Todays Assimilations

Nuclear cores and heat transfer
Back in the 1970's, when we had an energy crisis (high oil prices), my father (among many) started to seriously consider alterative methods of energy production and use. This led my dad to build a rather large parabolic dish that tracked the sun for a daytime heating element. Although he managed to build this 12 foot parabolic dish and have it track the suns course (accounting even for seasonal variation (earths tilt), the one big problem he had was how do you get water from liquid to steam for power when the water is only in the focal point for a short time? Even with that, there was obvious pressure issues as the water became steam, it pushed back against the original supply system.

While researching something else today (mass of a small nuclear reactor) I came upon a design of a reactor in a nice, digestable, picture. In this, the heat of the reactor is absorbed in a line of liquid sodium, which is pumped through the reactor, absorbing the heat, then the other side of this flow line going through a heat exchanger, where the heat in the liquid sodium then heats the water to steam in a secondary system. Once I saw this picture, the gears were turning. I thought, Maybe my dad could have used a two stage system like this. Maybe not *exactly* liquid sodium, but the whole idea of 2 steps in the same manner intrigued me, not only for an old 1970s project, but for some of the solar power projects I have been thinking of ever since (even the big space based ones).
The real choice in material has to do with operating temps and range within that material for a given liquid or gaseous state. (Freon performs this same function in a common refrigerator)

Glass
An hour show on discovery about glass and architecture fires the mind. Not only do they discuss glass-making, history, and show some nice uses in architecture and art, but they show a few other things which catch my attention. Things like changing the properties of glass (I knew some of these already), and coating the glass to make it essentially self cleaning (like a special Titanium Oxide coating that acts like permanent Rain-X (tm)
Even though Glass is *mostly* melted sand (SiO2 or Silicon DiOxide), there are at times other small amounts of things in it. Let us look at one variation: 24% Lead crystal. Beleive it or not, that is real lead melted into the molten glass, then cooled and hardened. Quartz? Almost pure natures' glass - the difference being that quartz is crystalline in form, not liquid as glass is. The structure of glass is more like Karo's Syrup.. still a liquid in structure at the molecular level.
Speaking of crystals: add a few things to quartz.. and you have a few other things which you know as gemstones: Emerald, for instance, is Quartz and copper.
Cu(CH3COO)2 * 3 Cu(AsO2)2 for those chemically inclined. If you have ever seen copper turn green over time from exposure to the elements (copper rust LOL) then the green of emerald makes even more sense.

We went to Sun-n-Fun in Lakeland, Florida yesterday. I have always had a love of flying, and being a pilot, and living in Florida the past 3 years, I have always meant to go to Sun-n-Fun.

I finally got my chance. I saw the usual things, talked to some of the UL guys, looked at the planes and jets, and finally settled down for the 3 hour airshow in the afternoon. Having done some aerobatics myself, I could put myself in the plane with these pilots as they shake rattle and roll. No matter what kind of rollercoaster you have ridden, that is a baby coaster compared to aerobatic flight. A rollercoaster might, at
most, put 2.5 G forces on you, and the zero G is sub second.

Aerobatics will allow you to put as much G force on you and plane and you can stand (depending on craft). I saw many great moves and some of the best pilots in the world (including Patty Wagstaff) and topped of by some moves by an F-16.
Seeing and hearing that F-16 come screaming across the field almost silent, until the afterburners hit and then climb straight up, rumbling all the way.. Just awesome, no other words fit.. watching the most
maneuverable fighter in the world have at it.. just awesome

DNA and Life
The past week or so I have been delving into DNA and genetics, how cells and enzymes work, ribosomes, and other such details. A very good intro into cells is here.
Discovery channel also ran a multi-part series called "how to make a human" discussing DNA. What I got from each is interesting, but there seems to be a bit of a conflict, and that is what I wish to think through.

In Cells, we learn that the encoding in DNA is there to replicate and build certain shapes of folded proteins. These special shapes match the shapes of very specific molecules, and are designed to make or break specific molecular bonds. The final word from the cell article is that all DNA does is code for enzymes. This does not explain non-enzyme material, like cell walls. They do reference that cells are molecular machines, so if enzymes can create all sorts of molecules, then this concept would still work.

One of the things shown during the Discovery series, was a family that had a genetic defect that made the fingers stop growing after the first joint, even though the palm of the hand was perfectly formed. It was traced down to a single code mistake along a chain in one chromosome. This would imply that somewhere in the genes and DNA, not only is there the instructions for building the day to day molecule builders that make maltose breakers, and hemoglobin molecules, but something which directs the entire stem cell to full growth as well. There must be instructions which direct the zygote and stem cells to differentiate to form brain tissue, (and to become the complex thing that a whole brain is), and for the entire body to develop literally from head to toe, (including toes). In retrospect, it could not be any other way, or the whole embryonic development cycle is all magic anyway.

The other thing brought up in the Discovery series, is personality and tenancies in DNA. This brings up interesting possibilities from quite a few angles. We believe that personality, aggressive or passive behavior, and other such things, are generally set by genetics, but specific to each person according to development through life and responses to the environment. These tendencies can be in a few categories. First, there are the types of behaviors coming from imbalance of certain brain chemicals. Just as a lactose intolerant person does not have the ability to produce the enzyme lactase, we know that certain types of brain chemicals may be in abundance or short supply, causing the neural activity to be modified. Manic-depressive and bi-polar fits into this category. There are probably many others as well. Some may be combinations of brain chemicals, not just one. There might be something in the genetic coding which alters how receptor sites themselves work, not just what fits at a receptor site.

Some background into the brain itself can be found here. Of course, All of this is extremely interesting to me as I work on Robotics and attempt to mimic the human system a bit.

The Mind
After watching 'A Beautiful Mind' again, I am reminded of many things. First
and foremost are the wide variety of human thought and perception.


Intelligence and Mental Health
Because of the type of work I'm in, I tend to meet and be involved with many
different types of intelligent people. I have seen in the course of many years,
those who exhibit the best of skills in resolving certain types of problems and
puzzles, and yet, the better they are at pointed resolving, the worse the
"common sense" seems to be. Many of us have seen this as well. I have seen
some that are "smart" without being "genius" and these are the ones most fitted
to society, in that, they can still function like everyone else. When you start
dealing with progressively higher IQ than 140, the chances for interacting
socially, become less and less. Although certain problems in math, physics, or
chemistry might be solved, in ways, these extreme people are better isolated,
and even they would tell you this, "I dont have time for relationships or
people" seems common.
I have met less than 20 in the 150-200 IQ range over the years, and they vary in
personality from witty and funny to "scary". What "makes" us intelligent and how
that is dealt with, and ultimately, what kind of person possesses this intellect
is as varied as the people with these minds.
I'm not a psychologist, so I cant tell you why certain behaviours emerge, But I
do notice that there is a much wider range of personality (and personality
disorder) in highly intelligent people.

The Minds Setup
One of the reasons we appear to "understand the world", seems to do with our
"modeling software". In other words, one part of our imagination, is our
ability to correctly model and play "what-if" in our heads. As an example of
this, Imagaine a 6 foot (2 meter) tall Halogen lamp. Skinny 1 inch tube from
base to head, where the base is no more than 1 foot (30 cm) in diameter, and the
top is about the same. now imagine this lamp being tipped, until gravity pulls
it finally to the floor. We see it accelerate and the glass top hit and shatter.
Depending on the detail of the model, we might see the shatter itself in slow
motion, and the glass shards bouncing. We can call this the inner theater, the
knowledge from our model of the world. then again, this particular thing.. we
might have seen a movie clip showing it.. and we remember, but our mental model
serves us in many ways.
So, how REAL is this model?? How REAL do we make it? If you consider a dream,
until you wake up and realize you've HAD a dream, at the time, its as real as it
gets!
Have you ever noticed while daydreaming (imagining heavily) that the more we put
into it, the more we get back. It can seem quite real. But then, what *is*
real? As my work in Robotics has been showing, if the internal brain only sees
the outside world as electrical responses, (eyes, hearing, skin, etc), then if
you can duplicate this input.. the brain does not know the difference,
especially if you can duplicate these "sensor readings" to the same effect as
the real sensors. Our internal playground can be quite real, and in ways it needs to be. Case in point, a big animal like a bear is chasing you and you are
approaching a cliff, with a more than 50 foot drop. In your mind, you can see
that you falling this far, will not allow you to survive, unless, perhaps, there
is a river at the bottom, and even then, its risky. so you look to alternatives,
like perhaps a heavy vine is hanging on your side of the ravine, enough to hold
your weight.. and you look up to see how it is anchored. These are the kind of
things our mind were built to do, to allow us to survive the savage beast.
Again, you can follow this story, because your mental stage can play it like
mine, including some of the sounds, the water, the animals, the emotion.. the
tensness of needing to get away, etc.
These things we understand, in fact, we rely upon them.
What happens if the model gets more attention than reality? What happens when
what should be dream, is recorded as part of reality. This is where all the
strange things can happen, scisophrenia, paranoia, many things. We are taught,
as children, to separate model from reality, by the discussions about our
"imaginary friends". We are expected to have it all sorted out by adulthood,
and that too, may be part of the problem, because our minds are child-like in
many ways all our lives.. that is how we learn. If a child says, "see my friend
harvey?" that one thing, especially if they are around 6. We proclaim they have
an active imagination and will outgrow such siliness and with a "pish-posh" give
it narry a second thought. Let a 30 year old try to the same thing.
Ambulances, white coats, and thorazine come to mind. What is it our minds go
through from childhood, to adult? Children have the BEST imaginations, no
doubt, and yet, adults discover the coolest things.
It must be that balance of the child-like and the knowledge and rules which
somewhat restrict and help form the imagination of adults. No doubt, play is a
big part of all of us, and play means many things, but at the core level, play
is that interaction, which firms up our model of reality, to reality itself.
if one is a programmer (play is messing with programming techniques), if one is
a mechanical engineer then LEGO play might suffice to gain understanding (this
works for me especially well), if one is a musician, play is to try new
combination of notes and chords.
sometimes, what people call play, I would call relaxation, because it serves no
other purpose but to distract the mind.

I spent a good part of the afternoon finally digging into and understanding the math and physics behind the infamous "Hohman Transfer Orbit". Hopefully, It wont be long before I formalize all that digging into a small perl program to calculate such things for a few different types of travels, then formalize that into a PHP driven web page, so others can play what-if.

Of this 2 hours, some significant things I have learned are: in theory, its not all that tough, its not intuitive at all at first in the way we would normally think about getting from point A to point B, I hope I can make good use of this and make good calculations for bodies other than Earth-Mars (which is what the calculations show, I'll use them to be sure my math is right). I really want to test this information on an Earth-Moon travel, then see if I am right by looking in detail into the Apollo missions (hoping the kind of data I'm looking for is around).

Okay, so you may be wondering, "what is a Hohman transfer orbit?" (you may not, but I'll enlighten you). This is the method for getting from one planet to another, using the minimum amount of fuel. For me, this is an important part of physics and space travel to know about. Its as important as knowing how to "park" in orbit. Step one is get into Earth Orbit, step two is to make the extra acceleration needed to slowly move from earth orbit, to your destination, step three is to match that velocity when you get there (so you can "park" or "descend"). To make all this happen, there is math concerning the mass and speeds of the bodies involved, the time of orbits, etc. I wont bore you with all that here, if you want to see it, go to this site.

I have made a number of interesting PHP web pages for playing what-if (well maybe only interesting to me and some other space-minded types). Things like:

Mass Calc: Description: Calculate the Mass of a body given the speed at which things orbit it and the distance from it

Acceleration Calc: Description: A calculator for Constant Acceleration

Orbit Calc: Description: This Calculates your Orbit based on miles above the surface of various bodies

Rotation calc: Description: This page will calculate the needed RPM based on a specific radius in feet

Swartzchild radius: Description: Calculate the swartzchild radius for a given mass



All of these things will be part of my flight control computers, just because they are useful and handy things to have on a spaceship wandering around. It doesnt take a big computer for these things.. in fact.. they are more like smallish subroutines, and I could have implemented these on any computer of the last 30 years. The robotic part of the computers.. with the sprectral analysis will take a little more time, but I am testing down here, before I need flight hardware.

If only we can get some part of humanity living in space permanently before something happens here, we can ensure survival. It seems, many people think that space is a waste of time, I hear so many times, "we shouldnt go to space til we solve ALL of Earths Ills!". *THAT* is plain stupid and and ignornant thinking to me. Ever wonder what people are fighting about down here to begin with?? resources, land, energy. In space, we have all the 24x7 sunlight we need to make unlimited power all the time, space?? Hmmm.. it *IS* space!, land? well.. you know, we can colonize the moon, make spinning space stations, grow plants, do everything we want.

Some dont see a way to "get there from here" as far as the money needed to build the space faring infrastructure. Well, I do. Think about this: in our current society (2004) what do we spend money on? The BIG share goes to taxes and house payment or rent, thats half right there, maybe 3/4. whats after that? Car and utilties? OK.. then food. All basic human needs met, food, water, shelter. Where does the "extra" go? Savings? Not for most of us! it goes for PLAY! "Lets go to the Beach!" or "Lets go party!" or "Lets go on a cruise!" or "lets go see a game!". Do you see the common theme?? Entertainment! In fact, between all forms of entertainment (including Cable TV, Stereo systems, Internet, Drinking, Movies, Beach, theme parks, Restaurants, Travel) I am willing to bet the balance of play to savings is 80 to 90% play over save. Some people save a lot.. some save NOTHING!

So, let us translate these play dollars into real figures to re-direct. Personally, I spend more than $200 overall for cable and other entertainment, but let us use 200 as a conservative number... times 100 million families in the USA (population is almost 300 mil) - We get 200 million dollars a year. Thats a billion dollars every 5 years, in rather conservative efforts! Hmmm.. so I put away my $200 a year, for 5 years, and I have 12,000 in five years. Could I have a space vacation on that? Not at current costs, no, but things change as people change.

The point is, that tourism and entertainmnt alone can fund a lot having to do with space infrastructure, as it did airline travel. Very few could afford the first few trips.. it was all the 'lifestyles of the rich & famous' at first. It got better.

Someday, we will wonder what all the hubbub was about, as travelling amongst the planets and stars will be as common as continent hopping is now!

Ahh, St Patricks day, the day I call green beer day (and usually have a few in a
clear glass with green food coloring! It is interesting to see how celebrations
and holidays have the original meanings diluted or completely lost over time. In
the USA, we have many holidays and traditions, owing to all the people that make
up the USA and where they are from.

It seems the less well known a tradition is, the better it holds true to its
original meaning. Of course, most of these seem to be the less (widely)
celebrated ones. St Patricks Day holds as true to tradition as Cinco De Mayo,
and for similar reasons.

Maybe I am making these connections today, because our office decided to have a
"diversity luncheon" where each person brought a dish representing their ethnic
background. I was one of the few who didnt go, maybe because I couldnt decide
WHICH ancestry to represent.. I kept teasing them all that I could only bring a
bottle of Heintz 57 catsup (all Americans feel Hientz 57 within 3
generations).

Been pretty busy around here with the next round of robotics. A lot of new things to play with and a lot of new ideas. Especially after pouring through the writings of Marvin Minsky, an MIT researcher into AI for many years. Current designs for Bot II include multiple processors, and separation of the problem solving CPU and the physical sensors and housekeeping CPU.

There should be some interesting new advantages and behaviors by splitting things up this way. By not tying the main CPU up with counting and timing loops for turns and reading the ultrasonic, etc. the bot should be freed up to do more things. A goals system is being introduced as well for some default behaviors, and some reactions will happen even if the main problem solving CPU is off-line. Since the body CPU is keeping track of light and dark, temp direction and sound, certain things can happen without the help of the thinking part.. almost like being on autopilot (as we do at times).