Printable View
Let's not jump too much ahead, as we shouldn't underestimate the future engineers. I'm not a big nuclear physicist, so I have no clue on all the ways to control the reaction. Perhaps, they would install large permanent magnets for safety to encompass the plasma. Or, perhaps, they would build it the way that as soon as the magnetic control is lost and the plasma loses its density, the reaction stops momentarily. Who knows? :unknown:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
We shouldn't underestimate Murphy's law either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
That fear is similar to the fear of lightnings by the cave men. There are laws of Physics and they work. Atoms that form the crystal structure do not suddenly disappear (even though the Murphy's law allows them to). :tease:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
Your words would really make those guys at CERN laugh. :ROFL:Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Quantum physics somehow denies standard logic. Particles disappear and reappear somewhere else, they change into something else and they seem to travel at speeds faster than light. There are still many paradoxes :D
That's right. And the plant should be designed by taking into account all those (and probably many other) factors. Think about it this way: one of the biggest nuclear plant catastrophes in Chernobyl fission plant resulted in emission of some significant portion of radiation, but the plant didn't explode like a nuclear bomb. If it were a fusion plant, there would be much less radiation hazard. Also, according to your "Murphy law" logic, we shouldn't be building the fission plants either. :roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
PS. So far so good for the Ukraine Elections 2010. :crazy:
Who cares? :ROFL:Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Some Ukrainians perhaps (?), but probably not the ones here on this forum! They have not shown any great interest in this discussion lol... Apart from the defeatist comment from iti-ogo that there is no hope for Ukrainian politics...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
But I am speaking as someone who hasn't voted for 10 years due to living abroad most of that time, and the complications of that..
But I didn't get that part about the "clean" planes. Do they EXIST now?
Can I fly to Asia or the US or a European destination in a clean plane? Which airlines have them? (As far as I've noticed all European carriers fly old Airbus, Boeing or Russian ones. None of them environmental!)
Are you for or against nuclear power then?
I think it's marginally preferable to coal and oil for energy. One lethal accident in ~45 years of usage is not THAT bad, even though Chernobyl was a terrible, terrible thing. I guess the people in the area there are strongly against nuclear power though.
But looking forward to the day when we can use renewable sources more efficiently and I think people should be forced to live more ecologically; it's disgusting how some people think that just because they have money, it's ok for the to pollute the planet at a rate of 100x that of a 3rd world person.
I studied the incident at Chernobyl at length. I reviewed many documents and interviews. I even went as far as studied the whole scheme of this particular reactor type (RBMK-100). It blew out due to negligence of personnel, not due to some technical malfunction.
The operators have deliberately turned off all safety mechanisms and run it in a mode it had not been designed for. This accident can be put in a textbook named 'A complete idiot's guide to blowing a nuclear reactor. Seven practical steps' (There were SEVEN fatal mistakes that operators made on 26.04.1986 in order to blow it).
The reactor resisted till the last moment but they blew it nevertheless.
Well, we don't need Al-Quaeda if them at power plants will do this now and then.
Interesting. I saw a documentary about it. It basically blamed a certain senior manager who was there to carry out some routine safety test (the irony!) and bullied the rest of the local staff into going along with his instructions despite, them being against safety procedures. According that that documentary, the talk of a serious fault with the reactor was a exaggerated - essentially it was a case of human error on the part of one man. If he hadn't ignored the guidelines it wouldn't have happened. Was that the conclusion you came to?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
There is a similar plant in Lithuania which has been running fine for many decades although the EU had managed to close it down (to the frustration of the local people who wanted to keep it. Now they have no energy...)
There is a good link that summarizes and explains graphically what happenned, but unfortunately it's in Russian only.
http://eco.rian.ru/ecoinfogr/20090425/169208464-ig.html
(requires flash)
There's another source (unfortunately in Russian too):
I'm inclined to believe this version:
http://www.ufo.obninsk.ru/chernob0.htm (part 1)
http://www.ufo.obninsk.ru/chernob1.htm (part 2)
There's an alternative opinion. It his book about the accident
Anatoly Dyatlov, a former chief engineer of the power plant states that there were faults in the reactor's design.
Well, he's dead already and he was the one who suffered the most, but nevertheless his arguments are weak.
Not to go too deeply into specifics I can illustrate his point like this:
Imagine, you have a TV set, and you are trying to 'experiment' with it. You pull out an electric fuse and attach the mains directly, then you open the casing and put your hand onto the leads. Naturally you will suffer an electric shock, but you will say afterwards that the fact that 'something might go wrong if you put your hand onto the leads' was nowhere in the documentation for your TV.
His book:
http://lib.ru/MEMUARY/CHERNOBYL/dyatlow.txt
They exist, but they aren't commercial yet (for the cost reasons mentioned above).Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
There are two types of nuclear power: the fission (the present ones) and the fusion (the future ones). It's been theorized that the environmental impact of the later is less than the former. However, both are said to be slightly cleaner in the short term than the fossil fuel plants.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
The 3rd world persons would gladly pollute just as much (or perhaps even more) should they be given the opportunity. Presently, they have more immediate issues than the environmental ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
To the topic. It appears Yanukovich wins this after all.
Does anybody think there's a possibility for a complete political separation between the eastern and western Ukranians? Like two different states? (I mean, the difference of 3% is not really convincing who is the leader.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
Remember George Bush junior.
It wasn't that much geographically divided in 2000. However, the last time it was (North vs South) some things did happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
No. Because there are also Central Ukrainians and they are essentially more then Eastern and Western ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
In 2004 all of them were leaders. Now no one of them is. We will see if the result will be different.Quote:
(I mean, the difference of 3% is not really convincing who is the leader.)
No more Maidans :) I'm disappointed - I was secretly hoping to see the sequel - Maidan 2.
=)))))))))
http://lenta.ru/news/2010/02/12/bandera/Code:Жители села Старый Угрынов Ивано-Франковской области, где родился Степан Бандера, напуганы победой Виктора Януковича на выборах президента Украины, пишет газета "Сегодня".
Как сообщает издание, селяне опасаются, что у них отберут землю, загонят в колхозы, не дадут ходить в греко-католическую церковь и заставят говорить "по-москальски".
Кроме того, староугрыновцы озабочены поисками "иуд" - именно так они обозвали своих односельчан, кто во втором туре выборов голосовал за Януковича. Согласно протоколам местного избиркома, из семисот избирателей села таких набралось около пятидесяти.
У меня вопрос: почему западенцев называю рагулями?
http://lurkmore.ru/%D0%9B%D1%8C%D0%B2%D ... 0%BB%D0%B8Quote:
Originally Posted by BappaBa
:)
Good, bad, ugly? Or have you got the same cynical view on Ukrainian polics as on Russian polutics?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
I was very sad to read in a paper about poverty in some parts of Ukraine. I really wish Ukraine can find a way to turn things around and find the best way ahead, whatever it might be. It's disgusting of the EU to treat Ukraine so coldly (Jean Monnet would turn in his grave) and the relationship between Russia / Ukraine / Belarus at the moment is really confusing to me.
Probably worse :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
Seriously though, Yanukovich was a pro-Russian politician 8 years ago and I doubt anything has changed. He represents the eastern Ukraine (starting from the left bank of the Dnepr river) and the people there are pro-Russian too. And of course he's much better than Timoshenko. But people change in 8 years and so do the circumstances. We'll see.
Now Timoshenko would be much more preferable to Putin from the economical point of view. Even in 2004 Yanukovich was good for Russian big/state busyness only as a guarantee of political succession and stability but not as a handy economical lobbyist. He is bought by the big Eastern Ukrainian busyness (which does not need Russian competitors in Ukraine) and is expected to act as a protectionist in economics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
Всё будет видно скоро, кто для кого предпочтителен.
Всем привет :)
И тебе привет! Добро пожаловать!Quote:
Originally Posted by FromGalich
Timoshenko's going to challenge the results in court. :mosking:
Кстати, что такое майдан?
Спасибо!!
Юлия Тимошенко: "Я приняла единственно возможное решение - обжаловать результаты выборов в суде. Я буду на основании юридических аргументов защищать наше государство, ваш выбор. Я не буду собирать майданы и не допущу публичных гражданских противостояний
It’s Ukrainian, I guess, for a square, plaza, meeting place, where Ukrainians get together to badmouth newly elected presidents.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maidan_Nezalezhnosti
I believe 'maidan' is sort of a synonym for the word 'revolution' in Ukraine. She says "I'm not going to call political meetings on Maidan to make a revolution".
Павло ТИЧИНА
* * *
На майдані коло церкви
революція іде.
— Хай чабан! — усі гукнули,—
за отамана буде.
Прощавайте, ждіте волі,—
гей, на коні, всі у путь!
Закипіло, зашуміло —
тільки прапори цвітуть…
На майдані коло церкви
постмутились матері:
та світи ж ти їм дорогу,
ясен місяць угорі!
На майдані пил спадає.
Замовкає річ…
Вечір.
Ніч.
1918
"Майдан" в буквальном смысле в переводе с украинского - "площадь". В переносном смысле - "лобное место", Roman forum, место для совершения публичных действий. В русском языке для этого используется слово "улица/улицы": "народ вышел на улицы с требованиями..."Quote:
Originally Posted by sperk
Yeah, I saw a clip where she said (in Ukrainian!) that Yanukovich only won through cheating. She is very convincing! Don't know what to believe. 2nd largest country in Europe and nobody has any idea what's really going on, or where the country will be heading in the future!
Oh... :crazy: Really???? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
Why not? Being convincing is the only thing she is good at. :D
If she hadn't the talent to talk herself out of trouble, she'd probably have been in jail already. :o
Well, you have to remember, I've lived in the UK for 8 years. I hadn't heard of Timoshenko at all until about 8 months ago.Quote:
Oh... :crazy: Really???? :D
The interest in Ukraine here is very low. A lot of people seriously couldn't find it on a map. Remember "Borat"? The fact that such a silly film could become popular proves how ignorant people in the UK are about everything east of.. Germany..
I started reading the Swedish papers online, partly because I knew that they write more about ex USSR countries. Also I thought they'd take more balanced view on Russia and I was getting seriously bored about reading British stories about the alleged aggressiveness of Russia. . But the outlook in Sweden turned out to have changed since I left. Now I've noticed that the new view is relatively suspicious of Russia. I also notice a lot of irritatation towards the Baltic states for some complicated issues relating to the longstanding relations across the Baltic sea.
But I also noticed that people in Sweden have lately become very interested in both Ukraine and Belarus. But I think the politics in those countries are so complex that many of the journalists simply don't understand what's going on, or what the real issues are. Sometimes they are just reporting events without attempting to analyse, or they appear uninformed. Other times it's clear that they got the story from an English speaking source instead of checking local sources themselves.
About the Ukraine elections they are saying that independent observers have stated that the election was honest, so the view is that Yanukovich won and Timoshenko is critisised for not facing reality.
Once she won the revolution after the lost elections. Now she knows that revolution is more effective way to influence reality than elections.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
Well, Johanna, you have to know that any politician sounds very convincing, otherwise (s)he is not a professional politician. So you shouldn't trust a political oratory just because the speech is well written, especially if you know almost nothing about the politician.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
True... Some of them seem a bit less trustworthy than others though. Plus I have a habit of trusting female politicians just a tiny bit more than male ones, and usually also green/red people a bit more than conservatives. Probably silly though but I like to think the best of people...Quote:
Originally Posted by Оля
Timoshenko is clearly not some blue-eyed idealist, particularly in view of her background as a businesswoman in the 1990s. I *wanted* to believe in her, I guess. Don't know too much about Yanukovich other than that he is supposedly "pro-Russia", whatever that means.
In the UK there are a few senior politicians that actually have a bit of conscience and integrity, although not in excess.... Same thing in Sweden, but the politicians there are more like bureacrats. They never have to campaign based on their own merits, just on the merits of the party they belong to.
Своим указом Виктор Янукович переименовал секретариат президента в администрацию главы государства. «Создать администрацию президента Украины, ликвидировав секретариат президента», — говорится в указе.
http://news.mail.ru/politics/3433367/
Вот все-таки не пойму, прямо сразу все переделывают под себя. А потом гимн начнут переписывать, менять конституцию и пр. :flazhok:
И чего? Просто официально оформленный повод быстро избавится от старой команды Ющенко и поставить у власти преданную себе команду. Она пока не такая большая, потому и сокращение. Со временем тоже разрастётся.Quote:
Originally Posted by mishau_
Лично мне бы очень импонировало введение русского языка в качестве второго государственного. Успешных прецедентов в мире навалом.Quote:
Originally Posted by mishau_
Во сколько кубометров газа это обойдётся?
Что именно? Новая команда или язык? Кстати, само количество газа особого значения не имеет. Важнее величина отката. Тогда и газ никто считать не будет. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil