Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

This is not a place of honor

wipp.energy.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 287 posts

Re: This is not a place of honor

#271

Post by imbeau »

ctdonath wrote: post #253
Zikes wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A most clever ruse, to be sure.

To what end? Tremendous effort for no purpose but to intrigue? Kinda like building an enormous underground labyrinth then filling it with sand, just to get a giggle at how much people will do (long after you're dead) to find the presumed hidden treasure that isn't there.

It seems far more logical at this point that the Oak Island sinkhole is a result of natural phenomena and rumors / myths. I'm highly skeptical that there is anything at the bottom of the pit.

Re: This is not a place of honor

#272

Post by Terr_ »

rev_bird wrote: post #254
Terr_ wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and the only ones to meaningfully modify it. The first oxygen-excreting algae may have a prior claim...

I'm not sure this is relevant. I mean, yes, they most certainly changed the planet itself, but it wasn't really to benefit themselves, was it? We build skyscrapers and Howitzers for intentional purposes, not because we excrete them.

> but it wasn't really to benefit themselves, was it?

Well, their descendants are pretty much everywhere you see something greenish, so it seems to have worked out.

> We build skyscrapers and Howitzers for intentional purposes, not because we excrete them.

We also emit pollution for intentional purposes. They might not be particularly noble purposes, but they're 100% intentional by each of humanity's individual parts.

I think you're confusing "the tools we use" versus "the ways we change the globe". Most of the worldwide changes we cause are not explicitly planned or built, but side-effects of the "metabolism" of our civilization.

Re: This is not a place of honor

#273

Post by ProAm »

VLM wrote: post #268
rev_bird wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Keep Earth hospitable" and "Colonize Mars" have very different goals, though. It would likely be humanity's crowning achievement to put a permanent outpost on another planet, but it would be, what, 15 people maybe? The other planet we're talking about has to support at least 7 billion.

I'm so old I remember we only supported 4 billion people. Even pessimistically over one human lifetime I bet that "15 people" turns into at least 30. You get gene pool and interbreeding issues with too small of a pool, then again you'd be amazed what you can store in liq nitrogen for a long time. Also looking at the temporary and limited mineral and energy requirements, the earth isn't going to support 7B or 9B or ev…

It's amazing to think the earth's population doubled between 1960 and 2000

Re: This is not a place of honor

#274

Post by mjevans »

cloakandswagger wrote: post #99
samplonius wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The plan in the US was to enrich waste in breeder reactors, mix in some fresh fuel, and re-use it. It was the nuclear fuel cycle. Lots of resources on the technology. There were two problems. The use of breeder reactors had some proliferation concerns: they can be used to make warheads. Not a big deal in the US, as the US can already make warheads, but harder if you want to export nuclear waste reprocessing to other…

This is something I've always wondered about, especially when confronted by environmentalist camps that oppose nuclear power. Nuclear fuel recycling seems totally viable, and I imagine nuclear "waste" could be reprocessed and used for as long as there are fissionable products left in it. At which point it would pose minimal danger and save us a boatload on 10,000 year warning signs.

It's viable in all ways except political.

People are scared by the phrase 'breeder reactor'; which is poor marketing, calling it a 'waste reduction reactor' is slightly longer, but also more accurately describes what it does and sounds a LOT better.

I think it may have been a result of Fukushima, but I gained an interest in the topic and spent a few tens of hours researching. A proper waste reduction reactor produces three categories of radioactive material.

* Stuff that is so crazy hot it'll cool off in a 'short' period of time.

* Stuff that is good for use in reactors (a subset of the above).

* Stuff that will take a LONG time to decay; which means that it is active, but very very slowly emitting.

Re: This is not a place of honor

#275

Post by ktRolster »

felipeerias wrote: post #173
tinco wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not thinking on the 10.000 year timescale. So you hide it, after 1000 years someone starts digging there and finds it anyway, they see the messages and stop, and then the site is left unhidden for the next 9000 years, what should it look like? Also even if poisoning people was ethical, how would the poison last 10,000 years? And how would you prevent people from using the poison as the potent weapon it clearly…

We still haven't opened the tomb of the first emperor of China, which has been closed for more than two millennia. One of the main reasons is the presence of enormous amounts of mercury. Whole rivers of it, according to tradition. There's your poison.

I would enter it.

Re: This is not a place of honor

#276

Post by ktRolster »

felipeerias wrote: post #173
tinco wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not thinking on the 10.000 year timescale. So you hide it, after 1000 years someone starts digging there and finds it anyway, they see the messages and stop, and then the site is left unhidden for the next 9000 years, what should it look like? Also even if poisoning people was ethical, how would the poison last 10,000 years? And how would you prevent people from using the poison as the potent weapon it clearly…

We still haven't opened the tomb of the first emperor of China, which has been closed for more than two millennia. One of the main reasons is the presence of enormous amounts of mercury. Whole rivers of it, according to tradition. There's your poison.

I would enter it. (And he wasn't the first emperor. He was the first emperor of the Qin dynasty)

Re: This is not a place of honor

#277

Post by ktRolster »

dsl wrote: post #244
vectorjohn wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not nuclear waste.

Lets say tomorrow we figure out how to drill down and tap the geothermal from the core of the planet. Pretty much overnight the coal, gas, and nuclear industries become obsolete. Nobody will be continuing studies in the field of nuclear. Knowledge will be lost. Heck, 5,000 after the pyramids were built we still don't know how.

Pretty much overnight the coal, gas, and nuclear industries become obsolete.

Unless you want to drive a car or fly a plane, then gas will still be important.

Re: This is not a place of honor

#278

Post by EdHominem »

jackhack wrote: post #270
EdHominem wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably just a lie. No effort. There are layers of wood, etc, but they're probably just laid down by natural causes over the millennia instead of being a constructed building.

"layers of wood, etc" doesn't do justice to what is in place there: http://www.activemind.com/Mysterious/topics/oakisland/story.... Flagstones, layers of heavy timbers every 10 feet, a stone with carved glyphs at 90 feet, oak chests with coins, a sideways booby-trap well, Layers of blue clay at 130 and 160 feet, a cofferdam, and artifacts dating back 200+ years. This strikes me as far, far more than an elaborate pran…

Or, the layers of timbers are trees felled in the same 100y storms, etc.

The flooding tunnel is likely just a normal geological feature, not some super-clever drift tunneling technique.

The stone is likely a fraud. Who would place a cryptic sign 90 feet down, telling themselves (in secret writing) to keep digging? Wouldn't they presumably know that they hadn't reached their treasure yet? Wouldn't they be more likely to place an innocuous sign on the surface, such as a gravestone? It's more likely a way to con investors out of further funds.

It's probably nothing but a rumor.

Re: This is not a place of honor

#280

Post by refurb »

bronson wrote: post #213
refurb wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of metals can be converted into insoluble, inert minerals that have low-to-no toxicity. Mercury can be converted to mercury (II) sulfide which is insoluble in water and has no vapor pressure.[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_sulfide

Except when you heat it. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2755212/ Also, cost must be a factor. Turning materials back into ore is extremely expensive.

Well I guess nothing is truly non-toxic. If you heat water high enough it could create hydrogen and suffocate you.
Post reply on HN