CaptainPanic

Good question. I don't think we actually have gone much further than the groups of a hundred or so. How many people do you interact with on a regular basis? I bet the number comes close that about a hundred. Perhaps two hundred.

! Moderator Note eric555, The large majority of your posts do not make sense. We already kindly requested you before to start making some sense. Our forum rules say you should stay on topic. You don't seem to have any topic, so I interpret that as a violation of the rule. Also, our etiquette suggests the following: "When you reply, try to make as much sense as possible." You break the rule, and you fail to follow the etiquette. Thread closed.

paulhorth, thanks for an excellent post. I feel pretty bad that I hadn't written these warnings myself. I should have. At least our do-it-yourself engineer included a relief valve.

Doomsday is quite literally a single day when the world as we know it is destroyed. Apart from a big rock from space (I guess that's why you choose to say "24 years"?), or one of those mega-mega-mega-disasters that the Discovery Channel / National geographic have some "documentaries" about, that's unlikely to happen. And given the frequency of those disasters, it's not something that we should worry about. The title of this thread however suggests some other issues. Global issues, caused by ourselves (humans). And that's a whole different story. Those are indeed urgent, and something to worry about, but they are slower processes, and the problems caused by them will not wipe out a civilization in a single day. Population growth and our sources for energy are probably the most urgent things. I do not think that we are doing enough to prevent any problems, and indeed these might cause (eventually) civilizations to fall. But I just wouldn't call that "doomsday". It's more like the Roman empire came to an end. It's a succession of poor decisions and relatively small calamities.

That does not make any sense to me. Could you explain what that means? And yes, I looked up what Paulding Light (a light: some people think it's ghosts, but Michigan Tech students were able to recreate it with car headlights). Also, I looked up where Watersmeet is. But I really do not understand why it is relevant for this thread. Please explain, and please remember our forum rules that your posts must be on topic. Thanks.

! Moderator Note Thread closed because it has gone off topic too many times now. Multiple people went off topic.

Well, I would guess that both the off shore / marine industry and the renewable industry are going to grow. And when it comes to off-shore wind energy, they have a big overlap. I would guess that any engineering study will start with the same maths/physics background in your 1st year. Then you will specialize. But the sub sea study sounds an awful lot like a wet version of normal mechanical engineering. So, since they seem so much alike, I cannot advise you. Also, I don't think you can go really wrong. My only piece of advice: start broad, and specialize later. But that's an opinion, which you can choose to ignore if you like.

Those who kicked Hitler's ass in WWII have all my respect. But that was a different American military, different government and a different generation. The way I see it, the current American military (esp. during the Bush administration) dragged us into wars, instead of helping us end them. So... you only detect a dislike of 21st century American imperialism, but still loads of respect of the liberators in WWII. But the mountain of credits earned in WWII with the Europeans will run out at some point. The USA has been cashing in those credits for well over a decade now. Europeans (also the Dutch) are helping you guys out this time, in Afghanistan and Iraq. That's not our conflict... but we're still there to help out, because we're allies. But don't give me the "we helped you in WWII, so you're forever in our debt" kind of talk. That may have worked with my grandparents, but it's too long ago now. That debt has been repaid, both financially and morally. I disapprove of your choice of words. I tried to clearly explain why I used the words I used, and I provided multiple links to back up my claim. To call that "bitching" is uncalled for.

Weird. The Welsh do. The logical conclusion is that the Welsh are, contrary to popular belief, apparently not aliens. Sorry to be off topic by being on a topic. In this thread, you're only on topic when you're not. But I am. So, I am sorry. Also, if that makes sense, then I apologise some more. Because you're not supposed to make sense in this thread, and instead write down whatever goes on inside your head. I'm not sure I do make sense, but just in case, let's make sure I don't. Get it? No? Good. Brains.

What is "sub sea"? Is that something like nautical engineering / marine engineering? (which is a sub-section of mechanical engineering)?

Where does the oxygen go? Ore is an oxidized metal (iron ore = iron + oxygen). You can only turn it into iron/steel when you get rid of the oxygen. As far as I know, you need cokes or charcoal (essentially carbon) for that. In short: the cokes in a blast furnace are added for 2 reasons: heat, and to react with the oxygen (to form CO2). Only heat is not enough.

Not really... We can start threads if we like. We just don't moderate those threads where we participate in the discussion.

I can claim that if you drop a bowling ball from 10 meters, it will hit the ground in 1 second. Then you can say: "I don't believe you, show me". Then I would show you. And we measure with a stopwatch how long it takes. And then we would know if I am right or wrong. Science means that you must be able to show something, if someone says: "I don't believe you". Here, in this thread, I say: "I don't believe you, show me." So, now you must show me. What I want to know is, how are you even going to show me that the universe would contract again?

Let's put the original posts in a row, because you're not answering my point. You seem to deliberately avoid it actually. So, did GW Bush not sign the The Hague Invasion Act, which authorizes the invasion of MY country (the Netherlands) by any means necessary, without even approval of congress, if we would try a US soldier at a court of human rights? Human Rights, FFS! Not some Guantanamo Bay prison of torture, but a human rights court. It's not the same. Not to mention my interpretation of human rights are not taken well by some people, as I see human rights as only that which is percieved as a right to the one who holds the most power. And I know that some see human rights as inalienable and God given(for lack of a better term), and not as something that is given by another human. Hence the one who holds the power to give such a right. But I think that is a little off topic. But you were talking about international treaties, and now you switch to explain your personal views? Personal views are not relevant when you're talking about international treaties. You said you don't use military intimidation to go against international treaties. I say you do, and I gave an example. And not just any treaty, but the human rights treaties. And then your defense against my example is that personally you don't really agree with the human rights anyway. That's not relevant. Interestingly, this thread is supposed to talk about ethics and morals, yet you have the attitude of a colonist: Business before ethics. Slavery is also very profitable. Slavery can also be in a country's best interest. People decided to walk away from that.

True. More experience is always better. And if you pay for your own education, more experience is also very expensive. I am not familiar with the UK education system, so I can't answer your more detailed questions.

Keep him at the bottom for how long? Long enough to drown, or long enough to stay there forever? When a human dies, you swell up. Gut bacteria will produce methane, and a body becomes a bit of a balloon. So, while you may initially sink, you can become buoyant even if you're dead for a while. 15 kg will certainly sink a normal person. Depending on body fat, and how much air he breathes in, much less (or no weight at all) might be sufficient. To stay down, I have no clue. It's difficult to commit a perfect crime.

My personal opinion (note: this is really an opinion, not a fact): Go straight into Mechanical engineering. It's a well-known degree, and many employers will understand what it means that you can do. A mechanical engineering degree will typically cover quite a few topics of that list you showed already... and you will be qualified for a huge amount of jobs. And once you graduate, and you get a job, your new employer is likely to send you straight back to school, to learn the details of that particular industry (expenses paid by the company). Or, you just learn on the job. So, if you work for a geothermal company, you will enter such a company as an all-round mechanical engineer (junior), and you will learn the details of geothermal engineering on the job. Sounds weird perhaps, but it's very normal. So, in summary, if you get a job in a company that works on renewables, you will probably get your "renewables course" anyway... but instead of paying for it yourself, the company will pay you to learn.

It was not clear to me at all what you wanted to discuss, and it sounded more that you were just writing down that you think the USA, and its military, are very very awesome. So, I decided to reply to that. The next time, it would help if you clearly state what you want to discuss.

Yes, there is a bright future for wind power. Yes, mechanical engineering is the right study for wind power, although aerospace engineering is useful too (aerodynamics, you know). Both are pretty awesome studies that allow you to do a lot more than just design wind turbines - in case you change your mind during your study. And the job market (in general) is good too, for both types of study.. Not sure how useful a general study regarding renewables is though. What do you learn in such a study?

Nonsense. You do. You seek that foreign governments listen to the US, and that their economies are controlled by the US. You invade, then you put a puppet government in the country, and you're done. There are dozens of examples of this. So, while you are smart enough to not to want to occupy countries, you definitely want to conquer - economically.

But then you get radioactive molten ore, which is like radioactive molten rock. You still do not get a not metal.

So, as I said, I understand that the US military or Pentagon creates propaganda. I just prefer not to see any of it. I am not in the US military. I am not even in the US. I would prefer a more objective analysis of the military, or none at all. Really? So, did GW Bush not sign the The Hague Invasion Act, which authorizes the invasion of MY country (the Netherlands) by any means necessary, without even approval of congress, if we would try a US soldier at a court of human rights? Human Rights, FFS! Not some Guantanamo Bay prison of torture, but a human rights court. How is ignoring human rights, and then signing an act that authorizes violence against a civilized country like the Netherlands not exactly what you say the US does not do?

If that is a triangle (in other words: if your acceleration is constant) then the 2nd blue line crosses the t-axis at t=21 s. It's a simple extrapolation of the slope: For the decelleration, using your picture as input: [math]v(t) = 40 - \frac{(40-30)}{(12-9)}\cdot{(t-9)}=40 - \frac{10}{3}\cdot{(t-9)}[/math] So, that gives [math]v = 0[/math] at [math]t = 21[/math] However, if your question is: "Calculate the value of t, if the average speed for the t seconds is 22m/s", we have a problem. Because if the acceleration is constant, and the top speed is 40 m/s, then the average speed should logically be 20 m/s... not 22 m/s. So, that would imply that your picture is wrong (it's not a triangle, but some other kind of graph, and the lines should probably not be straight). Also, it means we do not have enough information to solve this problem.

No. cheese is more than just a smell. You can make a bad smell from wine, but not cheese. If you have grapes, it's better to feed the grapes to the goat, then milk the goat and make cheese.

It starts by making lots of high quality posts. Also, it may help if you know that Cap'n Refsmmat likes cookies.