Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pheilman_ who wrote (1265)	12/17/1999 12:47:00 AM
From: T L Comiskey	Respond to of 12245

"Don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows....." Polar Wind Shift Marks New Global Weather Worry SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Shifting wind patterns around the North Pole are partly to blame for a raft of weather changes in recent decades ranging from warmer temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere to declining sea-level pressure over the Arctic, scientists said on Thursday. Changes in the "polar vortex", the pattern of winds which encircles the pole, may well be a sign of more severe weather shifts to come, they said. "The recent trend (of change) seems unprecedented in the historical model," David Thompson of the University of Washington told reporters at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union here. Scientists presented reports showing that, on balance, the polar vortex has tightened since 1970 -- meaning that the upper-atmosphere winds are blowing in a smaller, stronger circle around the polar region itself. As a result, frigid polar weather has not moved as far south during the Northern Hemisphere winter, leading to climate changes ranging from higher temperatures across Europe and Asia to a sharp decrease in Spanish rainfall. Scientists also theorize the shifting polar vortex could be responsible for fiercer winter storms across western North American and western Europe as higher temperatures in the lower, more-populous latitudes clash with the very cold temperatures above the North Pole, generating high-altitude winds that later pull heat and moisture from the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. NATURAL PHENOMENON While the effects of the change are becoming clear, scientists say they are still unsure if the shift is a natural phenomenon or part of a broader pattern of change blamed on accumulating greenhouse gasses. "We can't be sure that what we're seeing is not natural," said John Wallace of the University of Washington. Those who believe man may be to blame theorize that as greenhouse gases warm the lower atmosphere they are cooling the upper atmosphere, setting up a climate change that is slowly drawing the vortex winds closer to the pole. Many weather observers hope the trend will become clearer over the next several years. While the past couple of winters have seen a return to higher pressures over the Arctic and more wintry weather over parts of the Northern Hemisphere, they will be watching to see if this trend holds -- if it does, it could mean that the earlier change in polar winds was part of a natural cycle that is now returning to normal. If the coming winters shift back toward warmer weather, however, "it would be enough to convince most scientists that the changes are human induced, that they're not going to go away, and that they may be an indicator of even bigger changes to come," Wallace and Thompson said in a release.

To: pheilman_ who wrote (1265)	12/17/1999 10:11:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12245

*Fuel Cell Virtual Conference. PS: Have a heart* Fuel cells are likely to provide the electrons for cellphones, so check it out. wcnonline.com Personally, I think fuel cells are a dead loss for cars, but for buses and cellphones they should do okay. Cars are clean enough on high octane fuels, especially if they have catalytic converters, lean burn, good engine management systems and other technology. Buses and trucks on diesel [and cars, vans and any other diesels without particulate traps or other cleaning systems] are disgusting in a city. The high capital cost of fuel cells is more easily justified on a bus than a car [which isn't used so much]. But as energy for cellphones, fuel cells should be winners and they'll make high-powered WWeb devices with big screens and great ASICs running bloatware acceptable. Topping up with methanol is easy and cheap. Just slip another can in the slot! Or even pour it in and it will fill the gaps between the electronics so the battery takes a tiny space and the fluid acts as an ASIC coolant too. All technology leads to WWeb. Mqurice PS: On Doctors selling hearts, it's quite an ethical embarrassment for them. They don't understand economics and supply/demand pricing so can pretend they aren't selling hearts. But they get a huge heap of money for a heart and the giver of the heart gets nothing so it's obviously the doctor doing the selling. If the heart was $100,000, they wouldn't get so much money for themselves. You are right of course - people want the skilled people and those skills cost heaps. If surgeons didn't do heart operations, they'd do neurosurgery, eye repairs, dentistry or something else. But they choose heart transplants because it makes a lot of money. If it was car mechanic's rates, they'd rapidly lose interest. The main question is, can anyone who can pass the tests and fund their training get to be a heart surgeon? In New Zealand, the Medical Association and Universities limit entry to medical training, turning away three times as many highly capable people as they accept. That keeps prices up and makes training inefficient. My guess is that in the USA, the Heart Surgeon's Guild decides how many surgeons the USA 'needs', probably based on the number of hearts 'available'. That keeps prices up and the supply of hearts down. Now, suppose it was a free market, instead of a government protected monopoly, more people would train as surgeons and there would be competition for the hearts. If hearts were valued at $500,000 a kilogram instead of nothing, then the supply would suddenly rise as next of kin and estate beneficiaries gave permission for hearts to be used. It seems quite hurtful and revolting that people whose kin have just died are told that the heart is worth nothing, but can we have it anyway? But the surgeons collect vast fees for installing it which means it IS worth a great deal. Competition would see surgeon fees decline to something reasonable and the supply of hearts rise enormously. The total cost wouldn't go up since $750,000 is the supply/demand balance point anyway. More likely, the price would go down as people realized they could put in their will: "Heart may be removed and sold at current market prices and I direct the proceeds go to my children for their education". People would take any price rather than the zero they get now. Millions of people would put such things in their wills. Suicide would be a bit on the tricky side. I don't think it would be good if depressed people thought this would be a good thing to do. Then again, it's their life, not mine to decide for them. Sure enough, it's BMW not Mercedes with 7 series...I'm not up on cars. How come the USA gets the JJJ-Klan onto Microsoft's monopoly, but the USA Surgeons Guild gets to run a life and death monopoly and nobody bats an eye? The consumers are certainly harmed at $750,000 a throw and the donor getting zero. Is it really $750,000? [Joel, Janet, Jackson - Klan]