Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power

Pat Flannery wrote in
dakotatelephone:

Neil Gerace wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
Derek Lyons wrote:
That's also sometimes called a 'helper engine', which can also be
often be seen mid-train.

Haven't see that arrangement yet.

A quick look reveals this photo from Port Hedland, Western Australia,
about 1000 miles north:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/226/4...348e7c2793.jpg

My God! That place may actually be even flatter than North Dakota!
Using this technique, is there any theoretical limit to how long you
could make a train?

Probably there is, but a dedicated track like this iron ore line has
gotten trains up to several miles long using distributed power.

Mountains and tunnels can block the radio control signals, plus the
length of passing sidings tend to keep most trains under 10,000 feet.
Distributed power is an increasingly common sight on American railroads,
especially in mountain districts and on big unit commodity trains like
grain and coal.

--Damon

In article ,
"Rod Speed" said:

Mike Ash wrote

Keep in mind that getting the stuff into the Sun is worse than a
trip to the outer planets,

Wrong again. All you have to do is aim it at the sun and it will
get there eventually.

Hell, all you have to do is leave it lying in your parking lot and
it'll get to the Sun *eventually*.

-- wds (or vice versa)

In article ,
(PV) said:

Anyone who thinks that launching waste-filled rockets into the sun
is an environmentally or economically sound idea is insane. *

Rod Speed isn't smart enough to be insane.

-- wds

In article ,
"Androcles" said:

"David V. Loewe, Jr" wrote
"Androcles" wrote:
"Wayne Throop" wrote


Subcritical reactors can burn a wider variety of fuels, more
safely. There's no fusion involved in any of the schemes I've
seen, but "thrmal reactor" is a term that shows up, but I don't
think

Yes, we already know you don't think, no need to tell us over and
over again.

There's nothing quite like a vindictive edit to PROVE that you are an
interminable ****wit, but I digress...

Wackypedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_proof
lists:

[...]

and the ultimate counter proof:

18 Proof by "You're'n'asshole!" (proof by ad hominem attack).

Proof 18 is my favourite, I use it often. It is very effective
when used against proofs 11-17. Fight fire with fire, I
say. Proofs 1-10 have me defeated, they prevent me from using
proofs 11-17 and I have to bite the bullet and embarrass myself to
win the argument (which I must do at all costs upon pain of death
by diarrhea of the verbal kind).

Now we have to add
19: Proof by vindictive edit.
20: Proof by the Last Words of Michel Ney.

Yup, you're a ****wit all right. Go away.

-- wds

In article ,
(Nate Edel) said:

In rec.arts.sf.written Jim Jones wrote:

Like hell it will. **** all in the third world bother to use
them and that wont be changing any time soon, you watch.

Well, you could change that... by giving them a first world
standard of living and first world civil rights. Of course, you
need to expand world wealth somehow to do it

And kill a ****load of men who believe that the natural state of
woman is "property."

-- wds

In article ,
BradGuth said:

"Rod Speed" wrote:
BradGuth wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote:
BradGuth wrote:

Yay, kookfight!

-- wds

Damon Hill wrote:

Mountains and tunnels can block the radio control signals, plus the
length of passing sidings tend to keep most trains under 10,000 feet.
Distributed power is an increasingly common sight on American railroads,
especially in mountain districts and on big unit commodity trains like
grain and coal.

ISTR there have been several schemes floated to network the
locomotives together so as to no longer require radio. The stumbling
blocks (again IIRC) have been a) agreeing on a standard, and b) the
cost of retrofitting the cars.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

On Aug 20, 9:11 am, (William December Starr) wrote:
In article ,
(Nate Edel) said:

Well, you could change that... by giving them a first world
standard of living and first world civil rights. Of course, you
need to expand world wealth somehow to do it

And kill a ****load of men who believe that the natural state of
woman is "property."

You'd probably have to kill a ****load of women who believe that too.

One of the truly frightening (to me) things about human nature, is
when I see women in the USA in full oppressive regalia and no men of
their society around. "So, you do that willingly?" I think.

On Aug 20, 1:33*pm, trag wrote:
On Aug 20, 9:11 am, (William December Starr) wrote:

In article ,
(Nate Edel) said:
Well, you could change that... by giving them a first world
standard of living and first world civil rights. *Of course, you
need to expand world wealth somehow to do it

And kill a ****load of men who believe that the natural state of
woman is "property."

You'd probably have to kill a ****load of women who believe that too.

One of the truly frightening (to me) things about human nature, is
when I see women in the USA in full oppressive regalia and no men of
their society around. * "So, you do that willingly?" I think.

Just out of curiosity, what do you regard as 'full oppressive
regalia' ? Try to find examples for which has not been, at any time
and place, a male version (I'll concede to you stiletto heels, but
what else?).

pt

William December Starr wrote:
In article ,
"Rod Speed" said:

Mike Ash wrote

Keep in mind that getting the stuff into the Sun is worse than a
trip to the outer planets,

Wrong again. All you have to do is aim it at the sun and it will
get there eventually.

Hell, all you have to do is leave it lying in your parking lot and
it'll get to the Sun *eventually*.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.