RunFaps
Sabine
Sabine patreon

Science News Dec 21

🕑 Added 2022-12-21 16:00:05 +0000 UTC
Science News Dec 21

Comments

IMO, the issue is our system. We have an inherently corrupt system in which politicians must ask people for money and tell them what they want to hear. While coal companies donated to politicians to protect their interests so did individuals who were terrified of nuclear power and those interests aligned. The Three Mile Island incident occurred because poor training and a confusing UI (https://www.mindflowdesign.com/insights/user-centric-design-the-lessons-of-3-mile-island/). That the fast reactor program was shut down was due to the refusal of politicians to confront the irrational fear of nuclear because they would lose their job; They could have fixed the thermal reactor regulatory problems that lead to the incident and promoted the fast reactor as the thermal reactor's safer and more efficient replacement, but didn't because they were more interested in patronizing fear to keep their job.

So, I was wondering if the Argonne EBR II reactor was discontinued as a result of politics or public fear over nuclear power. This document https://www.ne.anl.gov/About/reactors/EBR2-NN-2004-2-2.pdf, explains that it was mostly timing and not, say, powerful senators being bribed by coal companies. At the time when the push from EBR II to EBR III would have happened, Three Mile Island and then Chernobyl killed the project's momentum. No respectable person in elected office could cast a vote in favor of any kind of nuclear power for a very long time. "If we had good, informed and concerned leadership," we would actually be on the metric system in the US and we would have a real socialized medical system. Jefferey, do you think it is just a matter of willful ignorance or do you think coal and oil bribery is the dominant player these days for why we haven't ramped up nuclear power, whether EBR II or other options?

That's exactly what I was thinking! They could have at least added some food coloring to make it not green.

I just recently saw some "dark photon" papers in my daily astro-ph email. Thankfully, Wikipedia had an entry so I could learn that they are yet another "plausible" invented particle that could explain dark matter, or, as one paper put it, "A dark photon is predicted by several well-motivated Standard Model extensions and UV completions." The papers looked at kinetic mixing models with regular photons and claimed that there might be X-ray or radio signals detectable by current observatories, depending on the environment, for example, around a black hole. Good luck to anyone wanting to insert yet another contributing factor to an accretion disk spectrum. Modelers already have both a thick hot disk component and a thin cold disk component, then they have to play with albedo, magnetic fields, and viscosity. The spectral data aren't currently good enough to distinguish these various models as they stand.

Armando Mistral

Ok, freaking out here. That green algae powder compressed into a tablet? Make it a 1"x1" flat square and you've got Soylent Green, man!!! This is how it all starts!

Rad Antonov

I missed the g-2, thanks for mentioning. It seemed like better QCD calculations could make that one go away, so I had given up the ghost there. Now I feel like it’s, help me neutrinos, you are my only hope 😂

Yes, I have seen it. It'll be in the newsletter and I'll briefly comment on it in the new year. Also another bucket of cold water on the g-2 anomaly.

Rad Antonov

For a change, there is particle physics news worth taking about this week, but it’s not the run of the mill PRL discussed in the episode. The big story in the field is a result from LHCb that came up snake eyes: https://home.cern/news/news/physics/lhcb-brings-leptons-line. There were a lot of people hoping, yours truly included, that b meson decay measurements would show a crack in the Standard Model, which would open the door to new physics. Preliminary indications were promising, but a more complete analysis slammed that door shut. Unfortunately, it probably slams the door on the LHC operating beyond the end of the decade, barring some miracle breakthrough.

Again, if we had good, informed and concerned leadership, we'd have developed a 2500 MW design of the EBR II because the integral fast reactor proved itself capable and save in 1986. Fusion could replace them if it ever becomes viable as a power source.

...OH.


More Creators