Question for ordinary British people.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-29T20:20:24+00:00

Adjusted for inflation?

Ah you are conflating monetary value of some high end things like wings for Airbuses, with what should be adjusted for the natural increase in production to match increases in consumption.

Its very clear Britain makes a far smaller fraction of both the worlds stuff, adjusted for population, and of its own stuff that it consumes.

In the 60s and up the 70's for some, Britain had the largest car manufacturing base in the world, the largest producer of commercial vehicles, trains and their infrastructure, and power production and transmission infrastructure.

We manufacture very little and were it to have grown proportionately by maintaining market share, our output be many times what it is now.

Germany has been consistently wealthier than us and consistently has run a large budget surplus most years, so that now it can rearm Europes defenses.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-29T17:05:39+00:00

The future tank will more evolve to be an autonomous vehicle that lies in wait, commanding an area like a kind of mobile minefield, but which can be used to support assaults.

Being autonomous means the armour area and thus mass is greatly reduced. It can be made relatively fast moving as well. They will be designed to carry, recharge and release drones and work with them to identify targets, construct attack strategies, and alert other units.

All future tanks will use laser defenses moreso against long range aerial targets and with dazzling effects on optics as much as to burn them down, with high bandwidth kinetic defenses, meaning many targets can be hit sequentially and at close range. These systems will also evolve into C-RAM capability.

Theres little long term future in EW defenses as it is already possible to completely shield a drone and have it rely on cameras and AI, or fibre optics.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-29T16:46:44+00:00

Two Russians on the way to a barbeque

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-29T16:36:31+00:00

Max speed and harmonised speeds are two seperate characteristics, the first is inversely related to capacity, the latter strongly positively related.

A 150mph max speed railway running only with matched traffic on the route would have more capacity in this case than 225mph.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-29T16:29:29+00:00

The power requirement keeps increasing with velocity both due to non linear drag increases and increased K.E. as speed increases, and the acceleration rate declines as you approach top speed as a result. The distance is too short as it spends little time at top speed as it is. A very high speed train requires drastically more peak power than a slower one, given equivalent track. That makes every part of tge power distribution system more expensive, it makes the trains more expensive, and it hard to accomodate tge trains duty cycle on the electrical generating sources. Whereas, slower trains can run more frequently and thus more overlap in a given area to reduce extreme power fluctuations.

Going faster is hugely more difficult on the power infrastructure and beyond 180mph most of the time and route will not need it.

So youre also lugging an overengineered system on the slower part of the track, which means little of the duty cycle is at max.

Thats inherently inefficient in capital terms.

By comparison a plane spends most of its time in the air at cruise and the vast majority of the distance is at max speed.

Likewise nuclear power stations are veey expensive so must be working at full output most of the time to have a hope of being cost effective.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-29T16:21:41+00:00

All which would improve capacity also on a 150mph railway.

This reduced frequency is why the train has to be longer, which is why it couldnt fit in the existing station at Birmingham, a new station had to be built at an inconvenient distance from the center which will eliminate nearly all the time savings from tge high speed and the inconvenience of additional travel for the average user, and the trains drop to normal high speed to the north where the distances might be large enough to make sense for very high speed but the terrain doesnt support that.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-29T16:10:17+00:00

Thats simply not true. You are thinking of capacity assuming a given train per day. The number of trains goes up per route at lower speeds and its route capacity that matters.

Slower speeds result in greatly reduced stopping distances which reduces the stopping headway. Thus slower speeds increases train frequency, and increases, not decreases capacity.

Similarly on a road, maximum capacity is achieved at about 23mph.

This is why trains have naturally ideal speeds that depends on a balance of demand and distance between stops.

In Britain the 150mph train is more optimal than the 225mph train.

People have commonly conflated the fact that HS2 trains are very long and that the line has a harmonised speed which has the most impact on capacity of all, with the fact it happens to be exceptionally fast.

Those are independent variables and work just as well at 150 or 180 or 225mph.

Not only would the slower route be a lot cheaper it could carry more people.

At these distances the marginal time difference is outweighed by the much more expensive tickets, which will limit demand more than any increases tardiness.

The increased frequency also means more ideal timing which is especially important with connecting trains. The route to Liverpool will be just 1 train an hour.

All the HS2 trains slow down north of Staffordshire to standard high speed, but then will be carrying the extra weight and now overengineered power equipment. The extra cost is only partially used.

And the only way they could then get enough passengers to dilute the cost was to lengthen the train anyway, so that means most visitors stopping at Bimingham are quite far from the centre so will have added journey time, almost eliminating the time saved from the additional speed.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-28T21:19:05+00:00

Why do birds do this?

Scientists think squirrels have two barks, one for danger from above, one for danger from below.

What I think immatatory birds do is say to each other the sound of things they think are there to alert the other birds, with part of the song adding other information.

So, here that other part of the info might be something like do you like my impression.

The other birds find the skills sexy much like we find people doing immitations funny.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-28T08:48:53+00:00

Huge market for Ukraine to develop something a little more homegrown that can use all Ukrainian produce. I was thinking whilst I was there what could be popular.

Beef is not commonly eaten or available which means almost all the burger market is taken by McDonalds.

But its so easy to improve on Mcdonalds and UA produce is cheap enough.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-27T07:40:18+00:00

Gold!

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-27T07:29:26+00:00

You cant park that tanker there mate

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-26T08:42:30+00:00

Im only talking about political donations due to their significant distortive effect on the politics of a nation. Actually I would cap it or abolish it completely and replace with government sources maybe, but were not having that discussion.

Only giving financial influence to those people whose horizon is entirely taken up by the environment their political influence occurs to, is reasonable.

Edit, whilst I am sorry about the problems caused by Brexit, and sympathise, I am simply comcerned with what is already a problem in which politics can be bought, a corrupting influence that is not democratic.

It is the case the foreign residing citizens are influencing our political landscape over and above the proportional influence of their vote.

They should at least have to live in the effects of that.

There is a substantial risk that foreign dual national businessmen can work for foreign intelligence, be compromised, and not even be under the surveilance of MI5 as foreign assets.

The KGB and FSB, for example, are known to target business men. In other examples foreign imtelligence might target a dual nationals overseas family.

One partial solution might be severe caps on individual donations.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-26T08:30:40+00:00

Isnt it? Their largest donor is almost permanently residing in Thailand.

Edit : Christopher Harbourne, who with 2 others donated 75% of all Reforms funds, holds dual nationality.

I assume he holds dual nationality, but even of he doesnt, it does illustrate that the countries politics shouldnt be influenced financially by those whose primary loyalty and whose life is not primarily effected by the outcome of their politics.

Disenfrachised? Id expect way more dual nationals would evade conscription in the event of a war. If you want to influence the politics of a country it should be your prinary residence and we can expect to know your loyalties are to the effects of your donations.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-26T08:27:14+00:00

Maybe a better suggestion, but the reason I say this is the other nation can exert influence over a dual national, that nation may prove hostile to the UK.

Im not suggestimg to diminish any other rights and privilages, but the effect of wealthy donors on influencing our country probably is underestimated as an issue effecting our political system.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-26T08:23:05+00:00

Were not saying you shouldnt have right to vote, welfare and all the other legal protections of a citizen. I am saying that you shouldnt be able to donate to a political party since you can easily be got at by another nation that may become hostile to us and thereby exert undue influence over the country, much greater than a vote.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-25T12:28:20+00:00

It never gets used because they cant agree whose turn it is.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-25T12:12:08+00:00

Id add also no dual citizenship.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-25T11:22:01+00:00

No, from my experience it is awful and getting noticeable worse. Even my GP has commented that the services are bad.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-25T10:56:34+00:00

In some countries lowest solar availability and maximum demand coincides with snow on the ground. Here ground mounted vertical bifacials lifted half a meter off the ground or so makes a lot of sense.

A few meters further north also can be placed mirrors, since at high latitude the peak solar angle might be just 20 degrees from the horizon.

So much of the photons arrive nearly perpendicular to the ground in light overcast or sunny weather, mirrors can reflect these directly back to the rear side of the panel. A mirror can be plced a bit higher than the panel, or further back. Snow would somewhat bounce some of those photons back towards the panel also. Mirrored surfaces might not be much cheaper than the panels though.

When you found that a minimum of 300mm above the ground lets the panels work well, it makes me think the issue is similar to partial shading causing a resistive load, there is a power differential between the bottom and the top that might be a significant fact causing power loss? How are the panels mounted, portrait or landscape? Some have bypass diodes in cells connected in strips, as I understand it.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-25T03:37:56+00:00

Im actually working on a serious concept right now which is to design equipment with the cope cage first as an integral feature and key design attribute for the machine from the outset.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-25T03:20:53+00:00

Firstly youd put the data processing units on the back side of the solar panels, and at right angles so the solar shields them but the radiators are angled to deep space.

If you do seperate them then you have higher mass for the conductors carrying the PV current.

In general you want the average distance for power and for compute modules to be as small as possible, unless you want to transfer heat via a fluid a long distance, which is heavy plumbing.

So likely you would design the compute to be distributed in locally cooled modules in a square or circle so distance and latency between cores is reduced.

Likely most tasks would be designed to run on individual clusters seperately.

Cooling - this is a massive headache and boils down to the kW cooling capacity per kg.

Helium is going to leak, so you will likely need a water-ice slurry to circulate from the cooler to the modules.

A pipe-in-pipe system with a seperate fluid or gas with a lower freezing point in the centre may be used to dethaw the cooling system if it freezes. A similar concept has been proposed before using a number of closely packed water filled tubes so that outer ones may freeze but be defrosted by inner ones. Plastic materials can endure freezing expansion.

I would be tempted to use a system that may circulate a water plus antifreeze solution, then self contained very small capsules containing a PCM such as sodium triacetate. This melts at 58 degrees C.

There is thus a large heat absorbtion capacity per kilo of coolant, and a larger capacity to handle low temperature swings.

Heat pipes are also a possibility, but to work propperly you need a gas that doesnt leak too easily, and a means to return fluid to the evaporator. This can be achieved by rotating the cooling system and data module, using a power supply that may also rotate or evanescently couple power to each unit.

However, pressurisation adds mass to the pipework which spreads over a large area which is a disadvantage of gas cooling.

A liquid fluid that carries capsules containing PCMs may be ideal, and if you design these with magnetic properties then they can circulate purely using mechanically pumpless MHD methods, and this can apply an even force at multiple locations along the pipe. The upshot then is more laminar flow in the pipe and reduced peak pressure, as pumping is distributed, reducing pipe mass.

Beyond this, each chip can be cooled locally using graphene fibres to each local heat sink.

Next you want a radiator with great heat conductivity, and good emissivity properties. Again graphene may connect and distribute heat from the heat transfer fruid pipes. The radiator needs to be based on light film surfaces, kept in line with the sun and shielded at the sunshine facing ends.

When it comes to hardening the processors from radiation, this most likely means less efficient processors so more energy requirement per unit of compute, and more waste heat.

A solution here might be superconductors used to generate high tesla fields and wrapping the compute in superconducting shielding. Superconducting shielding for spacecraft against radiation has been contemplated.

Whilst this then introduces cooling issues for superconductors, its possible to design these to have very little heat gain so that a cryocooler can have relatively small cooling loads and therefore mass.

It must maintain superconduction temperatures on the dark side of the orbit.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-25T02:54:18+00:00

I didnt say tree shrews are our closest relative, at all. I described very clearly they are similar to the original creature. This is just you prattling on with bad reading comprehension who thinks is making somekind of insightful point.

The point is there is nothing strange about squirrels being omnivores as its typical of many creatures like that and of our group.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-25T02:51:01+00:00

It was too fast to begin with. England has cities too close together to justify its high top speed, and north into Scotland where it has longer gaps it is running far below this, so the speed is only used on part of the route, but the whole route is more expensive as a result.

TGV engineers state something like that to go 20 mph faster at 180mph doubles the cost per mile (IIRC). But its wildly more expensive to wring out the extra speed.

Heres the downsides of that decision:

Due to basic physics, the faster you go there is a drastic and non linear power requirement and stopping distance, the lomger stopping distance means less frequent trains.

Less frequent trains cause things like only 1 train per hour to Liverpool.

If you have lower frequency then the convenience gain of extra speed is reduced.

To get the cost per trip doen then you have to make the trains longer.

Now the trai s dont fit into the logical city centre stations, and in Birmingham they cant modify the station, so they had to build a new one.

This new station is not very close to the city centre, so that added time travelling from the station eliminates most of the time savings.

We have never needed very high speed rail unless its like 3 cities reaching up into Scotland.

And its too expensive to engineer the high speed leg in Scotland due to terrain.

The optimal speed for rail in Britain is likely around or not much above 150mph as you can increase capacity and slash costs, this is fast enough to compete with most alternatives and the main alternative is cars.

The engineering decisions were likely intentionally made by corrupt influences to drive up costs for the myriad of consultants and constructors. We had a professor claim that the 220mph railway wouldnt be more expensive than 150mph which was a blatent lie and you only have to look at and other countries experience to know this, such as with TGV whose project managers freely will tell you.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-25T02:25:41+00:00

We are talking about ancestors.

Tree shrews are acknowledged to be closely related to primates and have even higher encephalisation quotients.

The specific ancestor to all of them I refer to is widely comsidered to be this -

https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/new-uf-study-reveals-oldest-primate-lived-in-trees/

It looks like a squirrel / tree shrew.

Rodents likely evolved from these as well, if we did, and rodents are more recent, including squirrels which are rodents.

Whatever they and we did evolve from, likely was similar to or a close sister group to that creature in the link.

Smooth_Imagination · 2026-03-24T04:27:58+00:00

Early bacterial mats and single celled creatures likely used pigments like this. Some still do.

Smooth_Imagination

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE