AGW: atmospheric physics

[mamooth]

Guess she thinks there is no programming on an IC chip....any old chip will do. Take it off the assembly line...plug it in and you have control over a reactor.

Wow. That's so stupid, I don't even know where to begin. It's like claiming you can plug an IC into a Model T and have control over it.

 

[SSDD]

I would write "QED", but I am sure you will try to wriggle and squirm out of something even so obvious as this!
.

I'm not going to argue the numbers beyond stating that actually getting all of the carbon sequestered in the earth into the atmosphere would be quite impossible. I seriously doubt that we could get the atmospheric CO2 even up to its natural high of some 5000 ppm which, by the way, didn't start any sort of run away global warming.

Now, how about you show me a single bit of hard, observed evidence for backradiation which is the basis for the greenhouse effet.

 

[mamooth]

From what I know those of the 60's and there abouts were run by analog systems, today most are run by computers.

Being that, inexplicably, the Navy does not have me on their mailing list for confidential material, I can not tell you the state of the art for 2013.

However, I can tell you that in 1990, everything was analog and hardwired logic, and that I've read nothing indicating any change there.

 

[polarbear]

Guess she thinks there is no programming on an IC chip....any old chip will do. Take it off the assembly line...plug it in and you have control over a reactor.

Wow. That's so stupid, I don't even know where to begin. It's like claiming you can plug an IC into a Model T and have control over it.

Unbelievable stupidity..there is almost nothing left that uses linear IC`s any more. Even vintage modem IC`s have been programmable for over 20 years (using the Hayes command set)...In a Motorola or Plessis IC book you can`t even find any more chips that aren`t EPROMS. The times where it took more than one IC to make a simple programmable amp are over...for decades IC`s have become integrated where one IC can accept analog data, convert it to digital and even have integrated output voltage buffers that step up from CMOS signals to DC Volts & Amps powerful enough to drive stepping motors to turn valves to modulate steam turbines. You can`t even find a car built after 1998 any more that does not run on a (programmable) ECM.
Take an old VCR apart and backtrack on the circuit board where the photo sensitive transistor is. It goes into 1 single IC which decodes the remote IR square pulse train and has all the pin-outs to change all the settings on the rest of the IC`s
Even toasters, microwave ovens and washing machines are programmable using Java.
IC`s are so integrated and RELIABLE..but also so compact that most Oscilloscope probe tips are too huge to monitor pin-out signals or solder any wires to it.
That`s why yes also on nuclear reactor control circuitry these IC pin-outs go via ribbons to the screen display..not through copper wires to old fashioned analog gauges...since over 2 DECADES

 

[mamooth]

That's nice. You still can't plug an IC into a model T and take control over it, nor can you plug one into a Navy reactor and take control over it.

 

[depotoo]

From what I know those of the 60's and there abouts were run by analog systems, today most are run by computers.

Being that, inexplicably, the Navy does not have me on their mailing list for confidential material, I can not tell you the state of the art for 2013.

However, I can tell you that in 1990, everything was analog and hardwired logic, and that I've read nothing indicating any change there.

the point could be that maybe things have changed yet you were not willing to admit to that. What ship were you on in 1990?

 

[polarbear]

They have quite deliberately denied patent facts -- or not even acknowledged them. They have just repeated foolishness over and over again.

Moreover, for the past few pages, they have deliberately posted many, many photos which have nothing to do with the topic of the thread. They have deliberately wasted the memory storage space of this site, clogged up the pages, slowed down the loading time -- all, apparently, in an effort to make the pages unreadable and prevent reasoned discussion.

.

Exactly that.

I hadn't expected that SSDD was ever going to have the cojones to admit that he'd been completely conned by his sources when it comes to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, but I had thought the discussion might come back to something of substance.

Instead, we get ploarbear spamming the thread with anything and everything he can think of to ensure no meaningful debate is possible, while SSDD runs around celebrating his victory over physics.

According to your "second law of thermodynamics" you can hold a candle next to a propane bunsen burner and make it hot enough to melt steel...with the additional photons from the candle.
Why don`t you tell all the professional engineers who don`t understand thermodynamics as well as you do how it should be done

 

[mamooth]

the point could be that maybe things have changed yet you were not willing to admit to that.

Where on earth do you get such a notion? I know things could have changed. However, everything I read shows no change by the early 2000's.

The point of this is PolarBear and Westwall are accusing me of lying, based on nothing except the fact that their vendetta compels them to call me a liar. Whether or not something changed in 2010 has nothing to do with the truth of my statements. Those two have gotten all the facts wrong, I've gotten all the facts correct, and thus it's pretty clear who's telling the truth and who's spouting BS.

What ship were you on in 1990?

USS California, CGN-36, based out of NAS Alameda (San Francisco Bay). I actually left in 1989, but my roommates were still onboard until I moved out in 1990.

 

[westwall]

NOBODY is using hardwired logic any more since pre 1960!

No. You're just wrong. Totally and laughably wrong.

But please, inform us which computers were running this famous control software control in 1960.

And here's a thought experiment.

What happens when a computer is hit with an EMP? (Hint: It's not good)

What happens when magamp is hit with an EMP? (Hint: Nothing)

Computers are fragile. Hardwired controls are not. So why would the navy use a fragile system, when the tough system works just fine?

Show me something REAL...

HELLO? THIS IS THE INTERNET.

No matter what I put up, you'd simply claim it was photoshopped, or that it wasn't me. So what's the point?

It's real easy to tell if a photo is real or not mammy old girl. You clowns aren't capable of making a photoshopped image that couldn't be discerned in seconds so by all means please post a picture of whatever you have.

It has been pretty funny watching you flail away though. So, you play computer games and that makes you an expert on things....good to know.

 

[westwall]

The Discomfort of Thought: Groton, CT, 11 Sept 2001

A story from a submarine nuclear officer about getting the boat underway after the 9/11 attacks. Very detailed, and not a peep about any software.


USS Thresher (SSN-593) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The loss of Thresher in 1963. Details of what happened in the engine room, and again, no mention of software.


Prospective Executive Officer Reactor Department Orientation – Pre-Naval Reactors Command Course (2004)
http://www.public.navy.mil/bupers-n...lers/Documents/CVN PXO PQS Underway Guide.doc

A list of the many things the prospective XO must learn concerning the nuclear plant, including a list of documentation. There is no software or manuals for it on the list.


2190 Days: My Navy Adventure - Daniel Bil - Google Books

A book from an enlisted sailor. Lots of talk about operating the reactors manually, yet again, not a word anywhere concerning this mysterious control software.


PolarBear, you seem to be the only human on planet earth claiming that Navy nuclear plants have been controlled by software since 1960. Stop digging in deeper, and just admit you made a mistake.

You've lost mammy old girl you really have....

 

[westwall]

Guess she thinks there is no programming on an IC chip....any old chip will do. Take it off the assembly line...plug it in and you have control over a reactor.

Wow. That's so stupid, I don't even know where to begin. It's like claiming you can plug an IC into a Model T and have control over it.

You are correct...you don't KNOW.......anything.....not one thing....

 

[depotoo]

the point could be that maybe things have changed yet you were not willing to admit to that.

Where on earth do you get such a notion? I know things could have changed. However, everything I read shows no change by the early 2000's.

The point of this is PolarBear and Westwall are accusing me of lying, based on nothing except the fact that their vendetta compels them to call me a liar. Whether or not something changed in 2010 has nothing to do with the truth of my statements. Those two have gotten all the facts wrong, I've gotten all the facts correct, and thus it's pretty clear who's telling the truth and who's spouting BS.

What ship were you on in 1990?

USS California, CGN-36, based out of NAS Alameda (San Francisco Bay). I actually left in 1989, but my roommates were still onboard until I moved out in 1990.

In April of 1990 the reactors were changed on the ship to D2G's as well as in 1994 it had another upgrade to its propulsion plant, but since the crew number were not reduced and one of the reasons for its being decommissioned. I suspect it possibly still had analog systems on board. (don't know for certain) I do know that the new reactors now need less than 400 crew onboard with the computerized systems. It was then de-commissioned in 1999.

Actually todays ships are computerized and the older ships were not.
Dates were important here for all to verify rather than arguing with one another over it.
You did make a comment that they would not be computerized due to more risks. You were incorrect in that.

 

[westwall]

From what I know those of the 60's and there abouts were run by analog systems, today most are run by computers.

Being that, inexplicably, the Navy does not have me on their mailing list for confidential material, I can not tell you the state of the art for 2013.

However, I can tell you that in 1990, everything was analog and hardwired logic, and that I've read nothing indicating any change there.

Yep, the US Navy is so primitive that while EVERY other country on the planet uses computers to run their reactors we are still stuck to the old switches and buttons

You really are a 'tard....


"Stuxnet, a computer virus that can infiltrate highly secure computers not connected to the Internet, a feat previously believed to be virtually impossible, entered the global political arena more than a year ago, in June 2010. The virus had attacked computers at Iran's Natanz nuclear facility, where scientists are enriching uranium, and manipulated the centrifuges to make them self-destruct. The attack penetrated into the heart of the Iranian nuclear program."



Mossad's Miracle Weapon: Stuxnet Virus Opens New Era of Cyber War - SPIEGEL ONLINE

 

[mamooth]

It's real easy to tell if a photo is real or not mammy old girl. You clowns aren't capable of making a photoshopped image that couldn't be discerned in seconds so by all means please post a picture of whatever you have.

Westwall, just as Obama doesn't humor the birfers, I don't humor my liar-stalkers.

After all, all of us know that whatever I would put up, you'd just lie and say it's a forgery. I hope you don't embarrass yourself by claiming otherwise.

 

[mamooth]

Yep, the US Navy is so primitive that while EVERY other country on the planet uses computers to run their reactors we are still stuck to the old switches and buttons

And Westwall now even fails to grasp the difference between a naval reactor and a land-based enrichment facility. It's the Westwall ideal stupidity law, that Westwall's stupid will expand to fill all available space.

Just why would the navy computerize something when there's no benefit to doing so, and many drawbacks?

And just what was this magical computer running the control software in 1960, as you all are claiming?

And just why can't a single one of you find any evidence for this control software, while I provided multiple examples showing it's not present?

 

[mamooth]

In April of 1990 the reactors were changed on the ship to D2G's

No, they were D2G from the start. They were just refueled in 1990, after lasting 20 years.

I do know that the new reactors now need less than 400 crew onboard with the computerized systems.

Where do you get the 400 number, and why does it mean anything? There are no nuclear cruisers in service, so there's nothing to compare the original crew size to, apples-to-apples.

Pinning the "computerization" theory solely on the crew size of a totally different ship looks like wishful thinking. Yes, automation reduces crew size, which is why the old battleships required such a big crew. And some things are being automated. But I see no evidence that it's the reactors being automated, and I showed the docs going up to 2004 showing it hadn't happened.

 

[numan]

NOBODY is using hardwired logic any more since pre 1960!

No. You're just wrong. Totally and laughably wrong.

In 1979, when I was visiting Fudan University in Shanghai, China, I remember seeing large, hardwired computers in the Computer Science Department.
,

 

[polarbear]

NOBODY is using hardwired logic any more since pre 1960!

No. You're just wrong. Totally and laughably wrong.

In 1979, when I was visiting Fudan University in Shanghai, China, I remember seeing large, hardwired computers in the Computer Science Department.
,

Your observation was correct. "Hard wired computers" are still being used to teach how the logic circuitry inside more complex IC`s works.
Unfortunately many computer science students today aren`t very interested.
That`s a shame I think and this is why the Chinese are gradually getting the upper hand in Computer technology. Their students with their "hard wired computers" as you called it have a better understanding how a flip-flop counter & memory element works, because they have to "bread board AND, NAND, OR, NOR, XOR gates to duplicate the functions that we all take for granted. Chinese Students also study the machine codes while our Students only learn the "higher" languages, such as C.
Knowing the hex-coded machine code instructions you can write whatever commands you want, often more powerful than the library functions of the "higher languages". Machine code instructions are very compact and over a 1000 times faster than the compiled versions, because the CPU does not have to look up which machine code sequence it should execute for a mnemonic if a > b then let x=x+1 .
Many of the high speed IC`s that do the analog to digital conversion run directly on machine language hex-codes which is stored on a permanent ROM on the same IC. The engineers that were schooled on these "hard wired computers" you have seen in China have the advantage. Most of the other programmers have no idea what the ALU on an Intel CPU has to execute to perform a simple division.
So I`m not all that surprised that Chinese hackers can write code sequences that go right by the firewalls of secure nets and the software engineers that designed them.
China exports cell phones, laptops etc,.. the entire array of digital gadgets we use today and even our military cyber security is unable to tell any more if there aren`t "sleeper codes" stored on the highly complex ICs.
Many of the IC`s that are in "Made in USA" electronic consumer goods are made in China (not in "Silicon Valley")...but you need a good magnifying glass to spot the markings on the chips.
See you can make some pretty sensible observations
Why aren`t you as sensible when it comes to AGW ?
P.S.
The physics courses that students take who study climatology are even more superficial than what some U`s teach in computer science

 

[polarbear]

the point could be that maybe things have changed yet you were not willing to admit to that.

Where on earth do you get such a notion? I know things could have changed. However, everything I read shows no change by the early 2000's.

The point of this is PolarBear and Westwall are accusing me of lying, based on nothing except the fact that their vendetta compels them to call me a liar. Whether or not something changed in 2010 has nothing to do with the truth of my statements. Those two have gotten all the facts wrong, I've gotten all the facts correct, and thus it's pretty clear who's telling the truth and who's spouting BS.

What ship were you on in 1990?

USS California, CGN-36, based out of NAS Alameda (San Francisco Bay). I actually left in 1989, but my roommates were still onboard until I moved out in 1990.

Actually it`s people like you who have a vendetta against fact checkers, also called skeptics, but called "deniers" by people like you who cheered every time when the left consensus media went on a vendetta to smear every scientist who did some IPCC fact checks.

Those two have gotten all the facts wrong, I've gotten all the facts correct,

Maybe you should do some fact checks.
Engineering has changed a lot since "the early 2000`s.

I know things could have changed. However, everything I read shows no change by the early 2000's.

The problem you have is that all you read are enviro-activist blogs
I made my living as an engineer and had to be up to date...unlike "climatologists" and their loyal following
I`m retired now but at least I still make the effort to inform myself and rather read stuff like this:
http://www.spiegel.de/video/testvideo-vom-passivradar-video-1221692.html
( Cassidian passive RADAR, using cell phone signals, digital TV or any other em from short wave to UHF all the way into the giga hertz range to pin point objects.
the military version is expected to be up and running by 2015..)
My guess is that it will be satellite based and revolutionize the current AWACS + render all the existing shrike missile technology as useless
The list of engineering innovations for the last 20 years is almost endless

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-far-away-mind-machine-integration

How Far Away Is Mind-Machine Integration?

 

[mamooth]

In 1979, when I was visiting Fudan University in Shanghai, China, I remember seeing large, hardwired computers in the Computer Science Department.
,

Just to be clear, I'm talking about hardwired logic, which is a different thing than a hardwired computer.

Examples:

Breaker trips -> ABT (automatic bus transfer) shifts to a different bus and restores power

Tank low alarm -> pump tripping off.

Reactor power increase alarm -> reactor SCRAM

Such logic chains can go 3 or 4 steps deep and get fairly complex, and they don't require software, any sort of digital logic or IC, or even a transistor. People tend to forget how we humans built very complex systems well before any computers came on the scene. The Germans built working ballistic missiles without using transistors. The logic of a working nuclear plant is easy in comparison to that.