8x higher than water when using normal outdoor temps as baseline, which actually seems like a useful measurement in this application
No. With unspecified units, that’s saying (energy—x) of sodium = 8 * (energy—x) of water. For celcius, x = 273.15.
I thought he was saying that, in this application, water would boil before it rises away to be cooled.
There are nuclear plant designs using natural convection with water for emergency cooling.
I guess I don’t know your background, but why do you believe yourself over them?
Because when I look up my half-assed ideas they’re often close to what people use today or what people on the cutting edge are researching. Because when I get to talk to people involved in things, I can tell how smart they are relative to me.
a disagreement on what’s safe in an incredibly complicated system with lots of disagreement out there
These are not disagreements among serious nuclear engineers. Gates just found a bunch of clowns instead.
Sodium offers a 785-Kelvin temperature range between its solid and gaseous states, nearly 8x that of water’s 100-Kelvin range.
There are nuclear plant designs using natural convection with water for emergency cooling.
ok? Was he trying to compare with those designs? Or the ones that caused deaths?
Because when I look up my half-assed ideas they’re often close to what people use today or what people on the cutting edge are researching.
This is poor evidence and exactly the same as people who have deja vu saying they can predict the future. You’ve probably been exposed to those ideas and forgot that you were exposed to them.
Because when I get to talk to people involved in things, I can tell how smart they are relative to me.
Also poor evidence. You’re trusting your gut? How do you know it’s right? Most people are biased to believe they’re smarter and you seem to place a lot of value on it, so I imagine it also applies here.
These are not disagreements among serious nuclear engineers. Gates just found a bunch of clowns instead.
Have you heard a respected physicist make this claim? Or is it just a judgment you’ve made? Because it’s sounding like a no-true-Scotsman argument to me.
—
This is getting a little nit picky so I’ll back off here. Maybe you are as smart as you claim and bill gates is as dumb as you claim. So far none of the evidence you’ve provided moves me at all.
No. With unspecified units, that’s saying (energy—x) of sodium = 8 * (energy—x) of water. For celcius, x = 273.15.
There are nuclear plant designs using natural convection with water for emergency cooling.
Because when I look up my half-assed ideas they’re often close to what people use today or what people on the cutting edge are researching. Because when I get to talk to people involved in things, I can tell how smart they are relative to me.
These are not disagreements among serious nuclear engineers. Gates just found a bunch of clowns instead.
I don’t think you understood my point, but I was a little wrong anyway. Turns out bill gates was close enough: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerraPower
ok? Was he trying to compare with those designs? Or the ones that caused deaths?
This is poor evidence and exactly the same as people who have deja vu saying they can predict the future. You’ve probably been exposed to those ideas and forgot that you were exposed to them.
Also poor evidence. You’re trusting your gut? How do you know it’s right? Most people are biased to believe they’re smarter and you seem to place a lot of value on it, so I imagine it also applies here.
Have you heard a respected physicist make this claim? Or is it just a judgment you’ve made? Because it’s sounding like a no-true-Scotsman argument to me.
—
This is getting a little nit picky so I’ll back off here. Maybe you are as smart as you claim and bill gates is as dumb as you claim. So far none of the evidence you’ve provided moves me at all.
What would you consider good evidence?