Skip to comments.
World's 'safest' nuclear reactor in India
The Press Trust of India ^
| THURSDAY, AUGUST 25, 2005 03:45:33 PM
| The Press Trust of India
Posted on 08/25/2005 4:11:34 AM PDT by CarrotAndStick
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-143 next last
To: Gengis Khan
"Companies in the US dont often maintain the same level of quality or safety standards in third world countries. Very often foreign copmanies are known to take advantage of the lax in enforcement of regulations when it comes to cutting corners and it is especially true of US companies operating overseas in third world countries where corruption is rampant." Of course they do. But your comment was that they violated INDIAN safety rule.
"The Union Carbide which operated in Bhopal was not exactly well known for their "fantastic" safety standards."
Prove it.
To: Wonder Warthog
There is indeed some problems with the standards that American firms or Indian firms hired out by them maintain.
For example, there has been a huge problem with customer data being stolen by employees of outsourcing sweat shops in India. If US companies cannot alter the culture and prevent such thefts they need to pull out and let the third worlders stew in their own corruption.
To: Moonman62
No, no! Batteries probably weighed less after usage, if they did so, because of escape of gases of reactions and the like. Nuclear energy produced is very obedient to the law E = mc^2. E is the energy produced, m is the ever so tiny change in mass, c is a large constant whose magnitude is the same as the value of the velocity of light, all in SI units.
43
posted on
08/25/2005 9:43:58 AM PDT
by
CarrotAndStick
(The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
To: StolarStorm; swarthyguy
There is indeed some problems with the standards that American firms or Indian firms hired out by them maintain.If they could avoid, they would. Capitalism is very adaptive to change. Either you are wise and the corporations are idiots for doing it ever more so , or the vice-versa.
By the way, Indian stocks are booming. Why don't you try peddling your 'advice' to the ones who are outsourcing to India, and see if they'll listen? Lately, if you haven't heard, the American economy is booming, unlike any other developed economy. Did you miss the band?
44
posted on
08/25/2005 9:49:50 AM PDT
by
CarrotAndStick
(The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
To: newgeezer
45
posted on
08/25/2005 9:54:02 AM PDT
by
biblewonk
(A house of cards built on Matt 16:18)
To: CarrotAndStick
stolarstorm Occupation: Software Developer
'nuf said.
To: CarrotAndStick
Nuclear energy produced is very obedient to the law E = mc^2. So is the energy produced by flashlight batteries. Just because the quantity is small doesn't mean it is any less obedient. Yes, mass change from outgassing, or even from dust accumulation would be far greater. That doen't mean there isn't also a mass change from energy conversion.
47
posted on
08/25/2005 10:09:48 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
To: Moonman62
I don't know where you got that information from. Can you lead me to a reputable link on the same? I'd be grateful.
48
posted on
08/25/2005 10:20:58 AM PDT
by
CarrotAndStick
(The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
To: Wonder Warthog
The only place where "electromagnetic repulsion" comes into play is in converting the velocity of the two fission fragment particles into heat as they collide with other atoms in the fuel rods. Electromagnetic repulsion is the reason why the fragments have the velocity in the first place. They are moving away from each other.
49
posted on
08/25/2005 10:27:46 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
To: CarrotAndStick
Loook at post #43. There is an equation there, E=mc^2. That equation says that if a battery has an energy change, there is also a mass change, no matter how small.
50
posted on
08/25/2005 10:30:29 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
To: Moonman62
No.
Mass is not consumed in the electrochemical reaction that takes place in a battery.
The E=mc^2 equation applies to a closed system.
51
posted on
08/25/2005 10:32:32 AM PDT
by
kidd
To: kidd
What happened to the energy that the battery no longer has once its depleted?
52
posted on
08/25/2005 10:34:55 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
To: Moonman62
Batteries are chemical-reaction energy systems. No destruction of mass in any way, is what I am aware of. I want you to give me a link on how batteries use up mass to give energy. I am pretty confident there is no nuclear reaction happening in an electrolytic battery.
53
posted on
08/25/2005 10:36:39 AM PDT
by
CarrotAndStick
(The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
To: Moonman62
That energy went through the wires to light up a bulb, rotate the shaft of a motor, power up electronic circuits, pump out music from a speaker, and so on...
54
posted on
08/25/2005 10:38:10 AM PDT
by
CarrotAndStick
(The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
To: CarrotAndStick
Batteries are chemical-reaction energy systems. True
No destruction of mass in any way, is what I am aware of.
Energy has mass. There is energy that is no longer in the battery once it's been used.
55
posted on
08/25/2005 10:42:58 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
To: Moonman62
"Electromagnetic repulsion is the reason why the fragments have the velocity in the first place. They are moving away from each other." Sorry, but this simply isn't true. The energy comes from the mass difference due to the fission of the isotope, nothing else. There is no guarantee, even, that the two particles have the same sign of charge, depending on which one gets more or less of the original fissioned atom's electrons.
Look dude, my PhD minor subject area was Nuclear Science, this is kindergarten type nuclear knowledge.
To: CarrotAndStick
That energy went through the wires to light up a bulb, rotate the shaft of a motor, power up electronic circuits, pump out music from a speaker, and so on... Right and that energy has mass.
57
posted on
08/25/2005 10:43:53 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
To: Moonman62
Nope, if you are suggesting that the electrons have mass, sure they do, but the same number of electrons returned to the battery after flowing about the circuit, through the return path of the circuit.
58
posted on
08/25/2005 10:51:28 AM PDT
by
CarrotAndStick
(The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
To: Wonder Warthog
There is no guarantee, even, that the two particles have the same sign of charge, depending on which one gets more or less of the original fissioned atom's electrons. The electrons play no significant role in nuclear (hence the term nuclear) fission. It is the splitting of the nucleus that matters, and all the resulting fragments are going to have positive charge.
59
posted on
08/25/2005 10:51:54 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
To: Moonman62
What about beta particles then? They have a negative charge!
60
posted on
08/25/2005 10:53:27 AM PDT
by
CarrotAndStick
(The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-143 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson