Strange that they don't flip the small boat that's hanging to the side: outboard engines (especially if they are 4 stroke) don't like being not upright. Seems it would be fairly easy to hang it so it could swing?
A ship that flips 90 degrees for precise scientific measurements
51–60 of 77 posts
Re: A ship that flips 90 degrees for precise scientific measurements
#52The stresses on that hull when it is at the 45 degree point during a flip must be immense.
Hmmm...I'm not so sure they are exceptional. The upper section is rather light; no heavy machinery like an engine, no heavy tanks like fuel oil. They'd likely only flip during favorable sea conditions so the accelerations are kept to a minimum. And once the spar bit is submerged some meters the influence of surface waves will be reduced. Edit: the bending stresses when its being towed horizontally could be quite larg…
I linked the Scripps website in a couple other comments, the technical diagrams of the ship show "concrete ballast" in the upper section.
I would guess to reduce roll when it is horizontal.
Re: A ship that flips 90 degrees for precise scientific measurements
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why are you using RD-to-GDP ratios? In 1980, US nominal GDP was USD 2.863 trillion. Today it is USD 18.625, which gives out an average growth rate of 5.34% and thus an 650% increase over 36 years. Real growth over the same period is around 2.69%, which gives out a 259% increase in real GDP, which is still way above a 45% decrease. In real terms, research budgets are actually 42.45% higher than what they were in 1980.…
Nominal dollars are a meaningless yardstick. Inflation is only slightly better, GDP on the other hand tends to compare better across time periods. There are 100 million more people in the US now vs 1980. Yet, we have fewer people doing fundamental research. Just because some numbers look better does not mean we are somehow actually doing more research. PS: GDP growth is also inflated when the same physical house is s…
Please do not focus on partitions the message, specially if there are readings which also address your concern: the real GDP figures were there from the beginning.
Now, do you mean that there are fewer researchers or that there are fewer researchers per unit of total population? Either way, you're wrong (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.SCIE.RD.P6?locati...).
Your postscript is also just wrong. Notice that GDP might be estimated by three different accounting approaches, all of which are mutually consistent. One of them is the net product approach, which takes the value produced by all economic activities/sectors liquid of their expenditures and sums all those up to get the GDP. So two things: first, if something isn't sold in a year, it isn't accounted for in the GDP for that year; second, activities which have no net product have zero impact on GDP. Trade is defined as having zero net product for national accounts purposes, so any sort of capital gains of the sort you're describing has no impact on GDP. It merely shuffles money and assets between hands.
Re: A ship that flips 90 degrees for precise scientific measurements
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
But we say wages are "stagnant" when really "wages continue to shrink" would be more accurate.
Mostly because when inflation ajusted they are in fact stagnant[1] That is to say, all of the profits from technology and automation in the last 40 years or so have gone to the owners of capital. How you interpret this or propose to 'solve' I won't comment on. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_wages
It's closer to 50 years than 40--since about 1970.
I'd say it's the capital-owners' problem to solve, since everyone else can still afford to buy/build weapons. They may sometimes forget that the veneer of civilization is paper thin, when their veneer has gold leaf on top of it.
Re: A ship that flips 90 degrees for precise scientific measurements
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nominal dollars are a meaningless yardstick. Inflation is only slightly better, GDP on the other hand tends to compare better across time periods. There are 100 million more people in the US now vs 1980. Yet, we have fewer people doing fundamental research. Just because some numbers look better does not mean we are somehow actually doing more research. PS: GDP growth is also inflated when the same physical house is s…
Please do not focus on partitions the message, specially if there are readings which also address your concern: the real GDP figures were there from the beginning. Now, do you mean that there are fewer researchers or that there are fewer researchers per unit of total population? Either way, you're wrong ( http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.SCIE.RD.P6?locati... ). Your postscript is also just wrong. Notice tha…
If you produced an identical house in Arlington VA in 1950 vs 2016 the 2016 version would be worth more above the inflation rate. It's still a new thing so it counts for GDP it also adds more to GDP without somehow actually being better.
And yes new housing is a significant share of US GDP.
PS: I specially said fundamental research as government funding covers a wide range of R&D.
Re: A ship that flips 90 degrees for precise scientific measurements
#56The article didn't address it so I'll just ask: why? Why do you need to build a flipping (no pun intended) ship? Couldn't they have just as easily built a tall floating rig that could be dragged by the same tugboat? Why do they even need to change to boat form? Can't they tug it when it's vertical? Drilling platforms are stable floating structures aren't they? They consist of a stable floating upper platform.
> Couldn't they have just as easily built a tall floating rig that could be dragged by the same tugboat? Why do they even need to change to boat form? Can't they tug it when it's vertical? Gigantic drag, low stability, and inability to enter ports and harbours when you have a 100ft draft. > Drilling platforms are stable floating structures aren't they? They consist of a stable floating upper platform. "Truss and spar…
(or about 5 million current adjusted for inflation, 2 orders of magnitude below a semi-submersible platform)
Re: A ship that flips 90 degrees for precise scientific measurements
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please do not focus on partitions the message, specially if there are readings which also address your concern: the real GDP figures were there from the beginning. Now, do you mean that there are fewer researchers or that there are fewer researchers per unit of total population? Either way, you're wrong ( http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.SCIE.RD.P6?locati... ). Your postscript is also just wrong. Notice tha…
If you produced an identical house in Arlington VA in 1950 vs 2016 the 2016 version would be worth more above the inflation rate. It's still a new thing so it counts for GDP it also adds more to GDP without somehow actually being better. And yes new housing is a significant share of US GDP. PS: I specially said fundamental research as government funding covers a wide range of R&D.
[deleted]
Re: A ship that flips 90 degrees for precise scientific measurements
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
They say this thing is stable in 30 foot seas. 300 feet of the ship is underwater. I don't think you could match that with buoys.
In the vertical configuration it is described as a buoy: https://scripps.ucsd.edu/ships/flip
Technically it becomes a type of buoy known as a spar buoy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spar_buoy
The surface wave motion decreases with depth, so having so much mass deep under water makes for a very stable platform.
Re: A ship that flips 90 degrees for precise scientific measurements
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I watch things floating in water, objects below the water seem to move back and forth with the movement of the water, as if the object and the water were the same, but things that are partially in the water, they seem to "ride" the water and shift much more slowly. Based on that, my guess is either surface tension, or the fact that an object that floats on top of a medium is much less dense than one that floats…
Here's a gif of water particle movement that's happening in an ocean wave (in deep water; it gets weirder if it's shallow). http://funnel.sfsu.edu/courses/gm309/images/Owave.gif Essentially, motion starts with wind. Energy propagates downwards into the water column resulting in the circular orbitals (you see this if you float in the (deep) ocean and you bob up and down in a circle but you don't really go anywhere). B…
I'd expect a stationary submarine to be much more suceptible to rolling? A raised tower or other non-symmetrical features might also cause a bobbing motion in the roll.
I'd also expect the submarine to have to adjust its ballast tanks in order to maintain a level buoyancy.
When a submarine is moving at cruise speed these things can easily be compensated for by the fins and rudders, but the motors will neccesarily make noise. Heck, even moving through the water (instead of floating with the current) may create undesirable artifacts.
Re: A ship that flips 90 degrees for precise scientific measurements
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
But that's just for Federal R&D spending. Worldbank and the OECD paint a much less bleak picture: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GB.XPD.RSDV.GD.ZS?locati... https://data.oecd.org/rd/gross-domestic-spending-on-r-d.htm These data sets include all forms of R&D spending, not just federally funded ones: "Gross domestic spending on R&D is defined as the total expenditure (current and capital) on R&D carried out by all…
R&D is misleading in this context. McDonalds's does R&D when it's designing it's new menu, but that's does not result in long term economic gain like say transistor research does. Generally, what matters is fundamental research not development as building ever better vacuum tubes ended up being mostly pointless.
Either we count R&D or we don't. There are mountains of articles written on wasteful government R&D.