2 ms·

If everyone believes that everyone else will be irrational, then they themselves will not throw their support behind nuclear power, rendering their stance on nu

If everyone believes that everyone else will be irrational, then they themselves will not throw their support behind nuclear power, rendering their stance on nuclear de facto irrational. As Baby Boomers age, and Millennials/GenZ form a greater percentage of the voting population, we have an opportunity to press the reset button on nuclear. The younger generations don’t really have a solid opinion on the matter, and probably don’t think about it much. Scientists are in the best position to influence the public and push for change. It is astonishing that scientific organizations have been timid about nuclear energy, or outright against it, because of a few people with the most extreme, empirically unjustified stance.

kozd 7y ago
Is it a tautology or just an unfortunate nash equilibrium?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- keenmaster 7y ago
  As you know, a nash equilibrium is the point at which no player can benefit from a move away from the equilibrium. However, that's a concept from game theory. What is the game here? Who are the players? Part of my point is that you might think that the game is "scientists vs. politicians, ignoramuses, and fear-mongers," but that's not the case. Sometimes they're all on the same side. Imagine a 4 player split-screen Star Fox, where the scientist leaves their controller and helps the others shoot down their plane because they don't think they can win. If that sounds baffling, it is.
illinformed 7y ago
>Scientists are in the best position to influence the public and push for change. No they are not, as always the rich elite control the world, just take climate change, air temperatures normalised in less than 24hrs after 9/11 over North America because the artificial clouds in the upper atmosphere caused by aircraft contrails were removed with the flight ban. https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/empty-skies-after-911-set-the-stage-for-an-unlikely-climate-change-experiment/ https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/empty-skies-after-911-set... https://news.psu.edu/story/141202/2005/12/05/research/probing-question-does-commercial-jet-traffic-affect-climate https://news.psu.edu/story/141202/2005/12/05/research/probin... https://web.archive.org/web/20160411094048/http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~rennert/etc/courses/pcc587/ref/Travis-etal2002_Nature.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20160411094048/http://www.atmos.... https://www.livescience.com/14944-wwii-bombing-raids-contrails-weather-climate.html https://www.livescience.com/14944-wwii-bombing-raids-contrai... How can you stop business making and selling to the rich elite big flash properties around the world, big flash gas guzzlers, yachts, planes, jets and helicopters? If you remove the politics of envy, how else do you drive innovation? Besides IF the eco friendly people wanted to be green why dont they use the most energy dense fuels on the planet? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Tables_of_energy_content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Tables_of_energ... Energy density is a security risk, plain and simple, so just like your smart phone battery or laptop battery is a plastic explosive if heated above 60 degrees C, the use of nuclear fuel and engines are a security risk from natives going wild and foreign powers attacking with missiles. Nuclear powered aircraft has been tried before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion Unfortunately, the weight and size of the nuclear engine using 1940's/1950's technology made it unfeasible, but more recent developments and testing in submarines and more recently the US embassy in London as a building example, the potential for a slimmed down lighter nuclear engine for more common uses is becoming viable. However battery technology notably using graphene instead of lithium will be a seismic shift in energy storage by an order of magnitude, so I would expect to see electricity infrastructure upgrades first before the next gen graphene batterys hit the market with week long lifespans when a day used to be consider good.

kozd 7y ago

Is it a tautology or just an unfortunate nash equilibrium?

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
keenmaster 7y ago
As you know, a nash equilibrium is the point at which no player can benefit from a move away from the equilibrium. However, that's a concept from game theory. What is the game here? Who are the players? Part of my point is that you might think that the game is "scientists vs. politicians, ignoramuses, and fear-mongers," but that's not the case. Sometimes they're all on the same side. Imagine a 4 player split-screen Star Fox, where the scientist leaves their controller and helps the others shoot down their plane because they don't think they can win. If that sounds baffling, it is.

illinformed 7y ago

>Scientists are in the best position to influence the public and push for change. No they are not, as always the rich elite control the world, just take climate change, air temperatures normalised in less than 24hrs after 9/11 over North America because the artificial clouds in the upper atmosphere caused by aircraft contrails were removed with the flight ban. https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/empty-skies-after-911-set-the-stage-for-an-unlikely-climate-change-experiment/ https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/empty-skies-after-911-set... https://news.psu.edu/story/141202/2005/12/05/research/probing-question-does-commercial-jet-traffic-affect-climate https://news.psu.edu/story/141202/2005/12/05/research/probin... https://web.archive.org/web/20160411094048/http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~rennert/etc/courses/pcc587/ref/Travis-etal2002_Nature.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20160411094048/http://www.atmos.... https://www.livescience.com/14944-wwii-bombing-raids-contrails-weather-climate.html https://www.livescience.com/14944-wwii-bombing-raids-contrai... How can you stop business making and selling to the rich elite big flash properties around the world, big flash gas guzzlers, yachts, planes, jets and helicopters? If you remove the politics of envy, how else do you drive innovation? Besides IF the eco friendly people wanted to be green why dont they use the most energy dense fuels on the planet? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Tables_of_energy_content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Tables_of_energ... Energy density is a security risk, plain and simple, so just like your smart phone battery or laptop battery is a plastic explosive if heated above 60 degrees C, the use of nuclear fuel and engines are a security risk from natives going wild and foreign powers attacking with missiles. Nuclear powered aircraft has been tried before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion Unfortunately, the weight and size of the nuclear engine using 1940's/1950's technology made it unfeasible, but more recent developments and testing in submarines and more recently the US embassy in London as a building example, the potential for a slimmed down lighter nuclear engine for more common uses is becoming viable. However battery technology notably using graphene instead of lithium will be a seismic shift in energy storage by an order of magnitude, so I would expect to see electricity infrastructure upgrades first before the next gen graphene batterys hit the market with week long lifespans when a day used to be consider good.