@Daniel- Nah, I'm always careful to use "Red Chinese" to better discern between them and our nearly forgotten friends & allies in the Republic of China (a.k.a. Taiwan).
I'm not a big fan of taxpayer dollars getting used for any R&D (and that is my line of work!). Too many times, I've seen stupid things worked on for too long only because other people's $ was footing the bill. Likewise for cost-share programs as well. All these corporate welfare schemes just result in time and effort being misdirected on negative-NPV projects that wouldn't see the light of day if companies were risking their own capital.
All that said, the idea of a prize (delivered upon success), is a WHOLE lot better. Companies still risk their capital choosing what to work on and will naturally avoid foolhardy things just because a bureaucrat gets them funding. Nontheless, I'm not sure there is really a great need for a prize. Any company that develops a practical (economic is part of this too!) photovoltaic system will have enormous sales that dwarf any proposed prize. The market rewards successful innovation, not bureaucrats picking taxpayers' pockets.
I don't think they are a scam sham company (those are easy to spot), but they don't have a real product yet, just a technology they are working on. As an R&D engineer myself, I can assure you that's not the same thing.
It does not appear they are seeking individual investors (those things are nearly ALWAYS scams), but are working hard to try to make their technology work. Let's see what they come up with, but don't get crazy giddy yet. Their product needs to make power (both voltage and amps), be cheap, easily to install, weather-proof, have long durability, and high reliability. It's a tall order, so I wouldn't be too optimistic yet. I'm not super-optimistic on photo-voltaics, but if people want to risk their own capital (not do it on taxpayer funding), that says something. I wish them well. Better Californians than Red Chinese.
@Justin- Oh man... The stuff you learned about velocities just increasing higher and high is completely whack. If that were the case, a full bathtub would drain as quickly as a half full tub. There is some increase in the drain rate from the added head, but ultimately the size of the limiting orifice (which could be the pipe itself) establishes the restriction.
By any chance, did you learn your physics in a public high school?
Seems like having a dedicated contraption already in place at large swim areas wouldn't be all that difficult. Doing a makeshift one ad hoc out of available materials (as described) sounds pretty sketchy, though. It would be a major skavenger hunt...
Given a purposed-designed gizmo, I wonder how well it works compared to modern methods.
@Alex: 1. Thanks for the answer on the tie-in to the Iggulden boy's book. It looks like they gave permission, probably after a lot of £ changed hands. 2. The *version* of the book being promoted, is the US edition. There is also at least a UK version as well & maybe more. If it is like the Iggulden "DBfB", the heroes listed are biased toward the target country. Nothing wrong with this -- it's a fine idea for the young readers to read about heroes they can more easily personally identify with. Some, like Marie Curie, are big enough "stars" that they will be in EVERY edition of course...
Bingo. Our credo: If you like it, TAKE IT... If you don't, BREAK IT!
Seriously, I hope the girlie book is as nicely done as the one the Iggulden brothers did for boys. Given the different set of authors, apparently the publishers and not the Igguldens own the intellectual property to the concept, design, &c.... it looks to pretty much a female version in exactly the same mold (not a bad thing, but interesting). Considering how good their book is (I bought the UK version before a US one was even out ... it's for my infant son to have someday and I couldn't wait), I was a little surprised they weren't involved in the girlie one as well (are they behind the scenes?). Whose idea was the original? Did the publisher hire the Iggulden brothers or did they write it first and shop for a publisher?
My wife's g-g-g-grandfather was a mid-to-late 19th century Great Lakes ship captain. There are writeups of him in shipping directories of that era and he was relatively "famous" within the industry, so it's not too hard finding information about him. We researched the many ships he captained over his long career and the majority of them eventually sunk (fortunately only 2 whilst he was captain) -- He managed to get "lucky" but being wrecked at some point was par for the course.
Most people don't realize how treacherous the Great Lakes (essentially inland seas) are, and it was pretty routine for the ships to go down in that era. If the Lakes weren't so cold, deep, and dark, it would be a wreck diver's paradise today. The sinking of the Edmund Fitzgerald proved that even with fairly modern meterology and radios, a stormy Great Lake is a dangerous place to be. The weather forecasting is a little better today and there are GPSs, but it's still not someplace you want to be in a bad storm even on a large ship.
Oh, I am SO glad this is coming out. I've grown rather tired of the criticism the "Dangerous Book for Boys" took from lefties on account of its lack of inclusiveness for girls. Here's your book, chicks, now go away and let us climb rocks and burn things.
At least the pic is taken on the newer "Passion" (a bit controversial in its own right) facade and not the older "Nativity" facade that was the work of Gaudi himself.
Nah, I'm always careful to use "Red Chinese" to better discern between them and our nearly forgotten friends & allies in the Republic of China (a.k.a. Taiwan).
I'm not a big fan of taxpayer dollars getting used for any R&D (and that is my line of work!). Too many times, I've seen stupid things worked on for too long only because other people's $ was footing the bill. Likewise for cost-share programs as well. All these corporate welfare schemes just result in time and effort being misdirected on negative-NPV projects that wouldn't see the light of day if companies were risking their own capital.
All that said, the idea of a prize (delivered upon success), is a WHOLE lot better. Companies still risk their capital choosing what to work on and will naturally avoid foolhardy things just because a bureaucrat gets them funding. Nontheless, I'm not sure there is really a great need for a prize. Any company that develops a practical (economic is part of this too!) photovoltaic system will have enormous sales that dwarf any proposed prize. The market rewards successful innovation, not bureaucrats picking taxpayers' pockets.
It does not appear they are seeking individual investors (those things are nearly ALWAYS scams), but are working hard to try to make their technology work. Let's see what they come up with, but don't get crazy giddy yet. Their product needs to make power (both voltage and amps), be cheap, easily to install, weather-proof, have long durability, and high reliability. It's a tall order, so I wouldn't be too optimistic yet. I'm not super-optimistic on photo-voltaics, but if people want to risk their own capital (not do it on taxpayer funding), that says something. I wish them well. Better Californians than Red Chinese.
Oh man... The stuff you learned about velocities just increasing higher and high is completely whack. If that were the case, a full bathtub would drain as quickly as a half full tub. There is some increase in the drain rate from the added head, but ultimately the size of the limiting orifice (which could be the pipe itself) establishes the restriction.
By any chance, did you learn your physics in a public high school?
Given a purposed-designed gizmo, I wonder how well it works compared to modern methods.
1. Thanks for the answer on the tie-in to the Iggulden boy's book. It looks like they gave permission, probably after a lot of £ changed hands.
2. The *version* of the book being promoted, is the US edition. There is also at least a UK version as well & maybe more. If it is like the Iggulden "DBfB", the heroes listed are biased toward the target country. Nothing wrong with this -- it's a fine idea for the young readers to read about heroes they can more easily personally identify with. Some, like Marie Curie, are big enough "stars" that they will be in EVERY edition of course...
Seriously, I hope the girlie book is as nicely done as the one the Iggulden brothers did for boys. Given the different set of authors, apparently the publishers and not the Igguldens own the intellectual property to the concept, design, &c.... it looks to pretty much a female version in exactly the same mold (not a bad thing, but interesting). Considering how good their book is (I bought the UK version before a US one was even out ... it's for my infant son to have someday and I couldn't wait), I was a little surprised they weren't involved in the girlie one as well (are they behind the scenes?). Whose idea was the original? Did the publisher hire the Iggulden brothers or did they write it first and shop for a publisher?
Most people don't realize how treacherous the Great Lakes (essentially inland seas) are, and it was pretty routine for the ships to go down in that era. If the Lakes weren't so cold, deep, and dark, it would be a wreck diver's paradise today. The sinking of the Edmund Fitzgerald proved that even with fairly modern meterology and radios, a stormy Great Lake is a dangerous place to be. The weather forecasting is a little better today and there are GPSs, but it's still not someplace you want to be in a bad storm even on a large ship.
Sarah: What were the women like in your time?
Kyle: They were ... good fighters.