the_geth
the_geth t1_je6knrq wrote
About ultra-massive block holes like this one or TON 618 which is even bigger, at 66 billion solar masses:
Since there are so, so big and it would take ages to travel to their centers from the event horizon itself , would it be possible to be inside the event horizon in orbit?
For how long, in theory (I imagine that orbit wouldn't be stable)?
Last but not least, would you be able to see the singularity from there?
the_geth t1_jdwx7pi wrote
Reply to comment by DDWingert in Around 550 million years ago the earth's magnetic field almost collapsed, but then strengthened a few million years later. Scientists say this may have been due to the formation of the inner core. But why exactly would that cause the magnetic field to get stronger? by somethingX
>They cannot directly measure the magnetic field due to the location and extreme temperatures of materials in the core
... WHAT
We can absolutely measure Earth Magnetic field (and many more, distant or not). I do not understand this sentence, what am I missing?
the_geth t1_iyw8nz0 wrote
Reply to comment by ukezi in Why not use hydrogen and deuterium in fusion reaction rather than tritium and deuterium? by Curious_user4445
I see. It’s interesting this was not (until I hear it here) mentioned as a potential problem.
the_geth t1_iyw8h5l wrote
Reply to comment by NetworkLlama in Why not use hydrogen and deuterium in fusion reaction rather than tritium and deuterium? by Curious_user4445
Super interesting, thank you for the thoughtful answer!
the_geth t1_iyvg3in wrote
Reply to comment by NetworkLlama in Why not use hydrogen and deuterium in fusion reaction rather than tritium and deuterium? by Curious_user4445
Really? I read about everywhere that it’s easy to produce with the lithium blanket (including in a classical fission reactor if needed). The reason we don’t have much production is simply… that we don’t need it (or rather, that the amount we have is enough for our CURRENT use)
the_geth t1_is4ggkf wrote
Reply to comment by pseudopad in A breakthrough in electric vehicle battery design has enabled a 10-minute charge time for a typical EV battery. The record-breaking combination of a shorter charge time and more energy acquired for longer travel range was announced today by Wagamaga
We already have that in Europe, check Ionity stations
the_geth t1_je6roq1 wrote
Reply to comment by FlattopMaker in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
The long answer is long, but in short: No.
Google "carbon dioxide capture via air filters" for instance, and you will see that the problem lies in efficiency: You need a huge amount of energy to make a dent into what has been released already, and that energy is likely carbon intensive in the first place.
The scale is insane too: see here how they talk about a hypothetic future plant capturing 1 million ton of CO2 per year. It would still take 32 000 of those hypothetic plants to cancel out the world's CO2 emissions for 2021 (32 billion tons), not accounting for CO2 produced by the construction of those plants and most importantly not accounting for the CO2 produced by the energy needed to capture and store this CO2.
Also, those plants requires chemicals which may be a problem in itself.
It takes about 10Giga joules per ton of CO2 to treat and store the CO2.
So, based on the 32 billion tons of CO2 figure, it would take 320 billion gigajoules to treat all the CO2 emitted by other sources.
That's about ~89 000 terawatt-hours, which is about 3 to 4 times the total consumption of electricity of the entire world in a year.
So... nope.