Michael J. Behe's Blog, page 18
January 9, 2023
Pebble Bed Modular Reactor developments (and other fission technologies)
Energy is a central issue for the future, and we need a positive focus on where we can go. Accordingly, let us consider the Chinese pebble bed initiative:
As a backgrounder, Wiki:
The pebble-bed reactor (PBR) is a design for a graphite-moderated, gas-cooled nuclear reactor. It is a type of very-high-temperature reactor (VHTR), one of the six classes of nuclear reactors in the Generation IV initiative.
The basic design of pebble-bed reactors features spherical fuel elements called pebbles. These tennis ball-sized pebbles (approx. 6.7 cm or 2.6 in in diameter) are made of pyrolytic graphite (which acts as the moderator), and they contain thousands of micro-fuel particles called TRISO particles. These TRISO fuel particles consist of a fissile material (such as 235U) surrounded by a ceramic layer coating of silicon carbide for structural integrity and fission product containment. In the PBR, thousands of pebbles are amassed to create a reactor core, and are cooled by a gas, such as helium, nitrogen or carbon dioxide, that does not react chemically with the fuel elements. Other coolants such as FLiBe (molten fluoride, lithium, beryllium salt)[1]) have also been suggested for implementation with pebble fuelled reactors. Some examples of this type of reactor are claimed to be passively safe.[2]
Because the reactor is designed to handle high temperatures, it can cool by natural circulation and still survive in accident scenarios, which may raise the temperature of the reactor to 1,600 °C (2,910 °F). Because of its design, its high temperatures allow higher thermal efficiencies than possible in traditional nuclear power plants (up to 50%) and has the additional feature that the gases do not dissolve contaminants or absorb neutrons as water does, so the core has less in the way of radioactive fluids.
The concept was first suggested by Farrington Daniels in the 1940s, said to have been inspired by the innovative design of the Benghazi burner by British desert troops in WWII, but commercial development did not take place until the 1960s in the German AVR reactor by Rudolf Schulten.[3] This system was plagued with problems and political and economic decisions were made to abandon the technology.[4] The AVR design was licensed to South Africa as the PBMR and China as the HTR-10, the latter currently has the only such design in operation. In various forms, other designs are under development by MIT, University of California at Berkeley, General Atomics (U.S.), the Dutch company Romawa B.V., Adams Atomic Engines, Idaho National Laboratory, X-energy and Kairos Power.
Where, too:
HTR-10 is a 10 MWt prototype pebble bed reactor at Tsinghua University in China. Construction began in 1995, achieving its first criticality in December 2000, and was operated in full power condition in January 2003.[1]
Two HTR-PM reactors, scaled up versions of the HTR-10 with 250-MWt capacity, were installed at the Shidao Bay Nuclear Power Plant near the city of Rongcheng in Shandong Province and achieved first criticality in September 2021.
More (Wiki here serves simply as a news source):
The HTR-PM (球床模块式高温气冷堆核电站) is a small modular nuclear reactor in China. It is the world’s first prototype of a high-temperature gas-cooled (HTGR) pebble-bed generation IV reactor. The reactor unit has a thermal capacity of 250 MW, and two reactors are connected to a single steam turbine to generate 210 MW of electricity.[1] Its role is to replace coal-fired power plants in China’s interior, in line with the country’s plan to reach carbon neutrality by 2060.[2]
[ . . . . ]
On 12 September 2021, the first of two reactors achieved criticality.[8] On 11 November 2021, reactor two achieved first criticality.[9] On 20 December 2021, reactor one was connected to the state power grid and began producing power.[10] On 9 December 2022, the HTR-PM project demonstrated it had reached “initial full power”.[11]
Yes, that’s up to last month. PBMR’s are now officially real and online, at 105 MWe. The gap to thermal is a matter of thermodynamics and as the video discusses, we can use heat as heat most efficiently.
A broader look:
More on molten salt reactors:
And on reactor history and issues:
The point is, we have serious options outside the gamut that is commonly headlined. Which is itself a part of the story. More on that, later. END
Copyright © 2023 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.Plugin by Taragana
Sabine Hossenfelder on a fusion energy milestone (plus . . .)
2.5 MJ in, 3.15 MJ out . . . not counting the inefficiency of lasers:
Counting 400 MJ to get the 2.5 MJ from the lasers, that is not yet “there” but it is a step.
Here is another recent attempt, based on firing two plasma “donuts” at each other:
The Helion people explain the challenge involved, here.
Let us watch as we inch towards a fusion world. END
Copyright © 2023 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.Plugin by Taragana
January 5, 2023
Evolution or Intelligent design: On which side is the evidence?
Socrates, Unepierre, Wilson, Paley, Darwin, Huxley, Spencer: Each side making its case: Where does the scientific evidence lead? Towards Intelligent design, or naturalistic evolution to explain our existence?
Where Do Complex Organisms Come From?
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2316-evolution-where-do-complex-organisms-come-from
Common descent, the tree of life, a failed hypothesis
How to recognize the signature of (past) intelligent action
Paley’s watchmaker argument
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2608-paley-s-watchmaker-argument
Has Paley’s Watchmaker argument been debunked?
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2860-has-paley-s-watchmaker-argument-been-debunked
Syllogisms about irreducible complexity
Copyright © 2023 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.Plugin by Taragana
January 3, 2023
Quotes about Infinity, Superstition, God, Intelligent Design
Marcus Tullius Cicero, wrote the most prominent Roman treatise to advance the argument from intelligent design in: The Nature of the Gods (written in 45 BCE), where i wrote:
When you follow from afar the course of a ship, upon the sea, you do not question that its movement is guided by a skilled intelligence. When you see a sundial or a water clock, you see that it tells the time by design and not by chance. How then can you imagine that the universe as a whole is devoid of purpose and intelligence? … Our opponents however profess to be in doubt whether the universe.. .came into being by accident or by necessity or is the product of a divine intelligence.The truth is that the universe is controlled by a power and purpose which we can never imitate. When we see some example of a mechanism, such as a globe or a clock or some such device, do we doubt that it is the creation of a conscious intelligence? So when we see the movement of the heavenly bodies, the speed of their revolution, and the way in which they regularly run their annual course, so that all that depends on them is preserved and prospers, how can we doubt that these too are not only the works of reason but of a reason which is perfect and divine?
Epicurus taught that the universe is infinite and eternal and that all matter is made up of extremely tiny, invisible particles known as atoms. All occurrences in the natural world are ultimately the result of atoms moving and interacting in empty space. He rejected the idea that the Gods have created our world for multiple reasons.
Epicurus, in attempting to provide a materialist explanation of the emergence of the world in all its complexity, relied on an argument that transformed blind chance into contingency. Thus he adopted assumptions that not only
reduced the improbability of the world developing in its present form but made the appearance of such a world certain. This was what Epicureans called “the power of infinity” associated with the assumptions of
(1) infinite space, time, and matter;
(2) an infinite number of worlds;
(3) a mathematically smallest magnitude (so small as to be partless) that combined in precise ways with other such minimum magnitudes to form atoms (literally uncuttables);
(4) a resulting finite number of possible atomic types/shapes derived from the combination of these smallest magnitudes;
(5) a largest possible size to a world; and
(6) the principle of isonomia, or distributive equality between like things.
As a result of these mathematical assumptions, together with the basic material postulates of Epicurean philosophy, anything possible was bound to happen in the universe at large, and anything necessary would occur in any given world. In short, a sophisticated argument of cosmic probability was used to bolster the case for a material explanation of the existing world.
“It is the specific originality of Epicurus that he is the first man known in history to have organized a movement for the liberation of mankind at large from superstition.” Epicurus has always had the reputation of being the atheist philosopher par excellence, and was always called a swine; for this reason, too, Clement of Alexandria says that when Paul takes up arms against philosophy he has in mind Epicurean philosophy alone.
Quotes about Infinity, Superstition, God, Intelligent Design
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InaQC... © 2023 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.Plugin by Taragana
Allowing Rufo and Lindsay to speak in their own voices,
again, as a certain objector here has accused:
Right-wing grifters like Jordan Peterson, James Lindsay, and Christopher Rufo make a lot of money selling these lies to the gullible fools who get their worldview injected into their brains by downloading Fox News propaganda
I have not previously heard of these two, but — courtesy YouTube — it is only fair to let them speak for themselves.
Rufo:
(He was here giving a workshop, and onward sessions here and here may be helpful.)
I trust that in future, commenters will refrain from such intemperate language. END
Copyright © 2023 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.Plugin by Taragana
Jordan Peterson speaks for himself,
given that an objector has suggested that he is a liar (along with others), here:
I do not endorse all or most of what he has to say, or even what he says here — or his guest, but in fairness we need to hear him in his own voice. END
Copyright © 2023 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.Plugin by Taragana
Tour deals with the rhetorical tactics of a critic
HT Q, here is Dr Tour’s response to a critic’s rhetoric (with some addressing of substantial matters through interacting with an expert caught in the cross fire):
It is sad to see that this had to be dealt with.
As a point of reference, let us highlight first duties and principles of right reason, extending to those connected with the logic of cause and so too inductive reasoning — which includes inference to the best explanation (i.e. abduction).
I trust, this will be useful. END
PS, as the critic attacked Dr Tour personally as allegedly lying for Jesus (which does not seem to be warranted on the circumstances), it is relevant to add this on Dr Tour’s response to anti-Christian bias on matters of Science:
NB, Dr Tour discusses the Christian faith here.
Copyright © 2023 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.Plugin by Taragana
December 30, 2022
Aquinas, Ockham, and Descartes about God. A free adaptation of their main arguments
Video made with Artificial Intelligence.
Descartes:
By ‘God’, I understand, a substance which is infinite, independent, supremely intelligent, supremely powerful, and which created both myself and everything else […] that exists.
“I could not possibly be of such a nature as I am, and yet have in my mind the idea of a God, if God did not in reality exist.” I have concluded the evident existence of God, and that my existence depends entirely on God in all the moments of my life, that I do not think that the human spirit may know anything with greater evidence and certitude.
Thomas Aquinas’ Unmoved Mover
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t3170-aquinas-first-mover-five-ways-argument
The cosmological argument for God’s existence
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1333-kalaam-the-cosmological-argument-for-gods-existence
The universe cannot be past eternal
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1333-kalaam-the-kalaam-cosmological-argument#5124
The cause of the universe must be personal
Nothing is the thing that stones think of
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2817-nothing-is-the-thing-that-stones-think-of
The philosophical cosmological argument of God’s existence https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1333-kalaam-the-cosmological-argument-for-gods-existence#545552
Syllogistic – Arguments of God’s existence based on positive evidence https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2895-syllogistic-arguments-of-gods-existence-based-on-positive-evidence
Copyright © 2022 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.Plugin by Taragana
Beauty in Nature – Staggering Evidence of Design
Eric Hedin writes:
Beauty and the Beholder
Although beauty has an objective quality even within science, in another sense beauty is in the eye (or the mind) of the beholder. By this, I do not mean that it is purely subjective, but that its appreciation is dependent on qualities of perception, sympathy, and intellect within the beholder. “The mere animal hears the Mozart concerto and sees the daffodil,” writes Dubay, “but it is neither enraptured nor overwhelmed. It has no intellect to perceive the inner depth, the form.”[1]
Besides needing a sufficient level of intellect to respond to beauty, we also need the ability to delight in something other than ourselves. Being fully responsive to beauty requires having enough humility to let something else move you. It requires the ability to appreciate a thing for what it is, not just for what use it may have. Such a quality of intellect is neither animal-like, nor mechanistic.
Snow Lake, Cascade Range, Washington State. Credit: Eric HedinDepth of Form, by Design
Beauty abounds on this Earth in majestic mountains, sparkling waterfalls, pastoral landscapes, white sandy beaches splashed by turquoise-blue waves. Beauty deepens in form and variety in the living creatures which grace our planet in endless abundance: flowers of every hue and symmetric form, tropical fish, songbirds and raptors, mammals large and small, each manifesting radiant beauty.
Human art demands an artist. The artistry of the beauties of nature is surely no less than that of any painting in The Louvre. What are we to make of this? Dubay sees in this evidence of foresight and planning: “One bluebird ‘in its way absolutely perfect’ is staggering evidence of art and design.”[2]
The forces of nature, acting on matter according to the laws of physics often give rise to forms of beauty manifesting simplicity, symmetry, and harmony. Patterns can arise naturally that show simple, symmetric repetition of form, as in crystals. Beauty is also found in complex arrangements of matter involving a significant degree of randomness, as seen in clouds illuminated by the setting sun. Throughout the natural universe we see beautiful images revealed to us by astronomers’ powerful telescopes. Diamond-like clusters of stars, vaporous nebulae of almost every conceivable color, and majestic galaxies all strike our senses as beautiful examples of celestial art.
These examples of beauty in nature, however, possess only a limited degree of depth of form. The greatest depths of beauty are in living things, such as flowers, animals of all types and, in our fellow human beings. From where does the intense depth of form seen in a rose, a butterfly, or a human face arise?
Beauty in nature reveals a conjunction both curious, and curiously fitting. We find depth of beauty in living things; Earth’s most intelligent living organisms, humans, alone appear able to intensely appreciate depth of form; only with intelligent agents do we observe the creation of information-rich artifacts, such as novels and symphonies; and depth of beauty is the purview of the most information-rich structures in nature, living things. Depth of beauty appears to be—in its manifestation, creation, and appreciation—the purview of a mind attuned to beauty.
www.pixabay.comA living thing’s depth of form is coded into its DNA and its other reservoirs of biological information. The form arises from DNA being read in conjunction with the marvelously orchestrated biochemistry of a cell. What is the explanation for such information-rich artistry? One easy response is, “Isn’t evolution grand?” Well, something is grand—something or someone. But if we want to address the question of the origin of living forms rationally, merely genuflecting before the theory of evolution won’t do. We need to compare the explanatory power of competing explanations and find one with the demonstrated capacity for generating depths of form and information. Blind evolution, I have argued, being subject solely to the laws of nature, lacks that capacity. Intelligent agents, by contrast, have demonstrated the capacity repeatedly.
[1] Thomas Dubay, S.M., The Evidential Power of Beauty: Science and Theology Meet (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1999), 51.
[2] Dubay, The Evidential Power of Beauty (1999), 24. Dubay quotes the phrase, “in its way absolutely perfect,” from biochemist Lewis Thomas, “On the Uncertainty of Science,” Harvard Magazine 83(1):19– 22, 1980.
Excerpted from Eric Hedin, Canceled Science: What Some Atheists Don’t Want You to See, (Discovery Institute Press, Seattle, 2021), pp. 202-204.
Copyright © 2022 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.Plugin by Taragana
At SciTech Daily: The Fountain of Life: Scientists Uncover the “Chemistry Behind the Origin of Life”
Chemists uncover key to early Earth chemistry, which could unlock paths to speed up chemical synthesis for drug discovery.
Purdue University chemists have discovered a mechanism for peptide-forming reactions to occur in water — something that has baffled scientists for decades.
Chemists discover a mechanism for peptide-forming reactions to occur in water, which leads to proteins and so to life on Earth. It could also lead to the faster development of drugs to treat humanity’s most debilitating diseases.
“This is essentially the chemistry behind the origin of life,” said Graham Cooks. He is the Henry Bohn Hass Distinguished Professor of Analytical Chemistry in Purdue’s College of Science. “This is the first demonstration that primordial molecules, simple amino acids, spontaneously form peptides, the building blocks of life, in droplets of pure water. This is a dramatic discovery.”
This water-based chemistry, which leads to proteins and ultimately to life on Earth, could also lead to the faster development of medicines to treat humanity’s most debilitating diseases.
Scientists have theorized for decades that life on Earth began in the oceans. However, the chemistry behind this remained an enigma. Raw amino acids — something that meteorites delivered to early Earth daily — can react and latch together to form peptides. These are the building blocks of proteins and, eventually, life. Strangely, the process requires the loss of a water molecule, which seems exceedingly improbable in a wet, aqueous, or oceanic environment. For life to form, it required water. However, it also needed space away from the water.
Cooks, an expert in mass spectrometry and early Earth chemistry, and his research team have uncovered the answer to the riddle: “Water isn’t wet everywhere.” On the margins, where the water droplet meets the atmosphere, extremely quick reactions can take place, transforming abiotic amino acids into the building blocks of life. Therefore, fertile landscapes for life’s potential evolution were in places where sea spray flies into the air and waves pound the land, or where fresh water burbles down a slope.
“The rates of reactions in droplets are anywhere from a hundred to a million times faster than the same chemicals reacting in bulk solution,” Cooks said.
The swift rates of these reactions make catalysts unnecessary, speeding up the reactions and, in the case of early Earth chemistry, making the evolution of life possible. Decades of scientific investigation have been focused on figuring out how this mechanism works. The secret of how life emerged on Earth can help scientists better understand why it happened and guide their search for life on other planets, or even moons.
Understanding how amino acids built themselves up into proteins and, eventually, life forms revolutionizes scientists’ understanding of chemical synthesis. That same chemistry may potentially help synthetic chemists identify and create novel medications and therapeutic treatments for illnesses by accelerating key processes.
SciTech Daily
The process is familiar by now: Show something slightly new in chemistry, wildly extrapolate its significance to the media, and make an extravagant claim suggesting that we now see how life can arise naturally.
The article said: “Chemists discover a mechanism for peptide-forming reactions to occur in water, which leads to proteins and so to life on Earth.” Peptides are short chains of amino acids; proteins are composed of much longer chains of amino acids. But for life, the specific sequence of amino acids in a protein is essential for it to fold properly into a functional three-dimensional configuration. The requirement of a particular sequence of amino acids endows the protein with vast amounts of information, far beyond what could be “chanced upon” by any natural process within the history of the entire universe. The superficial gloss of the article is promoting scientific nonsense.
Copyright © 2022 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.Plugin by Taragana
Michael J. Behe's Blog
- Michael J. Behe's profile
- 219 followers
