that post was for a specific reference to the infeasibility of ITER elsewhere, ie, who had gone there on a voluntary and deliberate act of wanting to know more, but once they arrive at their destination has not been able to retain their attention fixed on what was discussed more than a few seconds. And so it is always, I am sure that less than 5% of readers absolutely (the percentage is higher among regular, no doubt) have not reached this point of this post as long. Therefore, this means little and poorly serves to convey this message.


is, of course, the issue of talks. From my own experience I know that more direct contact such as giving a speech favors a more fluid exchange of ideas so that more intense than the Internet, contrary to what might seem. However, many times I've completely dissonant attitudes at the end of the talks, people wonder if it is true that "oil is running out" (and look what I always say several times that oil will never end) , people ask me if it is not resolved all with electric and hydrogen cars (there is also a transparency to explain this) and then the faux pas of all types: one that asks me if I want to introduce some kind of choice (this is good: "Peak Oil Party: raise your arms and surrender "would destroy at the polls) that what I think of religions or trade in weapons or a local problem which I am not at all an expert, etc. And then, as usual, that if this is a cult, that if we are a disaster and if science will solve everything. Because that's the biggest problem: our system does not only promote consumption, but blown propaganda that causes its victims to accept uncritically truths that are not so certain, so as not to question the growth, and that explains the imagination that so often occurs (as in recent days with an anonymous caller) on alternatives magic, conspiracy theories and nonsense groups. Even those who own that comes the message of the talk (and which tend to be biased, if not already knew: there is clearly a selection bias in who is going to hear a talk as well) know all these things usually produce a substantial change in their lives, for the reasons described above: misunderstanding, high personal cost to change their habits, etc, which makes it more feasible that can step further and be active, if not activists.


All this I thought so before, and experience has confirmed what I sensed. Therefore, I am not disappointed with the results, on the contrary, I was waiting worse. But it is clear that all this effort is an exercise in futility before utility. Why do I do then? For two reasons.

The first is because it is my duty . It is a moral issue. There, each with their conscience.

The second, because there is a remote possibility, and for that alone deserves worthwhile. Will probably occur during a brief window of opportunity, between normality gradually degrades and the total collapse that we may assume our stupidity and shortsightedness. There will be a short time in which the apparent dissonance between what was officially stated and what really happens push an unusually high proportion of people to seek an alternative explanation, before diving into the stampede. It is at that time vulgar and populist explanations can easily turn on people and finish ourselves to the disaster, but also the time when we can be heard for once, instead of being heard as background noise. Maybe this time is closer than it seems . In any case, if you think you, reader, still worth trying to do something, consider whether it is worth step forward .


Salu2,
AMT

Mosin Nagant Blueprint

Change the look of NetBeans on Ubuntu 10.04

The look of NetBeans on Ubuntu 10.04 is very ugly. Here is a trick to change the look of NetBeans.

1. Locate your installation of NetBeans (binary). For my part are in:

cd / home/miguel/netbeans-6.9.1/bin /

2.

console runs

. / netbeans - laf com.sun.java.swing.plaf.windows.WindowsLookAndFeel

3. Bonus!. Add the parameter "- laf com.sun.java.swing.plaf.windows.WindowsLookAndFeel" to the shortcut icon to change the Command field:


/ bin / sh "/ home/miguel/netbeans-6.9.1 / bin / netbeans "- laf com.sun.java.swing.plaf.windows.WindowsLookAndFeel

Ready!

Movie Film Adult Watch Online

Positive energy. From website www.djerm.com

Dear readers,

These days I'm having some brief discussions in other forums with some buff miracle solutions and conspiracy theory. Following the line of magical thinking which corresponds to an illiterate society and disrespectful to the actual scientific knowledge, proponents of miracle solutions to the problem of energy are often people with little or no knowledge of elementary physics, but that although they believe that actually comprise an abstract concept such as energy, and are convinced that nature really offers us an inexhaustible energy spectrum easily usable for our purposes, and if not it's because we are leveraging of a global conspiracy. The funny thing is that according to them we are also actively participating in this malevolent conspiracy of us who have dedicated many years of our life to the study of the fundamental laws of the universe, and therefore our opinion, it is always covered by a deep insight, healthy skepticism and a long process of reflection, is easily overruled by the doubts of our honesty with that ad hominem argument ahead easily fall into the disqualification Faltona and impertinent. I believe therefore appropriate to make this post in which I'll review it a little more understandable some basic concepts of physics in relation to energy, I have little faith that serve to placate the vacant infected progress unlimited, but at least it may serve to clarify some ideas to those who intend to try to understand the problems we face.

What is energy? Like other widely used concepts in physics such as force, work or power, the common language use this term with great latitude that encompasses many meanings, sometimes contradictory to the scientific and precise definition is given in Physics. I do not intend here to look back at the elementary grades of high school, because I think the basic knowledge about all the readers already have them, so I will focus on the interpretation and meaning of these concepts, but at some point I will have to use some formulas and a little math.

One of the first things we are taught in school about sums up the energy the following aphorism: "Energy is neither created nor destroyed: only transformed." The phrase is very true and condenses much of the scientific knowledge of the twentieth century is indeed the central claim of one of the cornerstones of thermodynamics, the First Principle. However, the phrase itself is much denser than it might seem, and its implementation is so far removed from everyday experience (where we see that objects spend and lose energy) and thus we take it as a phrase mantra, like one of those questions and answers of the Catechism, which did not fully understand but we accept as undisputed principle. And as with the Catechism, to reach our teens we put everything in question, and how deep we have not understood that that energy is neither created nor destroyed, then the very thing we foolishly challenged, more so if we rebel against authority imposed and levied against the deceptions that make up what we call reality. However, that energy is neither created nor destroyed is a tautology , since the definition of energy is built to be a conserved quantity, something that never changes. What happens is that we are not interested in the total energy, but the energy that can be exploited: the mechanical work. And here comes the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which tells us that in any conversion of energy sources in usable work we have to pay a toll, as a part of the energy be dispersed. But explain this a little more detail.

In the following I will rely on the basic laws of classical mechanics, which describes with precision of several orders of magnitude our everyday experience. All concepts and relations to which I refer can actually be generalized to the context of quantum mechanics (describing the laws governing the very small) and relativistic mechanics (describing the laws governing that moves very fast ), but before going on to discuss more complex concepts one must understand at least the simplest. Unfortunately, the complexity and lack of insight raised by the explanation of quantum and relativistic phenomena, sometimes exacerbated by news reports merely gimmicky and not very rigorous, makes some "witch of the tribe", sales of smoke, seek to rely on these exotic effects to justify the violation of the First or the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Nothing is further from reality, because despite the difficulties of generalizing the theoretical framework of thermodynamics or relativity to quantum field theory these two are perfectly compatible with it, and the principles deriving from it are perfectly applicable to your area ( There is an interesting question about the effect of the gravitational interaction that would violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics, but has no practical effect on what is here and their discussion goes far beyond the conceptual framework of this blog ). In summary, there is no such thing as an infinite source of energy based on the Zero Point Energy , bad interpretation of a key concept in quantum field theory (the quantum vacuum fluctuations ), though there many popular videos on the subject available on the internet, for more aberration, these videos are usually based on electromagnetic effects that can be described within the framework of Classical Electrodynamics -part, then, classical mechanics and nothing to do with the zero-point energy and greater affront regularly invoke the name of Nikola Tesla in vain, which must be turning in his grave.

Consider, then, what is the energy from the point of view of classical mechanics. The laws of Newton , verified with great accuracy after many careful experiments tell us that for any particle in motion:


F = m * a

or, which is, force equals the mass times acceleration. The left side of the equation, force, represents the dynamic quantity, is the agent of change, and has a prior existence independent of that over which it operates. The right side, which contains the product of mass and acceleration, kinematic quantity, which depends on the state of motion and the peculiarities of the particle. Mass is a property of this particle, its inertia or resistance ability to change the state of motion: a body with twice the mass of twice the acceleration needed to change the way their movement. As for acceleration, is an absolute reference (not dependent on the inertial reference frame) and measures the pace at which changes the speed of the particle. If we take this expression and integrate over a piece of the trajectory of the particle we get the following:


K W = change

where by "variation" means the difference between the final moment and initial piece of history considered. The left side is the mechanical work done by force, by definition, since work Physics is defined as: the integral of the force along the path. The right side is the change in kinetic energy , K = 1 / 2 mv ^ 2, half of mass times velocity squared, which is obtained by applying differential calculus elemental to the right of the first equation. The interpretation of this second equation, which results from the first, is that all work performed results in a modification of the kinetic energy of the particle. In short, if the force exerted on the particle work it will win or lose speed (as if the work is accelerating or braking) according to the mathematical expression. The beauty of this relationship is that the left side of the field is by force of external causes movement, while the right side is a feature specific particle moves there. On the other hand, making this relationship is extremely powerful do not need to know what has made the particle, just how much work has had on her, to see how it has changed its speed (at least in magnitude). However, the work carried out depends on what path is followed (remember the history of the particle), while the kinetic energy depends only on the initial and final point.

If the force field is the type called "conservative ", this expression can be further refined. A conservative force field is one that is derived from a potential (technically, is the gradient changed sign of a scalar function called energy potential). The advantage of conservative force fields is that, as evidenced by a little calculation work in the last equation does not depend on the path to be followed, but only depends on the initial and final point, and in fact corresponds corresponds to the variation of the potential change of sign. Therefore, for a conservative force field we

- variation of U = change in K

from which it follows that

0 = change in (U + K) = change in E

A magnitude E, which is equal to the sum potential energy and kinetic energy, is called mechanical energy of the particle. This is the definition of energy in physics, and is defined according to this reasoning, that is, precisely defined to be a conserved quantity. Not a chance, in cases where that takes into account other types of interactions more complex than I discuss here (eg, electromagnetic) are introduced to define appropriate terms of energy (eg radiation electromagnetic energy emitted by the moving charges) so that energy is always a conserved quantity. And that is precisely what we want is that energy is a conserved quantity, because then we can easily characterize the physical state of a system without having to know all its evolution. The definition of energy is also a reproductive character of the equations of motion of the particle through Hamiltonian formulation. In short, the movement of a particle under the action of conservative forces preserves, by construction, energy and also can regenerate the whole movement with the equations derived from it ( Analytical Mechanics).

What we have discussed so Now a simple case: a single particle under the action of a conservative force field. You have to say that all the elemental forces we know (gravitational, electromagnetic, strong nuclear and weak, all others are derivations of them) are conservative, so ask the force to be conservative is not a big restriction. However, the introduction of complex bodies, which contain many particles, it does trigger a change in practice the concept of energy. So, assuming the linear superposition principle (the resultant force is the sum of all the fundamental forces) that we total system power (understood as the sum of the kinetic energy of all particles the sum of the potential energy of all particles) is a conserved quantity, as in the case of a single particle. However, with a complex object consisting of many particles we distinguish two types of energy: its center of mass and heat. The center of mass is that corresponding to the object behaves as a whole, is the kind of energy that is often interesting to do useful work, and that is what is macroscopic: the piston moves upward to compressing the combustion chamber, the rotor blade that is moved by water, etc. But the macroscopic body has a second type of motion, smaller scale, in which position changes are smaller in the case of solids: the thermal motion, which corresponds to the agitation of the molecules that form the object and that is precisely what we measure when we measure the temperature of an object (it can be shown by the Statistical Physics the temperature is actually a measure of this kinetic energy). This second type of motion is chaotic, random. The movement of the center of mass (including the solid rotation of rigid bodies) is readily usable para hacer un trabajo; el térmico, por el contrario, sólo puede ser usado para transmitir una agitación semejante a un cuerpo puesto en contacto con él (contacto térmico y transferencia de calor).


Cuando utilizamos una fuente de energía cualquiera (porque quemamos un combustible o hacemos otro tipo de reacción física o química) generalmente desencadenamos un proceso térmico: de golpe una gran cantidad de energía potencial contenida en el combustible es convertida en energía cinética, pero con un grado de desorden considerable (por ejemplo, en la gasolina que se quema las moléculas de los gases producidos move in all directions and with very different speeds.) With a suitable apparatus (eg, confining the explosion inside a cylinder with a piston phone) can ensure that these molecules move randomly transfer part of its movement in one direction to the macroscopic element perform the useful work want. Part of the energy of the disordered molecules is transmitted to a system in which the movement is mostly ordered, solid, and therefore useful for us. However, we can not avoid that part of the newly released kinetic energy is never utilized and is dispersed in the form of heat, random movements of molecules. That is exactly what it says the Second Law of Thermodynamics: never recover all the energy that was stored for useful work, one part will be dispersed as heat. Worse, this dispersion is irreversible, can never be recovered (if not at the expense of generating even more dispersion). We know well the day to day costs more to sort that mess, fixing to break, linking to separate, clean up that mess ... The energy is not lost, but little by little scattering in random movements, thermal, which are useless for us. The energy is unchanged, but its usefulness to us decreases, and once used is not recovered.


Finally, the post is long and certainly not affordable to everyone, and I have not entered into the technical details of the issue. But I would conclude by making clear a few concepts.

regard to inexhaustible energy sources need to be clear about one thing: he claims that is a source of infinite energy, or do not understand the concept of energy or is a trickster (or both). Put another way: if someone says he can have the desired inexhaustible source of energy should be able to show which of the basic postulates of classical mechanics fails, typically will be the conservative nature of the forces acting on the system. Curling up with complicated devices that attempt, as the magician's trick to divert attention from what actually happens is a deception, if the merchants of the gullibility of others have such power source, demonstrating that they have discovered a new type of interaction , strength, which is not conservative, that careful experiments and measurements show rigorous to support it. On the other hand, would be a drama to be true. If there is a fundamental force conservative and can not inject energy into our system, then would be like if we had an inexhaustible source of energy. But that energy would be dispersed equally to the use, so we go slowly increasing the temperature of our system (planet, solar system, galaxy, universe ...) until you reach a time when it would melt everything. Think for a moment: what they think would happen if there were a magic tap that gave us all the oil we wanted? That would burn continuously until the atmospheric concentration of CO2 in the Earth was like Venus and land surface temperatures were equally searing. On the other hand, it is logical that there is no such kind of forces in our universe, exist because it would destabilize even destroy the possibility of intelligent life organized matter and that observed ( anthropic principle). Our universe seems to work as a system of cause-reaction that compensates for the cause, always keeping a delicate dynamic balance.


And regarding the optimal use of energy sources, it must be clear that the Second Law of Thermodynamics is, in essence, pure statistics. Classic example: what is the probability that in a container with two chambers, one empty and one filled with gas, by removing the wall that separates the gas fills the entire container? Just because the molecules move randomly, the theory predicts and practice confirms that in a moment of gas molecules occupy all the volume equally, the probability is 1. What is the probability that a given instant of time all the molecules are concentrated in a single chamber, so that if we were to place the wall would return quickly to have the gas contained? The probability of this event tends to zero exponentially with the number of particles. That means pure chance sets a direction of time, which always leads to increased disorder, and can not expect that the molecules of CO2 and water produced by burning gasoline with the ambient heat to react spontaneously to return to form gasoline.




all: the total energy of the universe never changes, but the useful energy we can leverage decreases with use. Anyway, I hope that, having taken the trouble to write a post so long, it can serve as reference for anyone who needs to shake off the heavy lunatics of the chimera of infinite energy. Indeed, as anxiety about our situation will become acute over Proponents of miracle solutions, and society will be at a crucial moment, which must decide whether to hear mermaids singing promise you never accessible Arcade and again, or grow up and accept that things must change.


Salu2,
AMT

Cheat Engine Chicken Invaders 3

Calculating date difference in days, months and years in SQL Server

Calculate the difference between two dates in SQL Server is easy using DATEDIFF . For example, to find the difference between '2007-05-07 'and '2007-05-08' in days just enough (1):

 SELECT DATEDIFF (day, '2007-05-07 ', '2007 -05 to 08 '); 

Result: ----------



1 day DATEDIFF used with ingenuity is helpful to make practical calculations (2), for example:

First and last day of Month:

 SELECT DATEADD (mm, DATEDIFF (mm, 0, getdate ()), 0) 
 
 SELECT dateadd (ms, -3, DATEADD (mm, DATEDIFF (m, 0, getdate ()) +1, 0)); 
 

Day last year:

 SELECT dateadd (ms, -3, DATEADD (yy, DATEDIFF (yy, 0, getdate ()), 0)) 

First Monday of the month: SELECT DATEADD

 (wk, DATEDIFF (wk, 0, dateadd (dd ,6-datepart (day, getdate ()), getdate ())), 0); 
 However 

DATEDIFF is not useful or satisfactory when we make the following calculation :

 2009/02/02 - 2009/01/08 = 1 month and 6 days 

is, given two dates, returning the number of days, months and years that have passed in a text expression.

The answer that I suggest for this problem is a scalar function in SQL Server that should receive two datetime parameters and return a string expression with days, months and years. You should also make an exception of months or days or years if they are equal to 0.

For example, if we invoke the scalar function: (3)

 select dbo.EntreFechasAñoMesDia ('02 / 10/1987 ', '02 / 02/2011') 

 Result: 

 - -------- 

 spend 23 years and 4 months 

Validating the calculation of dates in Wolfram of the Moon? How big do you think the sky?

Scale

from Brad Goodspeed on Vimeo
.