Discussion Forums > Technology
The best suicide technology in the world (nuclear technology?)
darkjedi:
--- Quote from: darklight7 on August 17, 2009, 10:31:02 PM ---oh your talking about military strength i was looking more into the the country citizen's lives as you can see there's a vast difference in iran and korea
tech savy koreans and irans who are way behind overall ( looking at it as a whole )
--- End quote ---
Iran still bites Korea's ass in space tech! ;D And they bite it using Scud missiles.
But yeah I agree, as a whole Korea is still more scientifically advanced, although not in a very useful way.
--- Quote from: darklight7 on August 17, 2009, 10:31:02 PM ---sry i should rephrase that failing in using their man source for war and weapons instead of research and development
they are tooo overly focus in military strength to look at their county people.
--- End quote ---
Hehe, actually no, Korea invest three times as much money for their military annually than Iran does, because of their proximity to North Korea. Iran favors cheap asymmetric warfare and proxy wars because it suits their political ideology better; Iranians oppose their adversaries through strategic deterrence and diplomatic coercion, not military conquest. Korea has a massive conventional military, complete with guided missile destroyers (10 in service) and aircraft carriers (one built, another one under construction) and hundreds of deep-strike strategic fighters such as the F-15 and F-16. South Korea's long-term ambition is actually to build a blue-water navy that will be capable of attacking other countries in other continents; they won't necessarily stop at self-defense. Iran doesn't have such ambitions. Hell, the Korean lifestyle is also very heavily military-oriented; I'm expected to serve at least 2 years in their military any time between next year and 15 years later in Korea, no excuse allowed, while in Iran I would be serving only 1 1/2 years, and scholars are exempted from military training. ;)
So you could say that Iran cares more about its citizens' comfort than Korea does. (the male population, at least) I tell you, the prospect of undergoing Korea's level of military training regimen is seriously debilitating to the innocent minds of young citizens like me.
--- Quote from: darklight7 on August 17, 2009, 10:31:02 PM ---i agreed on you on that, the older generation should be there to guild the new fresh scientists to new heights and teach them their knowledge of their own experience. Something like to learn from the past as not to repeat the same mistake
--- End quote ---
Indeed! The veteran Korean academics should be motivating and ushering us towards superiority, not slowing us down and bashing us for being smarter braggarts than they are. xD
--- Quote from: darklight7 on August 17, 2009, 10:31:02 PM ---even so on this like you said they have lots of insights and self studying but where do they get their base of research and information from? isn't it from what the older generation have found out and passed the knowledge on so that young scientist can find this and use it as a base for their own research and experiments?
--- End quote ---
That's correct. However, much of the knowledge that we Koreans are benefiting from right now is not from the older Korean generations, but rather from America's and Russia's generations. For example, if the Korean space agency's KSLV-1 launch tomorrow is successful, it would be largely because Russia's space technology, which we derived much of our space technology from, was already very well-established and easy to follow, not really because the older Korean generations were particularly proficient in space technology. It wouldn't necessarily mean that the old Korean scientists and engineers who were involved in our space program were necessarily competent, and if those Korean scientists and engineers were indeed not so competent, how can they teach us properly? ;D
Simply put, we young Koreans owe the older generations of Americans and Russians more than we owe the older generations of Korea itself, because it's from them that we really learned the things that are actually valuable to us.
--- Quote from: darklight7 on August 17, 2009, 10:31:02 PM ---even if they might get a breakthrough you can't deny the part that the older generation has played in helping him find out the breakthrough faster and quicker?
--- End quote ---
Same us above. ;) If we had to thank someone for helping us, we'd be thanking the Americans and Russians, not the senile old Koreans.
--- Quote from: darklight7 on August 17, 2009, 10:31:02 PM ---heck given a few more years won't the older generation of scientist do the same?
--- End quote ---
Do you mean that, if we ourselves become the old generation of scientists many years later, we will also be oppressing the new generation of scientists just like we are being oppressed right now? Of course we will be. :P It's a natural part of our human psyche; we don't want to be phased-out because that's detrimental to survival, and so we'll do our best not to be superseded by the new generation as much as possible. But right now since we are the new generation who are being oppressed, we are the ones complaining.
--- Quote from: darklight7 on August 17, 2009, 10:31:02 PM ---if they hadn't share their own research and knowledge i highly don't think that the young scientist can make a new finding without first using the core base research which the higher prestige older generation has found. (for that i respect them)
--- End quote ---
I respect some of them. But not all. Some of them just need to retire right now and rest their brains, and quite a few needs to die already. They are getting less beneficial to us as we learn more, and are actually starting to impede our country from progressing. Even though we must be grateful for some of their services, that shouldn't mean we should keep them with us forever out of sentimentality.
I'm answering this one now: (I thought I answered it but somehow got erased in the copy-pasting process >.>)
--- Quote from: darklight7 on August 17, 2009, 10:31:02 PM ---korea 1st world and iran 3rd world =\
--- End quote ---
I think that has more to do with economic/political circumstances rather than technology. Iran had fewer trading opportunities than Korea did because of U.S.'s trade embargo on Iran since the 1979 Islamic revolution. That means a lot, because the U.S. was 1/3 of the world trade at that time. Iran did not have a good trading relationship with Europe either because so many of European products had American-licensed components in them, especially the high-tech ones like electronics and semiconductors, and America did not want Europe to trade products that had American quality with blacklisted countries like Iran. It doesn't apply just to hardware but to intellectual property and technology also; Korea could purchase any technology they wanted from anyone as long as they had money, be it Russian, (space program) Chinese, (industrial technology) or Japanese/European/American. (everything else) Iran can't do so even if they had money; at least not from the Americans, and they still couldn't trade technology with Russia and China until the Soviet Union fell. Iran was very isolated throughout its late history since 1979, unlike South Korea who had enjoyed good relationships with good benefactors since its formation.
Things are slightly changing, though. One thing, Iran has a lot of oil, and the demand for oil is increasing. Their economy is slowly catching up with that of the rest of the developed world, (860 billion USD by purchasing power parity, and steadily increasing despite the global recession, unlike South Korea whose 1.3 trillion USD economy is deteriorating right now) and they have a better relationship with Russia and China, two most notorious (not that it's bad xD) technology and hardware sellers in the world. As I've said, even though Iran has a very good latent economic power due to their purchasing power parity, Iran is still living in a 3rd world environment because their money is sitting ducks and don't get converted to domestic use very well. No one except Russia and China wants to purchase Iranian money and sell foreign products to them. That is why their domestic development was hampered and inflation is high, (their nomial GDP is less than half of their purchasing power parity; it means much of the money is in the form of currency, not in the form of hardware or infrastructure) because their money don't get used often to buy and sell products, and also because Western products have ridiculously expensive price in Iran if they happen to be available.
So it's not the technology that draws the line between a 1st world Korea and a 3rd world Iran, but rather economy and politics. :)
darklight7:
@ darkjedi
wow nice detail stuff you wrote there still reading but this has really opened my mind to this matter ^^
i learned something from this :D
i didn't know the history behind why Iran was blacklist by America and how Iran is loaded but can't spend it's money.
heck i agree the compulsory military training suxs i be going to mine next year for two years (Singapore T^T)
question is this related to your field of work? since you know quite a handful of information about this?
mgz:
--- Quote from: darklight7 on August 18, 2009, 05:56:58 PM ---@ darkjedi
wow nice detail stuff you wrote there still reading but this has really opened my mind to this matter ^^
i learned something from this :D
i didn't know the history behind why Iran was blacklist by America and how Iran is loaded but can't spend it's money.
heck i agree the compulsory military training suxs i be going to mine next year for two years (Singapore T^T)
question is this related to your field of work? since you know quite a handful of information about this?
--- End quote ---
iran can spend money you retards
WingZero8788:
I would really like to know how this went from a debate about the pros and cons of various different energy sources, nuclear in particular, to weapons to whether or not Korea can spend any fucking money. The fact of the matter is that over time Nuclear Fission plants have become highly reliable and safe through the development of various fail safes and backup systems. However it is not the only source of major energy output out there.
Nuclear Fission: Through nuclear fission we split atoms to release an enormous amount of energy, usually Uranium-235, Plutonium-239, or Plutonium-241. O. Energy is generated through the water which cools the nuclear rods and turns to steam. This steam runs through massive turbines to produce the electricity.
Solar Energy: Solar Plants generate it's power through bouncing the sunlight off of the photovoltaic panels to the central tower. The concentrated sunlight heats up the central pillar. We run a coolant through pipes in the central tower to cool it. The heated coolant becomes pressurized and is able to push turbines which generate electricity. This is one of a few ways that solar power works, reason I listed it is it is the one most familiar to me. The systems used are called CSP systems (Concentrating Solar Power).
Hydroelectricity: Hydroelectricity, from my knowledge is able to be taken greatest in regards to waterfalls, or anywhere there is a great enough tide to push the massive turbines which generate the electricity, and thus is not as widely available.
Wind Power: This is about like Hydroelectric energy in the instance that it could not be as widely available, but is still more available I believe. It works, of course, by using wind to push the massive wind turbines to generate the energy. This is heavily dependent on the area as you need an area where the air is constantly flowing, or at least flowing 80% of the time.
Geo-Thermal Power: When someone says Geo-Thermal power you usually think of a plant that sits on a pocket of magma or on the edge of two tectonic plates where magmatic steam is more available. This will get you the greatest result but Geo-Thermal power can also be attained in the same sense of Solar power. Geo-Thermal is heat energy radiated from and off of the Earth. It is simply finding a way to capture that, which I feel isn't currently being used to it's full potential. Don't know the more specifics at this time but I do know that Geo Thermal power, if researched more, could compete with Nuclear Fission not so sure about Nuclear Fusion. Also I remember someone earlier in this thread stating how great Geo-Thermal energy was. I will say it is a great source of free renewable energy that hasn't been fully exploited, but one thing. Nuclear energy is only relevant on a planet. It holds no value in space, where as Nuclear Fusion would.
Nuclear Fusion: Nuclear Fusion is the greatest, that I can see so far, source of energy that we can possibly hope to exploit. The amount of energy produce from the fusion of two atoms is astronomically greater then the separation of a single atom through fission. Only thing about this technology is the possibilities for disaster in the attempt to create such a usable technology.
Not even going to comment on Fuels such as Coal, Oil and the like. Natural Gas is a good source of energy but I don't know enough about it currently to say anything. Also I made generalized statements on the different types of alternative sources of energy that I know of and how they produce the energy if currently being exploited. I could elaborate more on them but I will have to do some more research into them for that. Also need to research into exactly the amount of energy that each can produce currently, with the current level of tech that we have because I'm sure some of it is greater then what has been stated. Only other thing I can see to add to this is the form in which we acquire the energy. For one thing we take pure heat and use that to create steam. This steam then turns turbines, or what have you, to generate the electricity. How much potential energy is lost during this process? Quite a bit I'm sure. What if we could take pure heat energy, and kinetic energy, and turn that into electricity without the middle man. Or even better use the heat energy directly as an energy source, I realize this would be more difficult no only in implementation but delivery.
sdedalus83:
Photovoltaic cells, as the name suggests, rely on light induced chemical reactions to produce a current. They aren't mirrors and they certainly don't ave a central tower which gets heated. It would be pretty funny though to see a pocket calculator complete with a tiny mirror and tower.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version