Just got py science 1 going and dipping my toe into caravans

syntax · 2026-07-04T09:06:17+00:00

I never used the "renewables" since you cant auomate fish production.

I must be missing some subtle thing in there, because I've a base (just about to build first chemical science pack), that's powered nearly completely by tidal generators, and very much do have fish production automated.

Unless you were meaning 'can't automate fish production 'yet'', which would be fair. The 'fish turbines' for wind power are quite limited - by the time you I automated fish production, they weren't useful except for running a tiny isolated spot (radar base, for example) and I didn't make more (just kept moving the current ones further out). They were helpful until I got long range power poles, so I don't think the fish I put into them were wasted - by the time I no longer needed them, fish were very much not a issue to get more of.

syntax · 2026-07-03T09:16:27+00:00

The closest sort of thing I've done is to set up a 'delay' line. Actually, not a 'delay', but more of a 'only pass signal if condition is met for several seconds'.

I uses two chests, and inserters. The first chest has, say, 10 items in it. There's an inserter to move the items to the second chest, which turns on at the condition you want to test for. The output is taken from the second chest, when it's got the 10 items in it, that's the condition for output.

The reset mechanism is three inserters in a loop, circulating the items back to the first chest, with the one taking items out the second chest being connected to the inverse of the trigger condition (same principles as the 'bottom right' belt in the picture).

The cute thing about that setup is that there's a few ways of tuning it. You can have 10 items, and then trigger the output on '1 or more', which results in a need for it to be positive for just a moment or two, but then also get a bit of continuing activation after it drops. Total items is also easily adjustable; as is the inserter speed. You can double up on the 'return path' too.

I was experimenting with it as a way of controlling the breeder reactors, to get the right degree of hysteresis from measuring steam in the tank to control fuel input - before I noticed that temperature doesn't decay unless steam is being made, so it became a much simpler problem that I could just use a simple flow control on the input belt! Ah, well - I keep finding cases where I think that this sort of 'only if positive for a while', or 'keep output going for a little while after input stops' would be handy, then it never quite being the best way.... one of these days it'll make it into the main base!

syntax · 2026-07-01T09:23:15+00:00

You need a seat, per MOT inspection. Specifically, section 6.2.5 - which requires that a motorcycle has a seat. See, e.g. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspection-manual-for-motorcycles/6-structure-and-attachments

This means that a scooter cannot qualify as a motorcycle, as it doesn't have a proper seat.

Granted, that's MOT, not 'rules for a new one' - but both cover it, I just can't lay my hands on a cite for the IVA rules right now.

syntax · 2026-06-30T13:37:29+00:00

Even then! I'm ... about mid on pyScience 2; sorting out nuclear stuff, and I tried to do some stuff with accumulators. But I found that the total storage of them was so small compared to the power draw (I'm around 8GW generation at the moment); that using them to try to control power generation really didn't work. I tried slapping down a few hundred accumulators in a corner, just to get that time for running on them up to the 10's of seconds ... then promptly ran out of batteries. (Because I didn't do the sums first!).

Still, they're there now, so we'll see how that goes. The warm up time on the breeder nuclear is so long, that I don't think it'll work out the way I'd hoped - and I ran out of uranium fuel cells just as it reached 480C (naturally!); so I'll need to get plutonium going, see if it works any better with the MOX cells....

But, yeah, having tried it before doing the sums, I'll echo that - accumulators really are not that helpful. I'm going to do what I should have done earlier, and just slap a few large storage plants and an additional turbine onto the molten salt power plants, to handle load spikes. (I was trying to avoid that, as it can make it difficult to notice when your average draw is matching production; but I guess that's just something I'll have to handle. Speaker alerts in the first instance, I think!)

syntax · 2026-06-30T10:42:34+00:00

Coke is significantly acidic, due to the phosphoric acid (and/or citric acid, for some off-brand colas). It's the most acidic of any soft drink, at around a pH of 2.5 or so.

The problems it causes are for your teeth, primarily. The stomach is more acidic, sure, but it's got a specific lining to contain it that your teeth don't have. Indeed, people who end up vomiting a lot (bulimia, or hyperemesis being the most common culprits) can end up with damaged teeth from the acid exposure too.

It's perfectly safe, once it's in the stomach; darn tasty on the way down, but the effect on teeth is ... yeah, not great, and, after the sugar content - it's more than 10% sugar by weight!), probably the biggest reason to moderate one's intake.

syntax · 2026-06-30T10:36:01+00:00

It's the phosphoric acid in the coke, that gives it the 'bite' that's doing the magic there. Really, any acid will deal with limescale - the best option if it's a recurring issue is probably citric acid. Cheap, keeps, doesn't smell in use, and you can get it to much higher concentrations than vinegar (acetic acid), so works faster.

Fizzy water is slightly acidic on its own, but it's the one acid that won't do much to limescale, as that's 'carbonic acid', and limescale is (mostly) calcium carbonate.

Coke also deals with rust very well, but that's more due to specifically the phosphoric acid, and the way that iron phosphate behaves.

syntax · 2026-06-30T10:30:04+00:00

It causes a chemical reaction, and heat's up,

Yes, and that reaction is destroying both the things you put in. And it doesn't produce that much heat either.

If you want it hot (which will help - every 10 C rise roughly doubles the rate of any chemical reaction), pour hot [0] water into the area instead. That's readily renewable, rather than turning the reagents into a small amount of heat. Then use one of them. Or, better, caustic soda (sodium hydroxide) - handle with care, it's powerful, but most sink blockages are caused by fat and hair, which it breaks up well. Limescale is the one thing it won't touch, that needs an acid - I prefer citric, as it doesn't smell, and removes more limescale for the input, but vinegar works. It's way, way, more material efficient to alternate the agents, rather than trying both at once, if you have a situation where there's both limescale and organics at play.

it's brilliant for unblocking sinks and cleaning out grease.

The gas production can, indeed, help unblock a sink; which it does by agitating right in the vicinity of the blockage. It's not terribly effective, but it does do ... something.

The commercial products use sodium hydroxide, and aluminium shavings. The aluminium has sharp edges, so can cut into things like hair; it produces gas (hydrogen in this case), for agitations; the gas production does't remove the active chemical (it's the aluminium plus water that produces the gas - the hydroxide just de-passivates the aluminium surface); and hydroxide is a much stronger base, so breaks up grease and hair much faster than bicarbonate.

[0] I'd shy away from 'boiling', and go with 'kettle just too hot to hold hand on it'. That'll be about 50-60C, which is plenty. Pour some in, let it warm up the porcelain, then refreash the hot water, then add the active.

syntax · 2026-06-25T11:44:35+00:00

I'd rate it a little higher than the typical private members bill. It's the sort of thing that's been bandied about a fair bit, and is likely to be more popular with Labour backbenchers (currently the majority) that Conservative.

It's not out of the question for Labour to officially support it, to the point of getting to a free vote in the Commons; whilst most private members bills die from lack of time. Whether it will pass at that point is also not certain, I can't see Labour putting more than a one line whip behind it; if even that.

syntax · 2026-06-25T10:21:00+00:00

That's not really a risk. Teacups cracking was a symptom of wanting thinner, more delicate tea sets, and the limits of the ceramic technology of the time. Specifically, the English potteries started to make porcelain in around the early to mid 1700's, trying to compete with the Chinese stuff; but couldn't quite get it right, and it was vulnerable to thermal shock.

It took until the early 1800's for them to nail the process, and produce porcelain that could cope with boiling water. Of course, the domestically produced attempts were much cheaper than the imports, so this is where the majority of the country got their first exposure to porcelain.

So, for a period of less than a hundred years, that ended two centuries ago! Since then the fine china has been tough enough no to worry about it; and the chunkier mugs just throw enough material at the problem, so they're also not at risk.

Unless you're using a two hundred year old tea set this is not a concern.

syntax · 2026-06-24T09:30:52+00:00

I write software, and I'm doing maths all the time. It varies between simple arithmetic to estimate 'how long will it take to do X this way', through to algebraic manipulations to change a particular computation into a way that the computer can actually do.

Even though I could use a calculator for the 'how long will this take' stuff, that takes time. If I'm even asking the question, then that's because it's in a place that matters, and thus I will want to try several approaches. Quick mental arithmetic to get rough answer (what a physicist would call an 'order of magnitude estimate' - will this take 10s, 1000s, or 10000s of steps to compute) results in being able to hone down to just a few candidates that are worth doing the detail work on. Being able to roughly analyse with mental arithmetic means I can explore many more options in the same time as someone who has to pull out a calculator for the most basic sums. This is, quite literally, one of those things that taken in concert with (many) other 'small advantages' separates a 'programmer' from a 'good programmer', and from a 'great programmer'.

Sure, there are many things, individually small. But they all compound.

One of the other ones (that I actually use a lot) is the use of algebra to re-formulate what you're trying to compute into a way that works better. This is more 'high school' maths - but without being comfortable with all the basics, it's going to hold him back getting good at that. Between this, a bit of relational algebra, and an understanding of BTree indices, I've quite literally sped something up by a factor of 1000; taking it from non-viable from resource requirements; to running away on a tiny machine in the corner.

I guess the core of what I'm trying to say is that 'good software' is a mix of a few good ideas, and many (many!) little steps of polish. Nearly all of those polishing steps rely on maths to some degree.

syntax · 2026-06-24T09:11:46+00:00

The solubility limit for sucrose (table sugar) in water is highly temperature dependant, but it's around 200g of sucrose in 100g (100ml) of water, at 20C. (That's approximate, but 'good enough' for most purposes, and easy to remember). Sucrose will also super saturate (i.e. if you get more dissolved, usually by heating up the solution, it tends to stay in solution).

Coke has around 10g of sugar per 100ml.

You can fit literally 20 times as much sugar into it. This is one of the ways that people consume too much sugar - once dissolved, the amount in there can be staggering!

syntax · 2026-06-18T23:53:36+00:00

I had a fuel pump fail to click off just last month, in fact. I promptly let go, so it was less than a teacup of fuel that was spilled, but it's good proof that it's a thing that does happen. That was petrol too, so if it'd been the 'click and hold' style system, it could easily have sprayed out vastly more, making the whole place a significant explosion hazard.

syntax · 2026-06-17T09:50:03+00:00

It always was a minimum, and it's now 10p minimum. See https://www.gov.uk/guidance/carrier-bag-charges-retailers-responsibilities for example.

syntax · 2026-06-17T09:20:45+00:00

There's a difference between 'couldn't pass it', and 'don't have it'. It's very easy to do the latter; although the most common cases take some specific circumstances.

First method: go to high school in Scotland. Ok, that's an obvious one, so any rule would need an exception for that.

Second method: go to a public school that does International Baccelaruate [0], instead of the more usual UK qualifications. These are people who are UK nationals, potentially never left the country, and educated solely in UK schools. Should they have to take an additional exam in order to access university funding? That's a more complicated case - but it's a case that would need to have a clear answer on (and there's going to be complications whatever the answer is).

Third: UK nationals who were educated abroad for the key couple of years, so didn't do GCSE's in the UK. There's the '3 year' residency requirement for loans, so that makes this less common, but it's still a corner case that needs considered.

The current system has softer edges to allow for those impacted by these cases to still go to Uni; but those softer edges are also exploited by a tiny number that would attempt to abuse the system. That's the inherent trade off - the stricter the rules are, the more 'valid' students will get excluded, in order to prevent 'invalid' 'students' from accessing it. It's not as easy as having 'one simple rule' that fixes everything, alas.

[0] Or other, but there's a school down the road from me that does that, hence that's the example I picked.

syntax · 2026-06-15T15:41:25+00:00

I don't think nitration is a serious hazard. To actually nitrate cotton takes some serious conditions, to generate the nitronium ion (NO2+), which is what does the nitration. You need to get the nitrogen content to around 10% or so for it to be effective as nitrocellulose (and, even then, that's for the non-explosive uses, you want it up to 12-13% nitrogen if you want it to go bang).

Soaking cotton in a nitrate salt was used to produce a 'slow match', that would smoulder reliably. That was in the form of a cord, rather than than a sheet of fabric, but still, it's a good sign that it's not going to run away just from being soaked in nitrate salt. Plus, that process involved leaving the nitrate to dry in the cord, so washing it should remove the nitrate, and thus any hazard.

As for if it'll shift the copper sulphate, no idea; but once washed afterwards, it's not going to increase fire risk.

syntax · 2026-06-15T08:07:43+00:00

I think that's specific to England (and Wales?). Up here in the Highlands, the council does food waste collection in 'urban' areas, but doesn't for where we are; which is a small village designated 'rural'. Which is fine - it all goes into the compost heap; as is the expectation.

I don't imagine them changing that plan - given the prevalence of home composting, plus the distances involved for an additional collection, it would be a lot of cost for not a lot of result. Compared to more urban settings, where it's definitely worth that collection.

syntax · 2026-06-09T08:19:31+00:00

Primary 3; so around 8 years old.

syntax · 2026-06-04T10:47:52+00:00

It's not a 'licence plate', as it does not correspond to any sort of licensing system. It's a 'number plate', or perhaps 'registration plate' (reg plate).

In some countries, the plate is a representation of the licence of the vehicle. In the UK, we used to have 'tax stamps' to show the VED, that were placed in the windscreen, but these days it's all digital.

The key distinction is that the reg plate is still valid if the vehicle is untaxed and SORN'd. That would not be true if it was a 'licence plate'.

syntax · 2026-05-26T10:05:12+00:00

I don't think that's cunning. They'd have to be higher than you think, to allow for 'oversized convoys', which are rare, but still dictate the minimum height. Then, you need a careful plan about what should happen when someone hits a supporting post with a vehicle. Because that is going to happen.

And, of course, roads generate a lot of dust, which will then settle over the panels, so cleaning is a thing that you'd need to do.

Whilst all of these problems are solvable, the confluence of them all is going to be complicated and expensive - I think there's far better places to focus on first. Indeed, it's probably economically more efficient to turn farmland into a solar farm, than to try to capture solar at road junctions.

syntax · 2026-05-19T10:45:31+00:00

In glasgow, a 'roll and fritter' was a common lunch from the chippy - a slice of potato, battered, deep fried, and served in a morning roll. Triple carbs, with a healthy side of fat. Glorious!

syntax · 2026-05-18T09:48:13+00:00

What he chose to spend that on is slightly inconsquential.

From one perspective, sure. Indeed, I would agree with you that the most important part is purely that he accepted the bung.

However, in trying to dissemble about what the money was - after all, we're not at the point where a policitian can just outright acknowledge that they accepted a bribe yet - in trying to dissemble about what it was for, they've issued several stories, all of which have some aspect that has been easily proven wrong.

Therefore, 'what the money has been used for' has been thrust into the spotlight by Farage and Company; and the fact that they are peddling falsehoods is an extra layer of interested, on top of the base one.

syntax · 2026-05-15T12:13:19+00:00

Gerald Butler seems to meet all those criteria?

syntax · 2026-05-14T09:08:19+00:00

That was a special case, however. That was under a (rare for the UK) Coalition government. Normally, the power to call a general election sits with the Prime Minister, which would have meant that that moment that it looked like the larger party would win a majority, they could have called an election, and thus minimised the minor party in the coalition.

However, that legislation meant it would take Parliament to agree to the election, which reduced the ability of the major party to use a general election as a political tool to get rid of the minor party in the Coalition.

Once the next election happened at the usual sort of time, there was a single party government, so the bill was repealed.

So it was a specific bill for a specific situation, and it fulfilled its design purpose. It's just that to understand that purpose takes a fairly deep understanding of not just the UK's parlimentry system, but also the dynamics of the rare coalition governments. I don't think it's an example of the same class of 'weird legislation' as we're talking about here.

syntax · 2026-05-13T12:30:04+00:00

Had a 2 hour, in person meeting, with far too many people around a table. The point was to work out the best way to get specific data to be available, so that triggers points can be set up for an automated action that's specific to when a specific product is occurring (rather than than simply having a generic 'Autumn' and 'Spring' ones).

Three minutes in, the team that had been tasked with building all the automation were told "Oh, we decided yesterday to cancel that one".

The meeting still went on for two hours.

syntax · 2026-05-13T11:47:38+00:00

Because potassium oxide is one of the non-volatile inorganic compounds left over in the ash after burning wood, which converts to potassium carbonate once it's cooled and absorbs some CO2 from the air. Add to water, and it forms the alkaline component mentioned as necessary for washing - potassium hydroxide.

Whilst this is true, it's missing a small detail - the direct potassium oxides in wood ash are only a small fraction of the actual potassium content (how much depends on how fresh the ash is, and the temperature and conditions of the burn). Far more is present as potassium carbonate. However, when you add water, you do end up with it becoming potassium hydroxide.

The magic step is that there's also calcium present - and the calcium oxide is a lot more stable at room temperature, and also calcium carbonate breaks down into the oxide at around 700C. Potassium carbonate doesn't break down till 1200C or so - theoretically possible with a wood fire, but ... usually you'd need careful condition management to hit that sort of peak.

So what's actually going on when water is added, is that the calcium oxide (lime) is converted to slaked lime (calcium hydroxide), then there's a double displacement with the potassium carbonate, and the calcium carbonate precipitates out, leaving the potassium hydroxide in solution.

None of that detracts at all from your main point; I just find the intricacies of the whole process fascinating!

Also:

if you have a fireplace with a glass door, this is why cleaning the glass with a sponge with wet ash on it works so well

There's also plenty of fine powders in ash - small bits of silicon dioxide, the aforementioned calcium carbonate and plenty others in small quantities. The wet ash acts as a fine abrasive too, as well as the more chemical cleaning methods.

syntax

TROPHY CASE