Nod2003

Winter is based off the earth’s axial tilt. The angular tilt shouldn’t be impacted by CO2 levels.

The ice would have to fall off solid ground to have any kind of global impact. Ice calving off a floating ice sheet only causes local effects as the mass of the ice is already accounted for by the ocean.

Honestly, all of these problems are tiny considering the sun is going to become a red giant and cook everything anyway. So far, I know of no effort by humanity to address the issue.

Thanks for the input QuantumT, but so far you really haven’t posted a single thing that relates to the actual question on the frequency of micrometeoroid impacts in interplanetary/interstellar space.

Of course, though detecting and evading a grain of sand while traveling at 50km/sec seems a bit beyond our capabilities.

I was thinking more along the lines of a Hyper-Velocity Whipple Shield than fighting Klingons.

How significant are the effects of micrometeoroid impacts on interplanetary and interstellar travel? The ISS does have some issues with these, but would the space in between planets have them at the same rate? Additionally, would a generational ship traveling to a star say 50 ly from here with current propulsion technology actually be able to remain intact without some kind of ablative armor or shielding, or would micrometeoroids eventually erode the hull til it breeches?

Cadmium is rarer. I don’t know battery design, so I don’t know how much cadmium is in a Ni-Cad battery.

Hmmm, sounds like producers would need to use some lower tech Ni-cad batteries or similar to make up the difference, with resulting lower efficiency. Either that or there would have to be fewer cars.

I think presidential elections seem to cost around $0.5-1 billion per major party. This one will probably break records and be higher.

The right, and especially Pres Trump, constantly are claiming media bias, supposedly supporting the left. Have there been any independent studies on whether that bias actually exists?

True, though still plenty of time for folks to declare candidacy. Election isn’t for another 20 months or so.

Out of curiosity, are any Democrats advocating removing those sections of wall which already exist?

So how is this wall/fence/barrier more or less immoral then any other wall/fence/barrier?

Nah, best odds of leaving with my shirt are my dry cleaning tickets

That’s not really how things work in the US at least, so you might try listing the actual experience you have rather than making up a title which might confuse hiring management.

Arguement seems to be a stretch on the commerce clause though unless Arizona tried to fence over a customs border crossing or something. Still leave a lot of other concerns if they tried building it. What about financing it for the federal government though?

What if it was a laser instead? Granted, keeping the beam from spreading really wide over distance would be a challenge, but you could get the spot to move along faster the light if you had a rotating laser source projecting the beam at a far enough distance. And technically I suppose, that no individual photons are exceeding c. Not sure if there would be a practical application though.

What if you built a really long pole in space, say 1,000,000 km. Then you attached one one of the pole to a massive motor that could rotate the pole at 3 rpm. That would result in the end of the pole moving at 314,000 km/sec, almost 5% faster then c. From an engineering standpoint, this is hugely far fetched. Maybe 2 poles with the motor in the center for balance. Course you would need to attach it to the moon or something for the motor to push against. And even a small amount of gravity would bend such a bar. We probably need to discover adamantium or something to prevent that. Never mind, this was a stupid idea and would never work.

Is there anything that would prevent a local or state government from building or financing a border barrier? Obviously within the confines of their state, county etc...

Are there any places that give odds of who will be victorious?

Not exactly an accurate cross section of the voting population on here is there.

You can’t disprove something like that. The way God is described, omnipotent etc... is by definition outside the bounds of what science can really test and measure.

Was the analysis conducted by the Democratic Party less simplistic somehow?

Nuclear waste disposal tends to be more a political issue then scientific. NIMBY means that any suggestion is going to be strongly opposed.