Continue to Site

Welcome to our site!

Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

  • Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

at what temp we have a super conductor now these days???

Status
Not open for further replies.

rjvh

New Member
Just wondering at which temp we have a super conducter
15 years aggo there was a lot of research on it (at least the media did cover it wel)
at this time al eyes are focused on the sighting of a not seen part in a atom, and if it's not there 80% of the phisics laws are not valid annymore
as if that will change our daily lives
i am not saying it's not importand but super conduction in the range of -20 Celsius would be a revolution
Lets freez up your microprocesors and do the imposible with your computer
it would also look good for the emisions of those nasty greenhouse gases
the waste of energy transportation in cables that would be reduced will be significant
magnetic trains that can go faster than an airplanes
annyone some info where we stand at this moment
 
justDIY said:

No, it just shows my contempt for the lack of standard measuring procedures. As a practicing RF engineer, it is very petty and frustating when I have to convert mm to milli-inches to micrometers for no apparent reason.

It doesn't prove anything, is anal and is just plain stupid. Proof?

Mars Climate Orbiter (MCO) was launched on 11 December 1998 only to crash because of some stupid mixup with newton seconds and pound force seconds. Result? 128 million dollars down the drain.

I hope every engineer on the NASA JPL staff got fired for that one.
 
hi quixotron..

Looks like 138 degrees K

>> i'm too lazy to convert. whats that in fahrenheit?
Why would you want to convert the absolute Kelvin standard to Farenheit?


>>No, it just shows my contempt for the lack of standard measuring procedures

You obviously dont know that Kelvin is the absolute temperature standard. so whats the point in converting to some arbitary relative temperature.
 
quixotron said:
No, it just shows my contempt for the lack of standard measuring procedures. As a practicing RF engineer, it is very petty and frustating when I have to convert mm to milli-inches to micrometers for no apparent reason.

Interesting isn't it? Since the rest of the world uses metric, you woudl think your contempt would compel you to at least ask for it in Celcius.
 
quixotron said:
No, it just shows my contempt for the lack of standard measuring procedures. As a practicing RF engineer, it is very petty and frustating when I have to convert mm to milli-inches to micrometers for no apparent reason.

Man. All that condescension, and then you want it in an archaic, arbitrary unit system only used by a small fraction of the world? Lemme guess: you measure speed in furlongs per fortnight, right?

It doesn't prove anything, is anal and is just plain stupid. Proof?

I'd have to agree, but probably not in the way you were intending.


Torben
 
You are displaying a serious attitude problem and you sound a bit shaky for a career in RF engineering if you have no feeling for the different measurement systems without the necessity of doing a conversion. The RF engineers I know are all way better than average when it comes to the complicated stuff let alone the easy things.

I think that 138 degrees Kelvin is 248.4 degrees Rankine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rankine_scale
 
Last edited:
quixotron said:
No, it just shows my contempt for the lack of standard measuring procedures. As a practicing RF engineer, it is very petty and frustating when I have to convert mm to milli-inches to micrometers for no apparent reason.

It doesn't prove anything, is anal and is just plain stupid. Proof?

Mars Climate Orbiter (MCO) was launched on 11 December 1998 only to crash because of some stupid mixup with newton seconds and pound force seconds. Result? 128 million dollars down the drain.

I hope every engineer on the NASA JPL staff got fired for that one.
That's just wonderful how they spend so much money on trying to find out about other planets while we destroy this one, i think i just rofl in my pants.
 
crusty said:
That's just wonderful how they spend so much money on trying to find out about other planets while we destroy this one, i think i just rofl in my pants.

At first glance that makes sense. But in the long run we have learned much about earth by studying other planets. If you want to stop wasting real money find a way to put an end to war. It has a much larger budget and in general does little or no good.

The best way to preserve this planet would be to leave it. Without space travel we will never be able to do so.
 
3v0 said:
At first glance that makes sense. But in the long run we have learned much about earth by studying other planets. If you want to stop wasting real money find a way to put an end to war. It has a much larger budget and in general does little or no good.

The best way to preserve this planet would be to leave it. Without space travel we will never be able to do so.

According to the Space Review, in 2007 the American budget allocated $98 USD to social programs for every $1 going to NASA. Both were far behind the defense budget.

Stephen Hawking figures we've got less than 100 years to get off this rock before we have screwed it up too much to live here anymore. I've never met him but by all accounts he's a pretty clever fellow.


Torben

[Edit: I had forgotten the words "for social programs".]
 
Last edited:
Torben said:
Man. All that condescension, and then you want it in an archaic, arbitrary unit system only used by a small fraction of the world?
How much condescension did you expect at 138K? :D
Stephen Hawking figures we've got less than 100 years to get off this rock before we have screwed it up too much to live here anymore.
I guess we are screwed, because there is nothing else habitable that we know of. Time to pass out the mandatory birth control devices.
crusty said:
i think i just rofl in my pants.
I have a very strange image in my minds eye right now. Is there any reason why you wouldn't be in your pants? :D
 
Last edited:
[QUOTE=

Stephen Hawking figures we've got less than 100 years to get off this rock before we have screwed it up too much to live here anymore.


That should be a reason to speed up that supper conduction in order to buy time for our stay on earth
 
kchriste said:
How much condescension did you expect at 138K? :D

Well I found out night before last that running a dehumidifier at 279 K just ices it up and it's useless. :/

I guess we are screwed, because there is nothing else habitable that we know of. Time to pass out the mandatory birth control devices.

Yeah. I really hope he's wrong. The subject does seem to be outside his direct field of expertise, so here's hoping.


Torben
 
kchriste said:
How much condescension did you expect at 138K? :D

I guess we are screwed, because there is nothing else habitable that we know of. Time to pass out the mandatory birth control devices.

I have a very strange image in my minds eye right now. Is there any reason why you wouldn't be in your pants? :D
sometimes i rofl in my boxers and sometimes i rofl in my shorts, and sometimes i rofl with nothing on at all.
 
crusty said:
sometimes i rofl in my boxers and sometimes i rofl in my shorts, and sometimes i rofl with nothing on at all.

ewww... :(

anyways, i just don't see the logic behind multiple standards for a single type of measurement. the other day, i was told this one device needed holes drilled with a 64 mil diameter.

So I had to ask, is that milli-meters or milli-inches? I don't see any milli-inches on my ruler. now is it the end of the world? no. can i easily convert? yes.

so what i am bitching about? the lack of concise, organized information. there are standards but they aren't enforced.

the mars craft was one accident for instance. I can find several others.
 
The logic is that different systems evolved independently and in isolation. Given the enormous difficulties in travel and communication as little as 100 years ago it is hardly surprising that it should be this way. The Greeks and the Romans had perfectly good systems -- why don't we just use those?

To whom exactly would you delagate the task of enforcing standards? We tried going metric in the 1980's and it was a disaster. I also question your use of the term concise. In what snese does the use of a particular system of measurement have the property of being concise or not? I think you're just confused and angry at things over which you have no control. Without some increased flexability and patience, I predict a frustrating future for you as a project engineer.
 
Last edited:
Papabravo said:
We tried going metric in the 1980's and it was a disaster.

i asume we is USA
why it was a disaster???
Australia did the same thing somewhere in the 60s or 70s with not to much problems
 
At the risk of being hammered, let be get a little philosophical. On the one hand, we have a system that dates back to earliest civiliztion, i.e., a system that uses fractions (Egyptian). On the other hand, we have a decimal system, which is quite a bit newer by thousands of years. Binary has characteristics of both.

I believe that each system has its good points and bad. To appreciate that argument, and since this is and electronics forum, transpose the question to a different scenario. As you know, the EM spectrum is divided into several parts. For visible light, we use color and wavelength. In the mid-infrared, we use a term, cm-1, (reciprocal centimeters) that is most closely related to frequency. In the near infrared, we use cm-1 and wavelength. In UV, we use wavelength, but in computers and radio, we use frequency most often. So, why don't we just standardize on frequency, wavelength, or cm-1 for everything? Or, skip the whole matter and convert to a unit of energy per photon. I think the answer is convenience and custom. And, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Personally, I have a much easier time visualizing 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/6 etc. than I do the decimal equivalents when I am cutting a birthday cake. That also applies to working out puzzles on how to divide equitably an item between "n" individuals.

If you accept that the differences in approach may have legitimacy, then one is left arguing whether the reference point for measurement of length, for example, in the metric system is "better" than the equivalent reference in the English/Ameircan system. Both are arbitrary.

Finally, an often overlooked advantage of the English/American system is that it includes both a fraction-based version and decimal version (e.g., mils). The common metric version for measurement of length does not.

If you are in a positition where its important that you know the difference, you should be able to do the conversion. John
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest threads

New Articles From Microcontroller Tips

Back
Top