AM LAW: SUMMER ASSOCIATE HIRING DOWN 44 PERCENT OVER 2009 Forum

[romothesavior]

JohnBoy, I've agreed with most of what you've said re: nuclear power. You've made some good points. But you still rub me the wrong way. Work on that.

[clintonius]

It couldn't have anything to do with the knowitall attitude and demanding that everybody else possess knowledge of the intricate workings of nuclear physics, then copy/pasting a bio of some historical figure without reading it, now, could it?

[Always Credited]

Nuclear's a band-aid. Maybe it's a band-aid that stays on for a hundred years, but it's still a band-aid. Here are its problems:
(1) Requires massive capital outlays for infrastructure that decays rapidly
(2) Is completely "safe," according to the industry, and yet no one wants plants w/in 100 miles of where they live
(3) Creates highly toxic by-products that can be stored safely, but only at considerable cost (e.g., dry cask)
(4) Is NOT sustainable, no matter what people say, because it uses something in limited supply

Also, to any doofus who thinks one needs a PhD to make public policy arguments: get over yourself.

You have lost all credibility. It is not sustainable, because it uses "something" in limited supply. You obviously have no clue about nuclear fission/fusion...at all. Fusion uses elements like hydrogen...only the single most abundant element in the universe making up 3/4ths of all matter.

For reference 3, again..look to combustible engines for an understanding and potential evolution of nuclear power. As combustible engines gained efficiency as we researched it, so will nuclear power.

2 says absolutely nothing about nuclear power, other than the average person doesn't understand much about it.

1, any significant change is going to cost money...they say solar power is insanely expensive http://www.businessinsider.com/2009/2/s ... y-or-price

You don't know anything about the future capacity for nuclear power. Again, think of the sun as a giant nuclear reactor because that is exactly what it is. Is the sun a 100 year band-aid?

--ImageRemoved--

[JohnBoy]

JohnBoy, I've agreed with most of what you've said re: nuclear power. You've made some good points. But you still rub me the wrong way. Work on that.

Thanks. Learning how to rub people the right way is a much needed skill, in more ways than one. I agree. I know I am an asshole when I get started, learning to stay calm would be much more beneficial. Thanks for the constructive criticism, I always appreciate it.

[JohnBoy]

It couldn't have anything to do with the knowitall attitude and demanding that everybody else possess knowledge of the intricate workings of nuclear physics, then copy/pasting a bio of some historical figure without reading it, now, could it?

Understanding the universe we live in is a passion. I don't demand that everyone else knows about thermal dynamics or nuclear power, just don't bash it from fleeting ideas you gained from fox news.

Again, sorry for the douche-bagginess, It's a work in progress when I'm debating

[bwv812]

.

[JohnBoy]

How the hell did this thread turn into a discussion on nuclear power and Napoleon?

Kinda the same way you turned an OCI thread into an inane discussion on whether St. Louis is Southern.

But to JohnBoy: tell me more about fusion, and how it is a solution to our energy needs.

Are you serious, or sarcastic?

[Sell Manilla]

But to JohnBoy: tell me more about fusion, and how it is a solution to our energy needs.

Are you serious, or sarcastic?

Assume serious & roll with it. Maketh thine case! and then scramble to talk about how it will create law jobs

[bwv812]

.

[JohnBoy]

There have been recent developments and breakthroughs in plasma and large magnetic technologies. Plasma is heated to thermonuclear temperatures when particles are injected. Powerful and reliable large magnet systems handling of energy and particle outflow from the plasma have been developed and used in a wide variety of plasma confinement devices.

The near-term emphasis for magnetic fusion energy is on developing better tools for the production and control of high-temperature plasmas and, thus, the further development of plasma science. For inertial fusion energy, research on chamber-target technologies is focused on key feasibility issues that bear on the high-pulse-rate application of candidate drivers for IFE.

We know fusion technology is viable (thought cold fusion is still either long away or impossible, but again as technology increases exponentially who knows what is possible. Many thought it was impossible to fly, impossible to land on the moon). The issues surround sustaining the reaction and overcoming the required activation energy (which is extremely high). But the fuel sources are tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen (the most abundant element in the universe). Since fusing atoms creates new elements, technically the fuel can be constantly manufactured for consumption; thus, having an unlimited supply.

So the main obstacle is the development of reduced-activation materials. The use plasma is a step in the right direction as leaps are being made.

[bwv812]

.

[JohnBoy]

So essentially there is no current, or even theoretical, net-positive-energy fusion reactor design. We currently have no idea how to create one. But there's always the value of never saying never, and believing nothing is impossible. This is apparently what you mean when you say this forum lacks foresight and that law is dying while nuclear technology is just blossoming.

Wrong on multiple levels. First of all you asked about fusion. Nuclear power includes fission, which has already proven to be successful by France. Also, France has plans to start construction on a nuclear fusion plant.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4629239.stm

Look before you open your mouth and get cocky.

[09042014]

There hasn't been a fusion break through, but active research is going on. One my fav profs was doing research on how to shoot material into a fusion reactor.

[bwv812]

.

[JohnBoy]

There hasn't been a fusion break through, but active research is going on. One my fav profs was doing research on how to shoot material into a fusion reactor.

Depends on how you define breakthrough.

it seems to essentially be a mature technology.

I don't think you could be more wrong.

Not only are they finding new fissile material but they are using nuclear power in applications like "nuclear batteries." For you to say we are at the height of nuclear technology, fission or otherwise, lacks no credible support.

Understanding has to start somewhere. You think one day someone just decided to build a coal burning power plant without any experimental stages?

[underdawg]

in simcity 2000, fusion plants were usually invented at some point between 2000 and 2050. they were expensive but never polluted or melted down. the best thing to do usually was to just create a huge ass waterfall and hydroelectric the shit out of that though. solar and wind were too weak and expensive.

[JohnBoy]

There hasn't been a fusion break through, but active research is going on. One my fav profs was doing research on how to shoot material into a fusion reactor.

Was he your professor, or someone you follow?

[09042014]

There hasn't been a fusion break through, but active research is going on. One my fav profs was doing research on how to shoot material into a fusion reactor.

Depends on how you define breakthrough.

it seems to essentially be a mature technology.

I don't think you could be more wrong.

Not only are they finding new fissile material but they are using nuclear power in applications like "nuclear batteries." For you to say we are at the height of nuclear technology, fission or otherwise, lacks no credible support.

Understanding has to start somewhere. You think one day someone just decided to build a coal burning power plant without any experimental stages?

Nuclear batteries aren't fission, they are radiation based.

[bwv812]

.

[09042014]

There hasn't been a fusion break through, but active research is going on. One my fav profs was doing research on how to shoot material into a fusion reactor.

Was he your professor, or someone you follow?

My professor.

[JohnBoy]

There hasn't been a fusion break through, but active research is going on. One my fav profs was doing research on how to shoot material into a fusion reactor.

Was he your professor, or someone you follow?

My professor.

Mind if I ask who? I like to read as much as I can about physics.

[JohnBoy]

For you to say we are at the height of nuclear technology, fission or otherwise, lacks no credible support.

Good thing I didn't say that, then.

Understanding has to start somewhere. You think one day someone just decided to build a coal burning power plant without any experimental stages?

Sure. But just because something has an experimental stage doesn't mean it will become the next big thing. But I guess you're right. I am going to withdraw from law school and seek an opportunity in the exciting world of nuclear energy — that's how forward thinking I am.

Man, I never said anything about dropping out of law school. Someone said solar energy was the next big thing and said nuclear power was on the decline. All I was pointing out was that the universe runs on nuclear technology so I don't see how it's not the solution (besides understanding dark energy). The only persuasive point to my argument was the importance of nuclear technology moving forward. I never asked you to become a nuclear engineer.

[bwv812]

.

[09042014]

Man, I never said anything about dropping out of law school. Someone said solar energy was the next big thing and said nuclear power was on the decline. All I was pointing out was that the universe runs on nuclear technology so I don't see how it's not the solution (besides understanding dark energy). The only persuasive point to my argument was the importance of nuclear technology moving forward. I never asked you to become a nuclear engineer.

Well solar power is just a method of collection energy from a fusion reaction.

That said nuclear fission is a off the shelf technology that can safely, economically, and quickly reduce America's CO2 output to close to zero, and solve the fossil fuel problem.

[270910]

in simcity 2000, fusion plants were usually invented at some point between 2000 and 2050. they were expensive but never polluted or melted down. the best thing to do usually was to just create a huge ass waterfall and hydroelectric the shit out of that though. solar and wind were too weak and expensive.

I wish I had said that.

HAI BANTER WHAT'S UP EVER...

Oh, wait, this massive fucking tangent is in a thread in the employment forum. I sign on to TLS for snark and sweet, sweet law firm discussion. I see new posts in a thread about summer hiring trends! YESSS! I click on it, and

THE GOGGLES; THEY DO NOTHING.