I had high hopes after reading a review about World War Z. After (painfully) sticking thru to the end of the book, it was pretty much a dismal disappointment. Good concept, but really really really poorly written. Might be one of the few times the movie is better then the book.
Why don't they do a "suicide mockup" of photographers and art directors that have ran out of all good ideas/topic/art to shoot?
Astronauts are highly educated people (masters, phd's, engineers, scientist's, etc) and won't off themselves just because one aspect of their current career is for the time being, over.
Lockheed certainly isn't the first developer of monoblade helicopters (several Uni's have been developing them for years).
Unless they can actually get them down to the size of a maple seed, the advantages they have over quad-copters are slim and none.
Besides the processing power required for stable flight, the video processing requirements (either airborne or on the ground) are very high, since the camera is spinning at the same rate as the bird.
Interesting concept, but doubtful it will win out over the quad's.
No to be too harsh, the kid is after all only 13 but this "experiment" is completely bogus.
His observations on actual energy output is completely wrong, his math is wonky, and the conclusions he's drawn are not only wrong, not only against common sense, but are UNPROVABLE in any scientific way.
There is no WAY (and that's backed by science, physics, electromechanics, and math) that a non-optimal focused solar panel will generator (i.e convert) more power then one that's directly focused to maximize the exposure to sunlight.
The kid bases most of his observations on measuring the energy output WRONG. He measures voltage in a load-less environment. Solar cells have an almost consistent voltage no matter what the output (i.e. independent of power). Solar cells deliver a semiconductor-esque non-linear Current-Voltage curve.
So what he measured, and then based his conclusions on is junk data. It has nothing to do with the actual power conversion of the two types of solar panels (one flat panel, 45 degrees, conventional array, and one "big new discovery" non-optimal "mystery of Fibonacci" magic tree array.
It's expected that the popular press be way too stupid to understand the science, but the kids science teacher/adviser should have spotted the glaring errors in the kids ASSUMPTIONS (not proof) and reigned him in.
Now both the kid and anyone that has "gushed" over this "vast new discovery" just plain looks stupid.
Science is so cool. You can take plain boring easy to understand words, like "wishful thinking" or "pie in the sky" or "pulled from our collective behinds" and give them science-y sounding words like "speculating".
And once they start, then it's just one "if true" then "this wild ass thing" on and on and on.
Most people call it science fiction, paleontologists call it their next grant proposal.
Astronauts are highly educated people (masters, phd's, engineers, scientist's, etc) and won't off themselves just because one aspect of their current career is for the time being, over.
Unless they can actually get them down to the size of a maple seed, the advantages they have over quad-copters are slim and none.
Besides the processing power required for stable flight, the video processing requirements (either airborne or on the ground) are very high, since the camera is spinning at the same rate as the bird.
Interesting concept, but doubtful it will win out over the quad's.
His observations on actual energy output is completely wrong, his math is wonky, and the conclusions he's drawn are not only wrong, not only against common sense, but are UNPROVABLE in any scientific way.
There is no WAY (and that's backed by science, physics, electromechanics, and math) that a non-optimal focused solar panel will generator (i.e convert) more power then one that's directly focused to maximize the exposure to sunlight.
The kid bases most of his observations on measuring the energy output WRONG. He measures voltage in a load-less environment. Solar cells have an almost consistent voltage no matter what the output (i.e. independent of power). Solar cells deliver a semiconductor-esque non-linear Current-Voltage curve.
So what he measured, and then based his conclusions on is junk data. It has nothing to do with the actual power conversion of the two types of solar panels (one flat panel, 45 degrees, conventional array, and one "big new discovery" non-optimal "mystery of Fibonacci" magic tree array.
It's expected that the popular press be way too stupid to understand the science, but the kids science teacher/adviser should have spotted the glaring errors in the kids ASSUMPTIONS (not proof) and reigned him in.
Now both the kid and anyone that has "gushed" over this "vast new discovery" just plain looks stupid.
Geesh people, learn some basic science.
//I'm betting on the latter - batman is a wuss//
"It makes sense that a completely marine reptile would not lay eggs."
Bwahahahahahahaha. Let me guess, Public School?
**cough** Sea Turtles **cough**
Maybe if he fired just one from his team of patent troll lawyers he could have funded it himself. Hopefully they'll strip his name from the project.
And once they start, then it's just one "if true" then "this wild ass thing" on and on and on.
Most people call it science fiction, paleontologists call it their next grant proposal.