Power Plants: Characteristics and Costs

https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/KS91-319/M.1305345468.A.B06.html

作者: mk2 (帥氣美國會計師) 看板: Stock
標題: Re: [新聞]日本放棄未來所有核電廠興建計畫
時間: Sat May 14 10:22:01 2011

這種分析,真的太粗淺太粗淺.
來看看一份舊的分析報告.
這份報告在2008年讓美國國會鐵了心地支持核電.
對了,還有環保人士不想看到的,美國對於核電廠採取重重地補助.
大概是成本的三分之一.

按一下以存取 RL34746.pdf

你要看到第45頁,那張成本圖.

Technology (1) Total Operating Costs (8)
Coal: Pulverized $17.31
Coal: IGCC $15.97
NG: Combined Cycle $33.27
Nuclear $8.23
Wind $6.67
Geothermal $13.69
Solar: Thermal $13.71
Solar: Photovoltaic $4.17

這成本牽扯到你的電價.美國訂電價就是靠這種數字在訂.
電力為自然獨佔性產業,訂價就跟著operating cost在訂.

NG是天然氣,燒天然氣的電廠,跟燒錢差不多.煤炭也愈來愈貴.
風力便宜,但是風一停,台灣的性命也要跟著一起停.
如果要有風時,鄉民才能上網,沒風時,就用手搖扇子,不能上網,
這就真的是回到幾千年前的農業大國時代.

再附上一份美國能源部的報告.報告指出到2035年時,人類能源的消耗量還要再增加.

按一下以存取 0484%282010%29.pdf


World marketed energy consumption increases by 49 percent from 2007 to 2035
in the Reference case. Total energy demand in non-OECD countries increases
by 84 percent, compared with an increase of 14 percent in OECD countries.

沒有能源可以用的時候,就跟你玩星海SC一樣,就只能去打別人偷挖礦.

南海任何小國家一旦開戰封鎖兩個月,台灣的火力電力就要科科了.

天然氣與核能 Deaths from Nuclear Energy Compared with Other Causes

天然氣與核能

趁高雄瓦斯、天然氣氣爆找一下資料

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/191326/deaths-nuclear-energy-compared-other-causes

According to the World Data Bank, Japan’s coal generation increased by 57 TWh, natural gas 58 TWh, and oil 9 TWh through 2011. It is reasonable to assume this remained the same through 2012.

Deaths/TWh/yr from coal, gas, oil, and nuclear-based generation are 24, 3, 19.2, and 0.052, respectively. See URL

EXTRA fossil deaths and serious ailments over 2 years:

Coal = 24 people x 57 TWh x 2 years = 2,736 deaths, plus 25,000 serious ailments

Gas = 3 x 58 x 2 = 348 deaths, plus 3,400 serious ailments

Oil = 19.2 x 9 x 2 = 342 deaths, plus 2,900 serious ailments

Total EXTRA fossil deaths = 2,736 + 348 + 342 = 3,426, plus 31,300 serious ailments

Nuclear = 0.052 x (57 + 58 + 9) x 2 = 13 deaths, plus 54 serious ailments

Opponents of nuclear energy are completely irrational regarding the “dangers of nuclear”. Note that natural gas is 8 times less deadly than coal. These death rates are operative as long as Japan’s nuclear plants are idled!!

Difference between inelastic and nonelastic

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=4807150#post4807150

flied is online now
#1
T, 12:26 PM
[Edited]
P: 23
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inelastic_collision
An inelastic collision, in contrast to an elastic collision, is a collision in which kinetic energy is not conserved.

http://journals.aps.org/archive/abst…ysRev.114.1584
nonelastic (total minus elastic).

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/nuclear-e…otes/lec16.pdf
Is inelastic just part of nonelastic ?
nonelastic = inelastic + nuclear reaction [ (n,α),(n,γ), (n,p), (n,n’),fission …]

Is definition the same for charged and uncharged particles ?

mfb is offline
#2
T, 12:29 PM
Mentor
P: 11,589
In high-energy physics, all those processes (apart from elastic scattering of course) would be called inelastic. I don’t know about nuclear physics. In general, the same words can be defined slightly different between different authors.
Vanadium 50 is offline
#3
T, 01:27 PM
Mentor
Vanadium 50's Avatar
P: 16,156
The difference may be in quasi-elastic and diffractive collisions: these are ones where the incoming particles emerge intact, but the collision was not elastic.
__________________

Current Measurement of Incident Proton ?

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=763036

 

 

 

Current Measurement of Incident Proton ?

flied is online now
#1
Jul24-14, 09:04 AM
P: 23
The proton current in cyclotron are normally measured by Faraday Cup.
However, I do not understand that if there is target material for the proton beam.
Proton is fully stopped in the target material, for example, water.
How the current is measured if it did not hit anything else?
Simon Bridge is offline
#2
Jul24-14, 03:00 PM
Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
Simon Bridge's Avatar
P: 12,447
The faraday cup current is, then, telling you the flux that did not interact with the target.
If you want to know the flux that interacts with the target, then subtract the faraday current from the beam flux.
flied is online now
#3
Jul24-14, 03:27 PM
P: 23

https://www.dropbox.com/s/pwkgce1d9rcj3ev/target.JPG
The beam is fully stopped in the target material (light blue) before reaching x.
I’m curious is this how the cyclotron that produce medical isotope measure beam current.
Please advise me that if there is any reference about it.
Attached Thumbnails

Click image for larger version

Name:	target.JPG
Views:	7
Size:	31.8 KB
ID:	71604
Simon Bridge is offline
#4
Jul24-14, 03:41 PM
Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
Simon Bridge's Avatar
P: 12,447
Current Measurement of Incident Proton ?

The diagram shows “a simple model for conductive heat transfer" and does not appear to have anything to do with protons.

One way to determine the beam flux is to do a control run without the target.

flied is online now
#5
Jul25-14, 10:23 AM
P: 23
I’m sorry not that the diagram is not clear.
A typical radioisotope target system is like:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/sshbew3bqrwtjwh/measure.jpg
The proton beam coming from the left, passing through foil, then hits the water.
A control run without the target is a good way, but the flux during irradiation is not constant.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7mae40hmmo2mmfa/current.JPG
Where should the current meter connect with the target to measure the current hitting the water?
Attached Thumbnails

Click image for larger version

Name:	measure.jpg
Views:	4
Size:	87.3 KB
ID:	71624   Click image for larger version

Name:	current.JPG
Views:	2
Size:	53.1 KB
ID:	71625
Simon Bridge is offline
#6
T, 06:00 AM
Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
Simon Bridge's Avatar
P: 12,447
You can sample the flux during irradiation with a small faraday cup or other sort of detector in the beam before the target. This does remove some of the flux from the beam, but you either arrange for that to be small compared with the total flux or you take the measurement into account – a bit like using a thermometer to measure temperature (it removes some heat from the system being measured).

You can also get flux as a function of time during the control run … this will help yu work out a strategy for dealing with the test run depending on what you hope to achieve. Projects like isotope manufacture only care about the mean flux since the test runs are long compared with beam fluctuations.

Of course – you could put a detector between the target and the water – that’s only there for safety.

Note: the “typical system" in your diagram does not include a faraday cup – or any provision for detectors.
It describes a commercial-type setup – which will already have it’s own arrangement of detectors.

flied is online now
#7
T, 07:03 AM
P: 23
Commercial-type setup like this one connect a current meter with the right (green) side of the target body.
A colleague explains to me that once the proton enter the target, by the law of charge conservation, positive electricity carried by the proton must flows through the current meter if it’s connected to the target body (metal, conductor).
I’m just wondering can the positive electricity carried by the proton flows through water if the proton stops in the water ?
Simon Bridge is offline
#8
T, 08:29 AM
Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
Simon Bridge's Avatar
P: 12,447
Yeah – if the proton is completely absorbed in a solid target, and nothing else happens, then the target becomes slightly positively charged. This draws an electron from the wire that is attached to the target …

Presumably you could get water to do this. You’d certainly end up with more protons than electrons in the water … and that charge has to go somewhere.

This is nothing to do with a Faraday cup.

mfb is online now
#9
T, 12:42 PM
Mentor
P: 11,585
This is simple charge conservation – and the fact that even a tiny unbalanced charge leads to a huge electric potential. Your target will be close to neutral all the time, so if protons go in, there are some electrons flowing in as well. Current flow will use all available conductors, but if you provide the “best" connection to ground (lowest resistance) and attach a current measurement you should get a good estimate of the proton current.
__________________
He

Nuclear, Lindy Effect, 科學的進展

反核人士、反核團體主打的論點之一

替代能源   再生能源、核融合等等等

不投入多一點心思、金錢在這方面

認為政府不做產業升級、發展低耗能、高附加價值的產業

 

這一點也是很天真  跟我很早以前一樣

認為都要有最基礎工業能力  但是不知道台灣的狀況

另一個就是認為多投入金錢心力在新能源上

就能夠有突破等等等

這我沒看過有擁核團體回答過的  就是這是另一方面的Lindy Effect

現有的發電方式都不新

他能夠撐到現在  一直用他

就是因為沒有其他更好的方式

能夠50年都存在  那較可以預期再戰50年

 

科學、科技進展多是意外發現

Antifragile 裡講 Nuclear Science 是唯一例外 發展的科學家知道自己在幹嘛的

但Taleb不知道nuclear science起源 X光發現也是意外

不是說我投入一千億美元

來研究黑潮洋流發電  預計過幾年就要就可以上路

最可能的結果就是 nothing   不可行

 

維持、繼續運作

有固定收入  有點基本經濟基礎

才有閒錢有機會投資

忽然有意外橫財 (發現地熱、黑潮、洋流、核融合等等等)

辭掉工作都還來得及.

 

忽然把核電停止

感覺好像我現在馬上辭職

專職操盤、創業、貸款炒房開餐廳一樣

大概95%以上機會是失敗走投無路

然後之後失敗準備去打零工維生

—-

5/28

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerraPower

速讀 富足 這書 再提到 TerraPower 也再看一下

預計2020商用產品

Bill Gates, Nathan Myhrvold  這類當代天才 

做的就是這類比較可行的

這裡就看出人家為何聰明  做比較實際的

 

替代能源   再生能源、核融合、 黑潮發電三小的不知道50年後有沒有的東西

反而台灣想做?

計畫50年後幹嘛不順便計畫500年後的能源

 

Risk Feeling 輻射傷害與交通意外

http://www.appledaily.com.tw/appledaily/article/headline/20140426/35792374/2%E5%8F%8D%E6%A0%B8%E8%80%85%E8%B6%B4%E8%BB%8A%E6%93%8B%E8%94%A1%E6%AD%A3%E5%85%83

雖然沒同情心

但是我真的笑了

反核基本上最重要的核心概念就是要規避差不多是百萬分之一

平均降低壽命大概3.4天 或是 1/3 , 1/4 的輻射傷害

這還是無下限的合理抑低、然後你家住核電廠非常非常近的地方保守估計

你想避免這輻射傷害

核災就是輻射傷害  不然是什麼傷害你跟我講

但是居然去擋轎車

這個如果一不小心就是半殘

幸運的全身而退  你也不能怎樣阿

 

我真的覺得很可笑

—-

2014/4/27

我從國中迷上籃球後一直打到現在

但是我大概前六七年看到Hoop Dream籃球夢這電影的討論 (今年初才完整看完)

美國籃球運動員要到NBA才真的有賺到錢

而高中運動員進NBA的機率

http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/basketballTW/M.1375752524.A.224.html

Percentage: High School To Professional 0.03%

我記得以前看過的數據又更低

 

台灣 海闊天空的一代─教改10年

拍的打棒球男生跟兩個後面兩個女生的例子我印象就很深

 

這些類似的例子在鄉下地方成長的人應該都碰過很多

 

 

給未來總統的能源課 Energy for future President

http://www.amazon.com/Energy-Future-Presidents-Science-Headlines/dp/0393081613

這本書

是目前中文世界

我所讀過有關能源議題的書籍書籍

最好的一本

 

核能議題太廣

而有關輻射傷害、癌症 方面  基本上跟 Physics for Future President 超過一半一樣

為啥一樣  這方面進展很慢

而我的心得一樣    這問題100年內都會沒解答

有點像營養學一樣    太難有突破性展了

 

除非只有一種情形會有大突破

是人類都不會希望看到

就是他媽的發生核子戰爭

跟現在輻射傷害致癌一樣重要資料是從廣島、長崎受害者得來一樣

 

不急著看的人    建議等二刷

http://www.andbooks.com.tw/active.php?active_sn=25&publisher_url=33

但二刷時間不確定  from 我問過出版社給我的回應

 

 

Proton-proton inelastic cross section in MeV

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=736989

flied is online now
#1
Feb7-14, 04:31 AM
P: 13
Dear Forum :
I’m looking for proton-proton inelastic cross section in MeV.
There are lots of results in GeV, TeV.
But I can not find the results in MeV in ENDF nor TENDL.
https://www-nds.iaea.org/exfor/endf.htm
ftp://ftp.nrg.eu/pub/www/talys/tendl…ml/proton.html
Please advise me
Thanks in advance
mathman is offline
#2
Feb7-14, 08:57 PM
Sci Advisor
P: 5,860
I am not familiar with the particular interaction. However I wonder if at those energies the only reaction is elastic sacattering?
mfb is offline
#3
Feb8-14, 12:36 AM
Mentor
P: 10,378
The first inelastic collision via the strong force should be pion production at ~150 MeV, probably with a negligible cross-section at this energy.

p+p -> p+n+positron+antineutrino (or deuterium instead of p+n) would have a lower threshold, but as the process happens via the weak interaction the cross-section is completely negligible.

__________________
He
snorkack is offline
#4
Feb8-14, 07:39 AM
P: 317

Proton-proton inelastic cross section in MeV


Quote Quote by mfb View Post
p+p -> p+n+positron+antineutrino (or deuterium instead of p+n) would have a lower threshold,

p+p -> d+positron+neutrino should have NO threshold, because it releases energy – but also a low cross-section because it is weak interaction.

But there should be some electromagnetic interaction inelastic collisions, because protons are charged.
p+p -> p+p+γ… whether the energy of the said photon is γ, x-ray, UV, visible, infrared or radio waves. How does the cross-section of braking radiation compare wit the cross-section for elastic collision?
Starting from threshold of 1022 keV, there will also be electromagnetic interaction of
p+p -> p+p+e-+e+
So in that region, how are the comparative cross-sections of elastic collision, braking radiation and pair production?

flied is online now
#5
Feb8-14, 09:20 AM
P: 13
The question arose to me when I do a simulation on FLUKA,
there is inelastic scattering length 9.1E9 cm of proton-proton(H) in 10MeV.
9.1E9 cm which converting to 0.011mb.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gul3dibeql…20Material.JPG
It is really small compare to other process or elastic scattering of p-p.
I just wonder where could I find other resource to compare with it ?
mfb is offline
#6
Feb8-14, 02:45 PM
Mentor
P: 10,378
Quote Quote by snorkack View Post
p+p -> d+positron+neutrino should have NO threshold, because it releases energy – but also a low cross-section because it is weak interaction.

Right. But below the MeV scale you need long-range tunneling, and the cross-section gets even worse.
Completely negligible when you want to simulate processes in FLUKA.

But there should be some electromagnetic interaction inelastic collisions, because protons are charged.

I don’t think they are called inelastic in high-energy physics, but that’s probably just a question of definitions.

Starting from threshold of 1022 keV, there will also be electromagnetic interaction of
p+p -> p+p+e-+e+

Right. Again, should be completely negligible.

I don’t see 9.1E9 in this table, but this is scattering at hydrogen, not at protons. Ionization could count towards the value, or the result is just a relict of some extrapolation.

__________________
He
flied is online now
#7
Feb8-14, 10:49 PM
P: 13
I’m sorry for 9.1E9cm, should be 0.16E+10 cm , converting to 0.11 mbarns.
Also, it should be hydrogen instead of proton.
However, is there other resources to compare ?

[fluka-discuss]: Data merging statistics

http://www.fluka.org/web_archive/earchive/new-fluka-discuss/6181.html

From: Chenyen Lee <chenyenlee_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 09:59:08 +0800

Dear forum :
I would like to ask about a question about the data merging.
Performing a single run with 1e5 particles, I will get a statistical error
is +/- 99%.
But If I perform a continue run with 2 x 5e4 particles or 2 x 1e5
particles,
and then do the data merging,the statistical error is less than 1%.
Please advise me where I’m doing wrong ?

Thanks in advance

http://www.fluka.org/web_archive/earchive/new-fluka-discuss/att-6181/O18XS10.inp

 

http://www.fluka.org/web_archive/earchive/new-fluka-discuss/6194.html

From: <Andrea.Mairani_at_mi.infn.it>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 12:39:21 +0100

Dear Chenyen,
About statistical error you can read for example the last 4 slides of the
this presentation that explains how to interpret the results from a MC
calculation and it gives you some practical tips
(https://fluka-course.web.cern.ch/FLUKA-Course/Lectures_pdf/c04_StatSampl.pdf).
If you perform a single run by convention the statistical error is printed
as 99%.
Best Regards,
Andrea

前提錯誤的全盤皆錯 GIGO

在讀到nuclear physics看到一段

http://www.srim.org/SRIM/History/HISTORY.htm

A study was done by Leonardo DiVinci on catapults and how to increase the range of their projectiles (~1580). Unfortunately, his knowledge of dynamics was not as good as his analysis of static structures (levers, etc.) and he began with the unfortunate premise that the velocity of a projectile was proportional to the maximum force exerted on it, and hence what he actually derived was an early version of GIGO (Garbage In ® Garbage Out).

這個很有趣  以前聽張元的中國歷史發展(課名忘了)

講到一個著名歷史研究者的一本鉅作

談彩陶文化黑陶文化的發展

但結果過三四年考古學家發現的陶器就把它整本前提推論和結果都推翻

這個是The Black Swan  2nd edition裡面Taleb承認他原本不懂

以為歷史純粹是一些人的空想無法驗證其講法正確與否

然後一位歷史學家才點出他這點錯誤

可以從好的文獻考據或是實際的考古來做實證

 

另外一個則是兩三年前瀏覽過的一篇大社論

網路大概十幾頁

分析 為什麼台灣 以前的四小龍之首  現在卻是居末

列了十幾個原因吧

別人進步、台灣封閉、群帶資本主義、從電子業之後轉型不利、

缺乏創新、年輕人居於安逸、等等等等等等

寫的極為詳盡有道理

結果ptt上面 leefengyuh po類似的東西

IMF資料或是其他經濟研究

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2013/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=28&pr.y=8&sy=1980&ey=2000&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=576%2C528&s=NGDPDPC&grp=0&a=

台灣是四小龍沒錯

但是 排名第一的有時候是新加坡有時候香港

台灣從來就不曾是四小龍之首

所以哪來的這長篇大論?

 

Garbage In Garbage Out

Taleb沒這樣來形容計量經濟學

但其實差不多就是這樣

也跟一堆人一樣

幾乎任何地方任何領域都一堆這樣的人

從錯誤的大前提來很詳細、仔細努力的推論

寫出一篇、講了一整天、寫了一本厚書

結果其實都是不符現實的東西

哲學、宗教與現實

2013/10/24

不企圖提出更好更完善的見解

當然一定很多錯誤

純粹描述一下我的讀書心得和生活中碰到哲學、宗教與現實的感受

 

佛教哲學內容豐富度、優美性與完整性高於道教、基督教

中國佛教哲學屬中國哲學一部分 (這沒異議)

哲學離開現實 哲學就死了 (The Black Swan)

應該說 所有的思想理論 跟實際不符 不能回答現實問題

就幾乎沒有實用價值了

 

眾多修行修道者 遁入空門 走進山林 離開俗世

想藉著如此修行 得到大智慧

 

Santiago Ramon y Cajal 研究科學的第一步開頭寫到

歷史已經證明  舊時代哲學家科學家 用類似亞里斯多德的方法

嘗試想用觀察內心的方法以推到外部世界

這類嘗試都是失敗的

 

中國的故事是一個人做在竹林外七天七夜來觀測竹子  以求了解竹子

一無所獲 結果重病病倒  (from 李敖)

 

(王菲)入西藏藏傳(垃圾)佛門

三個月內嗑頭十萬次

佛門弟子修行 掃地砍柴  念重複的經文 早上打禪靜坐數小時

那裡書籍量也不多  都是一些舊時的經文為主

這樣入佛門前讀書不多  入了之後  一樣沒什麼讀書

 

又要努力抑制克服身體的慾望

請記得我們是演化而來的人

Attention and Effort  當把effort放在克制這些慾望  剩下的 attention 就很低的

 

就是你光克制這些你就沒辦法專心去做想要去做的事

 

也離開現實 不知道實際外部世界的發展   沒什麼交際

不事生產

當我看到農夫(我)  菜市場、街頭攤販

在當然不舒適的環境、甚至被警察驅趕、付黑道環境管理費

出外化緣的比丘比丘尼站在那拿一個缽要人把人家流汗維持生計的錢奉獻

說實在我打從內心  沒辦法尊敬

 

這樣能提升智慧   我絕對不信

上次看到裡頭的頭頭

居然企圖想回答核能的問題

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW7t5fJ7j2A

 

還有一次媽轉台看  一樣淨空回答讀者問題

讀者問到他家種菜  生很多菜蟲

如果噴灑農藥又會毒死菜蟲  殺生

請問淨空師父該怎麼做?

淨空:   這個阿

萬物都可以溝通講道理的

在北美他們佛堂那 ( 在北美他們有分部)也有菜園

他們就種一區專門給菜蟲吃

跟菜蟲溝通  這區給你們的  其他區你們不要吃

先在都運作的很好阿

 

這個跟法輪功可以用念力殺電腦病毒和把礦泉水轉化成汽油一樣

這些人根本沒辦法、沒能力處理現實的問題

所以讓他們負責主事會變多恐怖的事

政教合一最誇張糟糕的西藏  再來就是梵蒂岡

 

無論現實多麼殘酷

也不要自畫封閉小圈圈像是慕容復昨在土墓上幻想自己是皇帝

 

Zimbardo跟 Sam Harris認為狂熱宗教份子的時間觀在未來

今生不重要  犧牲為了未來或上天堂(的處女)

這是他們的信念所以你也沒辦法怎樣

 

請接受現實    未來不會相見

2013/11/22

在學習佛學、佛教哲學的時候

要非常非常小心

 

就是要知道這些是純知識上、Top-Down、

不是實證

也就是這些是跟現實會有落差的地方

 

從原始佛教教義開始

之後的發展

越好的觀念、想要涵蓋更大的範圍、想提出圓滿的解釋

後者取代前者一大部分都是因為後者的觀念更好

而不是離現實更接近

也就是跟現實做”校正”

 

學習者沒考懂這點

不知道這些知識、觀念、工具和他們的應用範圍

就跟鐵鎚人把世界的問題看成是釘子

要一招半式打天下

而且自大自己以為這招就是獨孤九劍什麼東西都能拆解

 

MIT物理教授要用熱力學、能量平衡來解釋身體

https://flied.wordpress.com/2012/10/24/%E6%88%91%E5%9C%A8mit%E7%87%83%E7%87%92%E7%89%A9%E7%90%86%E5%AD%B8-for-the-love-of-physics-energy-conservation-%E6%B8%9B%E8%82%A5%E7%9A%84%E7%89%A9%E7%90%86%E8%AA%B2%E9%A1%8C/

統計學來用到現實世界

手裡拿個輻射偵測器看到數值變高就覺得輻射很強

—-

2013/12/8

物理學只有一種

沒有所謂的台灣物理學、香港物理學、日本物理學、美國物理學

有日本製輻射偵測器  沒有日本輻射這種東西

 

數學也只有一種

也沒有所謂的台灣數學、英國數學

有台灣數學家  沒有台灣線性代數這種東西

 

所以為何經濟學不是科學

他會允許兩個矛盾理論同時存在、兩個推導出不同結果的理論同時得諾貝爾獎

沒有終極的實驗來證明對錯

 

所以佛教為什麼會有印度佛教、中國佛教、西藏、日本佛教

 

如果追尋解脫、well-being

會有一個相對於其他能夠效果更好更能達到的途徑

但目前卻不是

因為這個可能連假說不到

營養學更是

Integration after importing data, how to set the variables

http://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/164530

Integration after importing data, how to set the variables

GROUPS:

Dear Community :I’m learning doing the integration.
I know how to import data and integration.
But I do not how to set the variables after importing it.
The screencapture is as below.Please advise me
Thanks in advance

Lee

POSTED BY: Chenyen Lee
1 Day ago
  • Edit
  • |
  • Reply
  • |
  • Flag
6 Replies

Hi. I’m not sure what you would like to do with Mathematica. What do you want this code to do?Import will give you a list of numbers, not a function. If you would like to make the list of numbers into a function, please try using the Interpolationfunction.If you are new to Mathematica, you may want to read an overview of how to use it. You can do this by looking at the Mathematica Virtual Book.

POSTED BY: Sean Clarke
1 Day ago
  • Reply
  • |
  • Flag

I would like to know how to do a definite integral of sigma(E) over an defined region.

The distribution of Sigma is  http://ppt.cc/-5Z5  , and the values are in the file O8p18Ft.xls.
ex.   The sigma(E) varies with E
(2.5, 2.74)
(2.6, 52  )
(2.7, 6.6 )
….

(20,    )

POSTED BY: Chenyen Lee
22 Hours ago
  • Edit
  • |
  • Reply
  • |
  • Flag

You may take a look at this funciton after you import the data:
http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/ref/Interpolation.html

POSTED BY: Shenghui Yang
20 Hours ago
  • Reply
  • |
  • Flag

Let’s make up some data close to yours:

data = Table[{x, 700 x Exp[-x] + 50 RandomReal[]}, {x, 0, 9, .1}];

When you have just list of points you have three choices for integration:

  • integrate data
  • integrate interpolation
  • integrate model fit

Let’s first get all three on the same figure.

(* interpolation *)
f = Interpolation[data];(* model fit *)
model = a x Exp[-b x];
fit = FindFit[data, model, {a, b}, x]
modelf = Function[{t}, Evaluate[model /. fit]];
Out[] = {a -> 678.552, b -> 0.892996}
Show[
Plot[{f[x], modelf[x]}, {x, 0, 9}],
ListPlot[data, PlotStyle -> Red]
, PlotRange -> All]

Now we can compute the integrals – which all are pretty close to each other. You should pick a method more appropriate to your case. The 1st one – integration of data – is the simplest. You just have to sum all the Y-values and multiply them by the step between the points – in our case it is 0.1 .

 (* integrate data *)
.1 Total[data[[All, 2]]]
Out[]= 1911.23(* integrate interpolation *)
NIntegrate[f[x], {x, 0, 9}]
Out[]= 1901.01(* integrate model fit *)
NIntegrate[modelf[x], {x, 0, 9}]
Out[]= 1756.51

POSTED BY: Vitaliy Kaurov
20 Hours ago
  • Reply
  • |
  • Flag

Thank you so much for the instruction.
I understand much more how to do the interpolation and integral now.
But I still do not know how to set the variables after importing data,  how to correspond the importing data to variables
Please advise me.
The data  O8p18Ft.xls.
(2.5, 2.74)
(2.6, 52 )
(2.7, 6.6 )
….

(20, )   is attached in the link belowhttps://www.dropbox.com/s/f90z14hxwgbzxn6/O8p18Ft.xls

POSTED BY: Chenyen Lee
12 Hours ago
  • Edit
  • |
  • Reply
  • |
  • Flag

Paul Cleary
1Vote

Rate this as good.

Try this. Ammend the file path and the need to flatten/Partition as you need.  The attached picture is using your data from your dropbox, renamed.

 dtsa = Import[“test2.xls", {“Data"}]; dtsa =Partition[Flatten[dtsa], 2]; r1 = Min[dtsa[[All, 1]]]; r2 =
Max[dtsa[[All, 1]]]; f = Interpolation[dtsa];
model = a x Exp[-b x];
fit = FindFit[dtsa, model, {a, b}, x]
modelf = Function[{t}, Evaluate[model /. fit]];
Print[Show[Plot[{f[x], modelf[x]}, {x, r1, r2}],
ListPlot[dtsa, PlotStyle -> Red], PlotRange -> All,
ImageSize -> {800, 800}]]; .1 Total[dtsa[[All, 2]]]
NIntegrate[f[x], {x, r1, r2}]
NIntegrate[modelf[x], {x, r1, r2}]

POSTED BY: Paul Cleary
9 Hours ago
—-
我想的太複雜了
因為不懂所以想得太複雜
原來根本的問題在excel就可以解決

Interpretation of Cross Section of p,n reaction mb or mb/MeV

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=4587840#post4587840

flied is online now
#1
Nov29-13, 11:09 AM
P: 6
Dear Forum :

I’m reading a cross section data of 20MeV proton + 16O reaction from ICRU 63.
( as attachment and link http://ppt.cc/qf-9 )
The total cross setion of (p,n) reaction is 4.372mb
However, the cross section of emitting neutron of energy between 0 to 1.5MeV is 0.91 mb / MeV.
The cross section of emitting neutron between 1.5 to 2.5 MeV is 2.3 mb / MeV .

But how can the cross section be written as 0.91 or 2.3 mb / MeV, because as 20 MeV proton, it would give a
cross section of 18.2 and 46 mb, which is larger than the total (p,n) reaction
Is it the correct or just the traditional way to present the cross section as mb / MeV ?

Attached Thumbnails

Click image for larger version

Name:	ICRU630031.jpg
Views:	7
Size:	112.8 KB
ID:	64375
mfb is offline
#2
Nov29-13, 05:14 PM
Mentor
P: 9,567
I think the MeV refers to the neutron energy.
So you have (1.5*0.91)mb for a neutron between 0 and 1.5 MeV (is there a factor 10 missing?).
__________________
He
flied is online now
#3
Nov29-13, 10:45 PM
P: 6
thanks mfb,

(1.5*0.91)mb for a neutron between 0 and 1.5 MeV should be correct.
Summation of (1.5*0.91) + 2.3 + 0.75 equals to the total (p,n) reaction cross section.
BTW, which part of factor 10 missing?

mfb is offline
#4
Nov29-13, 11:04 PM
Mentor
P: 9,567

Interpretation of Cross Section of p,n reaction mb or mb/MeV


Oh, I did not see the “-1″. 0.91 is fine.
__________________
He
flied is online now
#5
Nov29-13, 11:59 PM
P: 6
Thanks a lot

Fluka flair

繼5、6年前灌好flair之後

https://flied.wordpress.com/2008/05/05/fluka-flair/

這個月初重灌ubuntu、fluka、flair

又耗去整整兩個多禮拜

發問的紀錄

http://www.ubuntu-tw.org/modules/profile/userinfo.php?uid=9710

http://www.fluka.org/web_archive/earchive/new-fluka-discuss/5827.html

安裝成功的圖片

https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/107913529117343388906/albums/594774729983206158

摸索這種自己不擅長的東西挫折

身邊又沒人可以直接發問的感覺真的不是普通的無力

這就是在自己舒適圈外take very hard effort的學習

Nuclear Energy , Planning for the Black Swan 核能,防範黑天鵝

2013/04/12

查核能安全時候從wikipedia看到wiki也在裡頭寫了Black Swan Event

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_safety#Black_Swan_events

來源是 Adam Piore (June 2011). Nuclear energy: Planning for the Black Swan, Scientific American, p. 32

找了原文來讀

很久沒找科學文獻  這篇也拖了兩三個禮拜才在剛剛看完

繼續閱讀

我認真點一篇反核文章想看 朱天心 蔡康永 張雅麗

新青年專輯3之1/青年為什麼神聖?
http://udn.com/NEWS/READING/X5/7795444.shtml#ixzz2OvW0gBGL

前面講的很不錯

只是我認為只有少數人做的到

但是看到蔡康永那段我就覺得很噁心了

繼續閱讀

「零檢出」vs.「沒有核安就沒有核電」 林中一

從學弟FB看到

近期少數值得看的有關核能安全文章

 

「零檢出」vs.「沒有核安就沒有核電」
─國立中興大學物理系教授林中一

這段日子核能問題是台灣最夯的議題,反核聲勢高漲,不同領域的人紛紛出來大聲疾呼:「為了下一代,台灣不能有核電廠!」在各種媒體的討論場合,每當反核人士拋出一句「你能保證絕對安全嗎?」,核電相關人士立即為之語塞,無法回應,於是「核能安全的要求」成了緊箍咒,一抓就靈,反核聲浪沛然莫之能禦,看來不必等公投了,核四可以立刻停建也!有關核能安全,最新的口號就是幾個政治人物拋出的「沒有核安就沒有核電」!聽來正氣凜然,似乎無從挑剔。但是個人的淺見,這句話和去年政客炒作「美牛瘦肉精」時所要求的「零檢出」一樣,都是假議題,實際上都是不存在的!「零檢出」是無從證實的,因為所有的檢驗儀器的精確度都是有限的!你的儀器精確度到10 ppm,那麼所有低於10 ppm的就是零檢出,你的儀器精確度有2 ppm那麼少於2 ppm的就是零檢出。那麼有沒有甚麼儀器的精確度是「0」的?沒有!所有儀器都有雜訊,那就是儀器測量的下限。所以「零檢出」是相對於你用的儀器,「絕對的零檢出」是不存在的!然而「零檢出」仍然可能有意義,那就是請把標準訂出來,xx ppm, 或 oo ppb之下零檢出,這就有意義。那麼對應於「沒有核安就沒有核電」,我們可以換一句話「沒有飛安就沒有飛航」來看看。世界上沒有航空公司能保證絕對的飛安!事實上,人製造的機器、甚至人的活動,都沒有保證不出事的。莫說坐飛機,誰能保證騎腳踏車「一定」安全?誰能保證開汽車「一定」安全?喝水都可能嗆死人,更遑論其他!所以,人的是世界只有風險的評估,然後看你能容忍的風險程度而已!就像一句老話:you can buy insurance, but not assurance!所以核電廠永遠有出事的「機會」,但是這和飛機「有機會」失事、汽車「有機會」出車禍、甚至走路「有機會」跌倒的是一樣無法避免的。所以討論「絕對的核安」和不訂標準的「零檢出」是和要求某人「永遠愛你」是同樣的無聊!如此,我們討論核安就應該由相對安全的概念去探討。就如同設計大型客機一樣,波音747、空巴380這一類大飛機不出事則已,一出事就是大事,所以在設計、建造時,對安全的要求必然格外嚴格,但是仍然沒有保證不出事!一位旅客從台灣去美國,如果對時間及旅遊舒適度有要求,那麼就要擔飛安的風險。每一天有成千上萬的人願意搭乘飛機旅行,就是從飛安的紀錄,或是任何其他的資訊,讓他願意接受搭乘飛機的風險。有所要求,就要準備付出代價,這才是合理的態度。
核能的使用與否,是工程與經濟上高度技術性的議題,需要多面向的考量。核能政策最後應該以多數人願意承擔的風險做為選擇的標準。類似於「零檢出」,「沒有核安就沒有核電」這句話也是可以有意義的,那就是請把你所謂「核安」的內容說清楚。相較於「飛安」,我們可以從很多客觀的數據去定義「飛安」,例如,這一型飛機的失事率如何、這個航空公司的失事率如何、航空公司多久讓飛機進場維護,飛行員的飛行時數如何等等,都可以做為風險容忍度的參考。世界上有國家不用核能,但是也有擁抱核能的國家,他們的標準都可以用來參考,以訂出我們的標準,例如核電廠意外發生比例、硬體標準、地質標準、意外安全處置程序、甚至核廢料處理等等工程考量,加上經濟方面的議題,例如台灣可以忍受少了核電提供的大約15%發電量嗎?如果不可以,有替代方案嗎?替代方案有沒有排碳的問題?能源自主性有多少影響?電價問題,及對各產業的衝擊如何等等,都可以討論。但是拜託,請不要再提不存在的「絕對的核安」!
很多我們習以為常的環保活動,事實上都有隱藏的危機。騎腳踏車很環保吧,但是製造腳踏車,從材料的開採、開發、輸運、製作都是要使用能源和帶來環境污染的(這些資訊應該可以很客觀的得到)。同樣的,使用太陽能時,太陽電池是來自高污染的半導體工業,燒煤、燒油的火力發電沒有輻射的問題,但是二氧化碳會製造麻煩,這些都是必須考量的問題。我個人目前對核能沒有定見,正面、反面的看法都有,但是多少對這些日子以來,立場鮮明的朋友們,是否在發言之前掌握了比較全面的資訊頗有保留。尤其是許多反核人士的態度令我有點不安,我所看到的論述幾乎都是出自恐懼的居多,但是並沒有對發生意外的機率有甚麼著墨,還語帶強制,甚至還要扯到道德的層面。「我是人,我反核!」,這句話邏輯的否定就是「我不反核,我就不是人!」令人覺得這些朋友比較像在推銷信仰,而不是以理服人。如果使用核能不道德,那麼請問使用汽車很道德嗎?搭乘飛機、高鐵很道德嗎?這些交通工具從製造到使用也產生了各種的污染以及對大氣層和土地的破壞,這些為害甚至是每天都仍在進行中!使用手機很道德嗎?手機的製造就是出自高污染的半導體工業!更遑論
基地台的電磁波還有爭議。說穿了,就是人類文明的確帶來諸多的便利,但是不可避免要付出的,就是破壞環境的代價。個人很欣賞羅大佑先生說的一句話:「開一場演唱會,是要用很多電的!」。天下沒有白吃的午餐,只是利、害相權大家要想清楚,我們必須做選擇!執政當局這次決定將核電付諸公投,個人覺得是件好事,其「好」在能提供正、反雙方一個公開的平台,各自將資料提出做為大家做決定的依據。個人衷心的盼望,不論要不要核能,我們的結論應該是出自理性的選擇而不是出自於恐懼!