Super critical c02 is a regular extraction process method for certain molecules! You can find it in a number of laboratory applications. Anyway, yes, doable - essentially for the reasons you mention. But also literally done at the moment, for the general extraction process capabilities of supercrit CO2
This was largely driven by the efficiency and fuel density.. so like, the mines specifically were coal mines which flood and need pumps, but obviously have unlimited coal. The engines/tractors were competing against oxen and horse, and it's hard to get a lot of power out of them. The trains had an easy time to carry lots of coal due to their nature.
I'm not actually sure where tractors fit in. I haven't heard of them in the equation early on. I think at some point they were probably viable, but I never heard of a coal powered tractor (maybe there were some). I suppose tractors could leave piles of coal and stuff if they needed to by the fields.
Steam Tractors were definitely a thing long before the development of the ICE. I'm not sure what the fuel used was, though. Hell we still have "steamrollers" that no longer run on steam.
The students live on campus, so the majority of folks are getting rid of items at the same time. Different than when people live in a city and not everyone is moving at once
Mounted internal to the window frame, not external, works better for me. Internal can ride tighter to the window, so light can't go out the edges. With external frame mounting, you need much wider shades.
If the fabric itself isn't blocking light... You need better material. I have only ever had problem with light leakage in the edges, not in the fabric material.
I believe 'blackout thermal shades' is what to look for.
You could use a different device in the swarm for measurement, but yeah it seems pretty quickly complicated! I have no idea as well how stable the latency is
You might think crisis of reproducibility means everyone is faking data. No, that does not mean that. There are many factors to a crisis of reproducibility. One is fake data. A bigger one is a lack of incentive and a lack of complete data gathering details on some metric. Generally even if there is a crisis is subjective.
There's also usually a mismatch between what older scientists and younger scientists think are the right approach to studying something.
But generally, science is pretty good. You're reading small slices and assuming it actually represents all of science. It doesn't. Please give me a better sense of what ground your ear is on. I don't think it's generally representative of most science fields. Science has a cool thing where you could post totally fake data, but there are enough actors that also would question it if it's entirely unreproducible. Most issues are small nudges or selective data (e.g, retesting when data doesn't support your expectations), not blatant lies. The blatant lie stories you hear are not actually common and I'd love to hear where you think they are.
> Most issues are small nudges or selective data (e.g, retesting when data doesn't support your expectations), not blatant lies.
Yeah you missed it. When you do small nudges or selectively report data that's even worse than faking data. Not all villains twirl their mustaches. It's the ones that don't that are the most dangerous, these are the ones that are going to suck time and effort away from the collective endeavour the worst. Everyone knows that leclair can't do synthesis. But how certain are we that Phil Baran's Xenon oxidation really worked?
The protestors and editorial writers were typically not arrested for breaking laws. Typically there are some rules on protests, and when they are not followed then police are free to arrest people.
These people are part of the fabric of free speech that adds value to America. It's messier to live in a country like that, but it stops crazy authoritarian bubbles. I think it's slower at times, but leads to a better outcome.
Many American friends I know don't have the same family history surrounding governments like the Nazis, ussr and CCP. These things are worth protecting, and by the time you realize it -- you're too late.
Firstly, the First Amendment legally speaking, applies to American citizens, not visitors on a visa.
Secondly, there's big difference between free speech (as in saying what you want openly), and congregating to occupying public or private spaces to generate protests, be loud, obnoxious, block foot traffic, cause litter, incite to violence etc.
Your speech is free as long as it doesn't inconvenience others. Can I come outside your house, occupy the sidewalk and shout in a bullhorn my political opinions at your window 24/7? No? Why is that? It's just my free speech bro. You see how free speech works?
reply