<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_25_138207</id>
	<title>Beamed Space Solar Power Plant To Open In 2016?</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1245936300000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Eric\_S writes <i>"Anybody who managed to get a decent city going in <em>Sim City 2000</em> remembers the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave\_power\_transmission">microwave power plant</a>; now it seems like a <a href="http://www.next100.com/2009/04/space-solar-power-the-next-fro.php">real-world equivalent</a> might be coming up on the horizon.

The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PG&amp;E">Pacific Gas and Electricity Company</a>, <a href="http://www.next100.com/2009/04/interview-with-solaren-ceo-gar.php">per this 'interview'</a> with the CEO of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaren">Solaren</a> on their affiliated site, announced PG&amp;E's plans to buy 200MW of base-load power from a Solaren beamed space solar power plant by 2016."</i>  I wish the skeptic in me would be quiet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Eric \ _S writes " Anybody who managed to get a decent city going in Sim City 2000 remembers the microwave power plant ; now it seems like a real-world equivalent might be coming up on the horizon .
The Pacific Gas and Electricity Company , per this 'interview ' with the CEO of Solaren on their affiliated site , announced PG&amp;E 's plans to buy 200MW of base-load power from a Solaren beamed space solar power plant by 2016 .
" I wish the skeptic in me would be quiet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eric\_S writes "Anybody who managed to get a decent city going in Sim City 2000 remembers the microwave power plant; now it seems like a real-world equivalent might be coming up on the horizon.
The Pacific Gas and Electricity Company, per this 'interview' with the CEO of Solaren on their affiliated site, announced PG&amp;E's plans to buy 200MW of base-load power from a Solaren beamed space solar power plant by 2016.
"  I wish the skeptic in me would be quiet.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465859</id>
	<title>Military funding</title>
	<author>Chrisq</author>
	<datestamp>1245942180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only reason this might work is that it could get military funding. Of course nobody has "death ray" in mind when they come up with designs like this.....</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only reason this might work is that it could get military funding .
Of course nobody has " death ray " in mind when they come up with designs like this.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only reason this might work is that it could get military funding.
Of course nobody has "death ray" in mind when they come up with designs like this.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466915</id>
	<title>If this is real, do one over  Afghanistan</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1245947580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The reason is that currently, the western militia there must import lots of fuel to provide electricity. That is EXPENSIVE. VERY EXPENSIVE. Instead, the groups could put up one of these that have say 5-50 MW and then put small collectors on the ground. It would be MUCH cheaper than bringing in the equipment and fuel. In addition, if a base is overrun, it would be easy to prevent enemy (read Al Qaeda) from using the equipment and new equipment would be much lighter, easier to take care of, etc. Also, once  several of these were up there, they could be shifted around to help on Emergency locations. For example, helping Hurricanes, tsunami, Chinese EarthQuake,  9/11, etc. The ability to get power into a large disaster area means, LITERALLY life or death. If we put at least one over every major continent, they could be used normally to help a city that already has coal/gas, but then moved ahead of time for when a disaster is heading there way (hurricanes), or a day or two for unseen disasters that happen. Heck, if done right, private space industry should push this private tugs. These can then be used for doing other work (perhaps getting rid of space junk).</htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason is that currently , the western militia there must import lots of fuel to provide electricity .
That is EXPENSIVE .
VERY EXPENSIVE .
Instead , the groups could put up one of these that have say 5-50 MW and then put small collectors on the ground .
It would be MUCH cheaper than bringing in the equipment and fuel .
In addition , if a base is overrun , it would be easy to prevent enemy ( read Al Qaeda ) from using the equipment and new equipment would be much lighter , easier to take care of , etc .
Also , once several of these were up there , they could be shifted around to help on Emergency locations .
For example , helping Hurricanes , tsunami , Chinese EarthQuake , 9/11 , etc .
The ability to get power into a large disaster area means , LITERALLY life or death .
If we put at least one over every major continent , they could be used normally to help a city that already has coal/gas , but then moved ahead of time for when a disaster is heading there way ( hurricanes ) , or a day or two for unseen disasters that happen .
Heck , if done right , private space industry should push this private tugs .
These can then be used for doing other work ( perhaps getting rid of space junk ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason is that currently, the western militia there must import lots of fuel to provide electricity.
That is EXPENSIVE.
VERY EXPENSIVE.
Instead, the groups could put up one of these that have say 5-50 MW and then put small collectors on the ground.
It would be MUCH cheaper than bringing in the equipment and fuel.
In addition, if a base is overrun, it would be easy to prevent enemy (read Al Qaeda) from using the equipment and new equipment would be much lighter, easier to take care of, etc.
Also, once  several of these were up there, they could be shifted around to help on Emergency locations.
For example, helping Hurricanes, tsunami, Chinese EarthQuake,  9/11, etc.
The ability to get power into a large disaster area means, LITERALLY life or death.
If we put at least one over every major continent, they could be used normally to help a city that already has coal/gas, but then moved ahead of time for when a disaster is heading there way (hurricanes), or a day or two for unseen disasters that happen.
Heck, if done right, private space industry should push this private tugs.
These can then be used for doing other work (perhaps getting rid of space junk).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466545</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245945600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>THe beam power density can be held down to just a few times noon sunlight power, and still deliver plenty of energy.</i></p><p><i>That way, both airplane and albatross are safe to transit the beam area.</i></p><p>And what, pray tell, makes you think that "just a few times noon sunlight power" is actually safe?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>THe beam power density can be held down to just a few times noon sunlight power , and still deliver plenty of energy.That way , both airplane and albatross are safe to transit the beam area.And what , pray tell , makes you think that " just a few times noon sunlight power " is actually safe ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>THe beam power density can be held down to just a few times noon sunlight power, and still deliver plenty of energy.That way, both airplane and albatross are safe to transit the beam area.And what, pray tell, makes you think that "just a few times noon sunlight power" is actually safe?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466993</id>
	<title>well...</title>
	<author>path0l0gist</author>
	<datestamp>1245948000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyjWmwTaans" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyjWmwTaans</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = iyjWmwTaans [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyjWmwTaans [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466239</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>john.r.strohm</author>
	<datestamp>1245944040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, no, it won't heat the atmosphere significantly.</p><p>"Atmospheric heating from microwave loss" is another word for "atmospheric attenuation".  The trick is you choose microwave frequencies that are not significantly absorbed by nitrogen, oxygen, and water (dihydrogen monoxide), and that knocks out your atmospheric attenuation problem right there.</p><p>This is Physics 102, people.</p><p>Your real losses are going to be in beamforming and beam wander.  You fix beam wander by using a BIG receiving antenna (which also lets you use low power density in the beam: win-win).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , no , it wo n't heat the atmosphere significantly .
" Atmospheric heating from microwave loss " is another word for " atmospheric attenuation " .
The trick is you choose microwave frequencies that are not significantly absorbed by nitrogen , oxygen , and water ( dihydrogen monoxide ) , and that knocks out your atmospheric attenuation problem right there.This is Physics 102 , people.Your real losses are going to be in beamforming and beam wander .
You fix beam wander by using a BIG receiving antenna ( which also lets you use low power density in the beam : win-win ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, no, it won't heat the atmosphere significantly.
"Atmospheric heating from microwave loss" is another word for "atmospheric attenuation".
The trick is you choose microwave frequencies that are not significantly absorbed by nitrogen, oxygen, and water (dihydrogen monoxide), and that knocks out your atmospheric attenuation problem right there.This is Physics 102, people.Your real losses are going to be in beamforming and beam wander.
You fix beam wander by using a BIG receiving antenna (which also lets you use low power density in the beam: win-win).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467039</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>jayme0227</author>
	<datestamp>1245948180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So how efficient is it to convert solar energy to microwave energy to electrical energy? It is unlikely that it is more efficient than converting solar directly to electrical, or we'd do it already. There must, therefore, be energy lost at both the satellite collecting solar energy and converting it to microwave, and then energy loss on the ground converting from microwave to electrical energy. The efficiency of conversion argument doesn't hold up.</p><p>The only real benefits that I've seen so far are collecting energy 24 hours a day regardless of weather conditions and usable land around the rectenna. These may be enough to make this cost efficient at this time, however I have reason to be skeptical.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So how efficient is it to convert solar energy to microwave energy to electrical energy ?
It is unlikely that it is more efficient than converting solar directly to electrical , or we 'd do it already .
There must , therefore , be energy lost at both the satellite collecting solar energy and converting it to microwave , and then energy loss on the ground converting from microwave to electrical energy .
The efficiency of conversion argument does n't hold up.The only real benefits that I 've seen so far are collecting energy 24 hours a day regardless of weather conditions and usable land around the rectenna .
These may be enough to make this cost efficient at this time , however I have reason to be skeptical .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So how efficient is it to convert solar energy to microwave energy to electrical energy?
It is unlikely that it is more efficient than converting solar directly to electrical, or we'd do it already.
There must, therefore, be energy lost at both the satellite collecting solar energy and converting it to microwave, and then energy loss on the ground converting from microwave to electrical energy.
The efficiency of conversion argument doesn't hold up.The only real benefits that I've seen so far are collecting energy 24 hours a day regardless of weather conditions and usable land around the rectenna.
These may be enough to make this cost efficient at this time, however I have reason to be skeptical.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467025</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1245948180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A simpler way of thinking about it is to consider the Sun-facing area of the Earth and the Sun-facing area of the satellite.  Even if the satellites are 100\% efficient and all of the energy they beam towards Earth contributes to global warming, the change is going to be a tiny fraction of 1\% of the energy hitting Earth.  Now imagine you pump enough carbon dioxide into the atmosphere to make 0.1\% of the energy from the Sun bounce back to Earth instead of escaping into space.  This will have a much more significant impact on the global temperature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A simpler way of thinking about it is to consider the Sun-facing area of the Earth and the Sun-facing area of the satellite .
Even if the satellites are 100 \ % efficient and all of the energy they beam towards Earth contributes to global warming , the change is going to be a tiny fraction of 1 \ % of the energy hitting Earth .
Now imagine you pump enough carbon dioxide into the atmosphere to make 0.1 \ % of the energy from the Sun bounce back to Earth instead of escaping into space .
This will have a much more significant impact on the global temperature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A simpler way of thinking about it is to consider the Sun-facing area of the Earth and the Sun-facing area of the satellite.
Even if the satellites are 100\% efficient and all of the energy they beam towards Earth contributes to global warming, the change is going to be a tiny fraction of 1\% of the energy hitting Earth.
Now imagine you pump enough carbon dioxide into the atmosphere to make 0.1\% of the energy from the Sun bounce back to Earth instead of escaping into space.
This will have a much more significant impact on the global temperature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28472021</id>
	<title>Re:Occam's Razor.</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1245923340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're right. They should just use <a href="http://www.steorn.com/orbo/" title="steorn.com">this</a> [steorn.com] instead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right .
They should just use this [ steorn.com ] instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right.
They should just use this [steorn.com] instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465995</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469221</id>
	<title>The microwave plant was for noobs!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1245956340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Experts leveled the whole area, created the biggest mountain quarter possible in one edge, filled it with waterfalls, and then started the game in pause mode, to add dams to it. You could easily power the whole city with that mountain, while not having any of the risks or rebuilding costs of the others.</p><p>Now if only we hat a magical waterfall from space descent upon the Himalaya...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Experts leveled the whole area , created the biggest mountain quarter possible in one edge , filled it with waterfalls , and then started the game in pause mode , to add dams to it .
You could easily power the whole city with that mountain , while not having any of the risks or rebuilding costs of the others.Now if only we hat a magical waterfall from space descent upon the Himalaya... : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Experts leveled the whole area, created the biggest mountain quarter possible in one edge, filled it with waterfalls, and then started the game in pause mode, to add dams to it.
You could easily power the whole city with that mountain, while not having any of the risks or rebuilding costs of the others.Now if only we hat a magical waterfall from space descent upon the Himalaya... :P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468107</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Canada</title>
	<author>Ernesto Alvarez</author>
	<datestamp>1245952320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Memo from Canada<br>February 13th, 2020</p><p>Dear United States,</p><p>We've know for long that your education system was in trouble, but we didn't know the situation was so desperate. You might want to get a refresher course in geography, but just FYI, Canada is to the north, not to the south of Oregon. If you needed economic support, you should have asked.</p><p>Sincerely,</p><p>Canada</p><p>PS: Somebody boiled the Bay Area, you might want to check it out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Memo from CanadaFebruary 13th , 2020Dear United States,We 've know for long that your education system was in trouble , but we did n't know the situation was so desperate .
You might want to get a refresher course in geography , but just FYI , Canada is to the north , not to the south of Oregon .
If you needed economic support , you should have asked.Sincerely,CanadaPS : Somebody boiled the Bay Area , you might want to check it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Memo from CanadaFebruary 13th, 2020Dear United States,We've know for long that your education system was in trouble, but we didn't know the situation was so desperate.
You might want to get a refresher course in geography, but just FYI, Canada is to the north, not to the south of Oregon.
If you needed economic support, you should have asked.Sincerely,CanadaPS: Somebody boiled the Bay Area, you might want to check it out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465569</id>
	<title>"Solaren Insta-Tan (tm)"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245940500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, that's one way to get a quick tan I'm sure.</p><p>We could sell time in it to celebrities.</p><p>Or just run animals* through for quick roast dinners.</p><p>* or celebrities</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , that 's one way to get a quick tan I 'm sure.We could sell time in it to celebrities.Or just run animals * through for quick roast dinners .
* or celebrities</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, that's one way to get a quick tan I'm sure.We could sell time in it to celebrities.Or just run animals* through for quick roast dinners.
* or celebrities</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466629</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Pontiac</author>
	<datestamp>1245946020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do you think that?<br>Just because the shuttle is not going to be around anymore does not mean we have no launch capability.<br>We still have the Falcon 9, Delta IV and Atlas V launch vehicles.<br>Delta IV can launch 23,904 lb to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary\_transfer\_orbit" title="wikipedia.org">GTO</a> [wikipedia.org]<br>Atlas V can put 28,660 lb into <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary\_transfer\_orbit" title="wikipedia.org">GTO</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Just to compare the Shuttle capacity to GTO is only  8,390 lb</p><p>On Launches to LEO the Shuttle is still outclassed by Atlas V (53,600 lb to Atlas's 64,860 lb)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do you think that ? Just because the shuttle is not going to be around anymore does not mean we have no launch capability.We still have the Falcon 9 , Delta IV and Atlas V launch vehicles.Delta IV can launch 23,904 lb to GTO [ wikipedia.org ] Atlas V can put 28,660 lb into GTO [ wikipedia.org ] Just to compare the Shuttle capacity to GTO is only 8,390 lbOn Launches to LEO the Shuttle is still outclassed by Atlas V ( 53,600 lb to Atlas 's 64,860 lb )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do you think that?Just because the shuttle is not going to be around anymore does not mean we have no launch capability.We still have the Falcon 9, Delta IV and Atlas V launch vehicles.Delta IV can launch 23,904 lb to GTO [wikipedia.org]Atlas V can put 28,660 lb into GTO [wikipedia.org]Just to compare the Shuttle capacity to GTO is only  8,390 lbOn Launches to LEO the Shuttle is still outclassed by Atlas V (53,600 lb to Atlas's 64,860 lb)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467405</id>
	<title>What if ...</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1245949680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...the beam goes off course and ignites thousands of acres of southern California brush land? How would we know the difference between that and their normal state of affairs?</htmltext>
<tokenext>...the beam goes off course and ignites thousands of acres of southern California brush land ?
How would we know the difference between that and their normal state of affairs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the beam goes off course and ignites thousands of acres of southern California brush land?
How would we know the difference between that and their normal state of affairs?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468625</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>Brandon30X</author>
	<datestamp>1245954180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally a reasonable and informative comment. Also a retrodirective transmitting array can be used to stay targeted automatically using a pilot signal. Additionally the beam can be defocused if the pilot signal is lost.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally a reasonable and informative comment .
Also a retrodirective transmitting array can be used to stay targeted automatically using a pilot signal .
Additionally the beam can be defocused if the pilot signal is lost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally a reasonable and informative comment.
Also a retrodirective transmitting array can be used to stay targeted automatically using a pilot signal.
Additionally the beam can be defocused if the pilot signal is lost.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466239</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795</id>
	<title>Science/tech illiteracy</title>
	<author>StCredZero</author>
	<datestamp>1245941820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphere</p></div><p>Fail.</p><p>Most power generation schemes are *heat engines.*  The typical efficiency is less than 40\%.  Microwave transmission starts at 50\% efficiency, and is likely to get better.  For the same amount of electric power, you're going to have less waste heat than with coal, nuclear, or natural gas power plants.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphereFail.Most power generation schemes are * heat engines .
* The typical efficiency is less than 40 \ % .
Microwave transmission starts at 50 \ % efficiency , and is likely to get better .
For the same amount of electric power , you 're going to have less waste heat than with coal , nuclear , or natural gas power plants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphereFail.Most power generation schemes are *heat engines.
*  The typical efficiency is less than 40\%.
Microwave transmission starts at 50\% efficiency, and is likely to get better.
For the same amount of electric power, you're going to have less waste heat than with coal, nuclear, or natural gas power plants.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466013</id>
	<title>huh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>in the article they mention that an advantage of their system is that sunlight can be captured outside the atmosphere, so that it is 10x stronger (no attenuation losses). However, they *do* have to beam the energy back through the atmosphere right? Doesn't that annihilate the advantage?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in the article they mention that an advantage of their system is that sunlight can be captured outside the atmosphere , so that it is 10x stronger ( no attenuation losses ) .
However , they * do * have to beam the energy back through the atmosphere right ?
Does n't that annihilate the advantage ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in the article they mention that an advantage of their system is that sunlight can be captured outside the atmosphere, so that it is 10x stronger (no attenuation losses).
However, they *do* have to beam the energy back through the atmosphere right?
Doesn't that annihilate the advantage?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468635</id>
	<title>AN/SPY radar</title>
	<author>l00sr</author>
	<datestamp>1245954180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This reminds me of a story told by a guy I once knew about the AN/SPY radar--i.e., the big hexagonal radars you see on US Navy ships.  Apparently, he and a friend were walking around outside the facility where they are designed, built, and tested.  At this facility, they have functional test versions of the radars mounted on the sides of buildings, in much the same way they're mounted on ships, next to huge red lights to signal when they're turned on.</p><p>So, this guy is walking along with his friend, and suddenly feels distinctly warm.  He turns to his friend and asks, "Do you feel that?"  He says, "Yes."  They look up, and sure enough, the radar is on.  Guess the radar missed!</p><p>The AN/SPY is a peak 4 MW system, and it operates in the microwave range, for reference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This reminds me of a story told by a guy I once knew about the AN/SPY radar--i.e. , the big hexagonal radars you see on US Navy ships .
Apparently , he and a friend were walking around outside the facility where they are designed , built , and tested .
At this facility , they have functional test versions of the radars mounted on the sides of buildings , in much the same way they 're mounted on ships , next to huge red lights to signal when they 're turned on.So , this guy is walking along with his friend , and suddenly feels distinctly warm .
He turns to his friend and asks , " Do you feel that ?
" He says , " Yes .
" They look up , and sure enough , the radar is on .
Guess the radar missed ! The AN/SPY is a peak 4 MW system , and it operates in the microwave range , for reference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This reminds me of a story told by a guy I once knew about the AN/SPY radar--i.e., the big hexagonal radars you see on US Navy ships.
Apparently, he and a friend were walking around outside the facility where they are designed, built, and tested.
At this facility, they have functional test versions of the radars mounted on the sides of buildings, in much the same way they're mounted on ships, next to huge red lights to signal when they're turned on.So, this guy is walking along with his friend, and suddenly feels distinctly warm.
He turns to his friend and asks, "Do you feel that?
"  He says, "Yes.
"  They look up, and sure enough, the radar is on.
Guess the radar missed!The AN/SPY is a peak 4 MW system, and it operates in the microwave range, for reference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466909</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>radtea</author>
	<datestamp>1245947520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>we can conclude that the extra energy reaching the Earth would be in the region of 0.0000001\%.</i></p><p>Please don't confuse the trolls with numbers!  If you start bringing quantitative facts into the discussion they won't be able to lie with abstraction, using the false identity "heats the atmosphere" to imply "heats the atmosphere to a significant degree" instead of the true "heats the atmosphere vastly less than an equivalent fossil fuel plant would."</p><p>I gotta love the "it seems to me" replies on this story:  they demonstrate the complete scientific and technical illiteracy of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. posters.  All kinds of information--actual, quantitative facts!--is available in the linked stories, and clever people can even go out and search around to generate independent confirmation the way you have.  But that won't stop the morons who want to tell us all that "it just makes sense" to them that this will result in boiling lakes of fire, deep-fried tweety birds and gigantic lizards stepping on Tokyo.</p><p>"I may be ignorant and innumerate, but I that doesn't stop me from having a strongly held opinion!"</p><p>That pales beside the "thinking skillz" demonstrated by people who think this is different from fossil-fuelled power because it "adds energy to the atmosphere that would otherwise have passed us by."  Gosh, then, it's exactly the same as coal, oil, gas and nuclear power, all of which "add energy to the atmosphere which would otherwise have not been added to the atmosphere."  Carbon-based power does nothing more than "add solar energy from another time" to the atmosphere.  How that is better than "adding solar energy from another place" to the atmosphere is really unclear.  I guess I'm just not smrt enough to figure it out.</p><p>Nuclear power "adds energy from a bygone supernova" to the atmosphere!  No wonder people are worried about it!  They know exploding stars kill people, unlike all those silly nuclear physicists who don't!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>we can conclude that the extra energy reaching the Earth would be in the region of 0.0000001 \ % .Please do n't confuse the trolls with numbers !
If you start bringing quantitative facts into the discussion they wo n't be able to lie with abstraction , using the false identity " heats the atmosphere " to imply " heats the atmosphere to a significant degree " instead of the true " heats the atmosphere vastly less than an equivalent fossil fuel plant would .
" I got ta love the " it seems to me " replies on this story : they demonstrate the complete scientific and technical illiteracy of / .
posters. All kinds of information--actual , quantitative facts ! --is available in the linked stories , and clever people can even go out and search around to generate independent confirmation the way you have .
But that wo n't stop the morons who want to tell us all that " it just makes sense " to them that this will result in boiling lakes of fire , deep-fried tweety birds and gigantic lizards stepping on Tokyo .
" I may be ignorant and innumerate , but I that does n't stop me from having a strongly held opinion !
" That pales beside the " thinking skillz " demonstrated by people who think this is different from fossil-fuelled power because it " adds energy to the atmosphere that would otherwise have passed us by .
" Gosh , then , it 's exactly the same as coal , oil , gas and nuclear power , all of which " add energy to the atmosphere which would otherwise have not been added to the atmosphere .
" Carbon-based power does nothing more than " add solar energy from another time " to the atmosphere .
How that is better than " adding solar energy from another place " to the atmosphere is really unclear .
I guess I 'm just not smrt enough to figure it out.Nuclear power " adds energy from a bygone supernova " to the atmosphere !
No wonder people are worried about it !
They know exploding stars kill people , unlike all those silly nuclear physicists who do n't !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>we can conclude that the extra energy reaching the Earth would be in the region of 0.0000001\%.Please don't confuse the trolls with numbers!
If you start bringing quantitative facts into the discussion they won't be able to lie with abstraction, using the false identity "heats the atmosphere" to imply "heats the atmosphere to a significant degree" instead of the true "heats the atmosphere vastly less than an equivalent fossil fuel plant would.
"I gotta love the "it seems to me" replies on this story:  they demonstrate the complete scientific and technical illiteracy of /.
posters.  All kinds of information--actual, quantitative facts!--is available in the linked stories, and clever people can even go out and search around to generate independent confirmation the way you have.
But that won't stop the morons who want to tell us all that "it just makes sense" to them that this will result in boiling lakes of fire, deep-fried tweety birds and gigantic lizards stepping on Tokyo.
"I may be ignorant and innumerate, but I that doesn't stop me from having a strongly held opinion!
"That pales beside the "thinking skillz" demonstrated by people who think this is different from fossil-fuelled power because it "adds energy to the atmosphere that would otherwise have passed us by.
"  Gosh, then, it's exactly the same as coal, oil, gas and nuclear power, all of which "add energy to the atmosphere which would otherwise have not been added to the atmosphere.
"  Carbon-based power does nothing more than "add solar energy from another time" to the atmosphere.
How that is better than "adding solar energy from another place" to the atmosphere is really unclear.
I guess I'm just not smrt enough to figure it out.Nuclear power "adds energy from a bygone supernova" to the atmosphere!
No wonder people are worried about it!
They know exploding stars kill people, unlike all those silly nuclear physicists who don't!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469421</id>
	<title>Re:Solar energy from space</title>
	<author>dwye</author>
	<datestamp>1245957120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; What happens to countries which depend on oil for revenue?<p>

Really smart ones invest in it.  Merely smart ones are and have invested outside the Middle East, so that when their oil runs out their revenue doesn't.  Dumb ones return to where ever they were, economically, in the early 19th century.</p><p>

&gt; But human greed says some kind of war will happen if space solar energy becomes reality.</p><p>

Oil exporting countries without other revenue streams have not demonstrated a lot of geosynchronous launch capability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; What happens to countries which depend on oil for revenue ?
Really smart ones invest in it .
Merely smart ones are and have invested outside the Middle East , so that when their oil runs out their revenue does n't .
Dumb ones return to where ever they were , economically , in the early 19th century .
&gt; But human greed says some kind of war will happen if space solar energy becomes reality .
Oil exporting countries without other revenue streams have not demonstrated a lot of geosynchronous launch capability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; What happens to countries which depend on oil for revenue?
Really smart ones invest in it.
Merely smart ones are and have invested outside the Middle East, so that when their oil runs out their revenue doesn't.
Dumb ones return to where ever they were, economically, in the early 19th century.
&gt; But human greed says some kind of war will happen if space solar energy becomes reality.
Oil exporting countries without other revenue streams have not demonstrated a lot of geosynchronous launch capability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28474527</id>
	<title>Re:Oh, come on... You can't have it both ways.</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1245933000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Never, ever multiply temperatures.  It doesn't mean anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Never , ever multiply temperatures .
It does n't mean anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never, ever multiply temperatures.
It doesn't mean anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466429</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519</id>
	<title>Global warming?</title>
	<author>steelmaverick</author>
	<datestamp>1245940320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd be concerned with maybe its effects on the weather, maybe global warming.

Also, this could affect radio communications on Earth. Or perhaps not, since it probably would operate off of a different frequency.

Personally I think that geothermal energy is still a method of energy production that has yet to be tapped on a more massive scale. Why put up satellites and beam power back to Earth when we have excellent sources of power here?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be concerned with maybe its effects on the weather , maybe global warming .
Also , this could affect radio communications on Earth .
Or perhaps not , since it probably would operate off of a different frequency .
Personally I think that geothermal energy is still a method of energy production that has yet to be tapped on a more massive scale .
Why put up satellites and beam power back to Earth when we have excellent sources of power here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be concerned with maybe its effects on the weather, maybe global warming.
Also, this could affect radio communications on Earth.
Or perhaps not, since it probably would operate off of a different frequency.
Personally I think that geothermal energy is still a method of energy production that has yet to be tapped on a more massive scale.
Why put up satellites and beam power back to Earth when we have excellent sources of power here?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468261</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>labradore</author>
	<datestamp>1245952860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Remember, you've already got PV conversion loss up in space.  Probably they'll get around 20\% efficiency up there and 75\% efficiency in transit to the ground.  So overall you're getting around 15\% of the power that will hit the satellites.  On the other hand, it&#226;(TM)s base-load, you get a lot more light hitting panels in space (vs. on the ground) and the system has got low on-going costs.  If they manage to build their birds to last longer than 30 years and the damn things actually work, they will likely make good money.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember , you 've already got PV conversion loss up in space .
Probably they 'll get around 20 \ % efficiency up there and 75 \ % efficiency in transit to the ground .
So overall you 're getting around 15 \ % of the power that will hit the satellites .
On the other hand , it   ( TM ) s base-load , you get a lot more light hitting panels in space ( vs. on the ground ) and the system has got low on-going costs .
If they manage to build their birds to last longer than 30 years and the damn things actually work , they will likely make good money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember, you've already got PV conversion loss up in space.
Probably they'll get around 20\% efficiency up there and 75\% efficiency in transit to the ground.
So overall you're getting around 15\% of the power that will hit the satellites.
On the other hand, itâ(TM)s base-load, you get a lot more light hitting panels in space (vs. on the ground) and the system has got low on-going costs.
If they manage to build their birds to last longer than 30 years and the damn things actually work, they will likely make good money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466237</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28479359</id>
	<title>Increasing energy input</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246011660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Global warming is already an issue.</p><p>If you capture energy in space that was not already destined to arrive on Earth, then beam it there, that will increase the energy on the planet, creating further warming.</p><p>CN</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Global warming is already an issue.If you capture energy in space that was not already destined to arrive on Earth , then beam it there , that will increase the energy on the planet , creating further warming.CN</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Global warming is already an issue.If you capture energy in space that was not already destined to arrive on Earth, then beam it there, that will increase the energy on the planet, creating further warming.CN</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465495</id>
	<title>Miss</title>
	<author>SIBM</author>
	<datestamp>1245940200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder if there are plans to avoid misses.  This makes nuclear look good....</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if there are plans to avoid misses .
This makes nuclear look good... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if there are plans to avoid misses.
This makes nuclear look good....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465481</id>
	<title>They should try this over San Francisco</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245940080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the people over there are pretty progressive on the green energy front, and if there are any problems it will be over San Francisco.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the people over there are pretty progressive on the green energy front , and if there are any problems it will be over San Francisco .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the people over there are pretty progressive on the green energy front, and if there are any problems it will be over San Francisco.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466369</id>
	<title>The Luddites were at least in favour of education</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1245944760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is what happens when you get your religions mixed up.</p></div></blockquote><p>I smell the stupid trend of changing the meaning of a word either just to win an argument or (less likely) ignorance that such words as "obsession" exist.  Yes I know that the Heartland Institute is full of people that read a lot of books unlike those wacky scientists that freeze their balls off looking at ice cores in Antarctica - and those bright folk at the Heartland Institute will tell you that smoking is good for you and global warming is a myth.  This "high priest of science" stuff may be funny among your peers but out in the wide world it makes as little sense as "high priest of milkshakes".  Even the oil exploration community was convinced of global warming in the 1990s before it became a Republican vs Democrat issue.  It's unfortunately become another thing for sects of lay preachers to yell about as another example of the evils of education.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what happens when you get your religions mixed up.I smell the stupid trend of changing the meaning of a word either just to win an argument or ( less likely ) ignorance that such words as " obsession " exist .
Yes I know that the Heartland Institute is full of people that read a lot of books unlike those wacky scientists that freeze their balls off looking at ice cores in Antarctica - and those bright folk at the Heartland Institute will tell you that smoking is good for you and global warming is a myth .
This " high priest of science " stuff may be funny among your peers but out in the wide world it makes as little sense as " high priest of milkshakes " .
Even the oil exploration community was convinced of global warming in the 1990s before it became a Republican vs Democrat issue .
It 's unfortunately become another thing for sects of lay preachers to yell about as another example of the evils of education .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what happens when you get your religions mixed up.I smell the stupid trend of changing the meaning of a word either just to win an argument or (less likely) ignorance that such words as "obsession" exist.
Yes I know that the Heartland Institute is full of people that read a lot of books unlike those wacky scientists that freeze their balls off looking at ice cores in Antarctica - and those bright folk at the Heartland Institute will tell you that smoking is good for you and global warming is a myth.
This "high priest of science" stuff may be funny among your peers but out in the wide world it makes as little sense as "high priest of milkshakes".
Even the oil exploration community was convinced of global warming in the 1990s before it became a Republican vs Democrat issue.
It's unfortunately become another thing for sects of lay preachers to yell about as another example of the evils of education.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466277</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>AlecC</author>
	<datestamp>1245944220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The global warming caused by fossil fuels is not the energy cause by burning those fuels, it the many hundreds or thousands of times more of the incoming solar energy that is trapped because of the carbon dioxide created by the burning. If we use this energy to replace fossil fuels, we will leave the fossils in the ground, and we will create zero carbon dioxide. It therefore represents a very substantial win for global warming. It will not affect the weather any more (or less) than the heat our power stations already emit, which creates significant microclimates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The global warming caused by fossil fuels is not the energy cause by burning those fuels , it the many hundreds or thousands of times more of the incoming solar energy that is trapped because of the carbon dioxide created by the burning .
If we use this energy to replace fossil fuels , we will leave the fossils in the ground , and we will create zero carbon dioxide .
It therefore represents a very substantial win for global warming .
It will not affect the weather any more ( or less ) than the heat our power stations already emit , which creates significant microclimates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The global warming caused by fossil fuels is not the energy cause by burning those fuels, it the many hundreds or thousands of times more of the incoming solar energy that is trapped because of the carbon dioxide created by the burning.
If we use this energy to replace fossil fuels, we will leave the fossils in the ground, and we will create zero carbon dioxide.
It therefore represents a very substantial win for global warming.
It will not affect the weather any more (or less) than the heat our power stations already emit, which creates significant microclimates.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466985</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>chexy</author>
	<datestamp>1245947940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"If you're worried about microwave radiation, remember that this includes the frequencies that make up the WiFi, Bluetooth, and AM/FM radio waves that pass through your body all the time."</p><p>If wifi,bluetooth and am/fm waves are so similar, there must be plenty of energy floating around us.  Why can't we just recover that energy?<br>Power your laptop from your WiFi signal.<br>Heck, with all the radio stations transmitting around us we should be able to pluck a few dozen frequencies and power the radio itself.</p><p>How efficient are these antennas again?</p><p>Ok, you can flame me now</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" If you 're worried about microwave radiation , remember that this includes the frequencies that make up the WiFi , Bluetooth , and AM/FM radio waves that pass through your body all the time .
" If wifi,bluetooth and am/fm waves are so similar , there must be plenty of energy floating around us .
Why ca n't we just recover that energy ? Power your laptop from your WiFi signal.Heck , with all the radio stations transmitting around us we should be able to pluck a few dozen frequencies and power the radio itself.How efficient are these antennas again ? Ok , you can flame me now</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If you're worried about microwave radiation, remember that this includes the frequencies that make up the WiFi, Bluetooth, and AM/FM radio waves that pass through your body all the time.
"If wifi,bluetooth and am/fm waves are so similar, there must be plenty of energy floating around us.
Why can't we just recover that energy?Power your laptop from your WiFi signal.Heck, with all the radio stations transmitting around us we should be able to pluck a few dozen frequencies and power the radio itself.How efficient are these antennas again?Ok, you can flame me now</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465995</id>
	<title>Occam's Razor.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While this might be cool tech, and may even work, it's using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.<br> <br>

There absolutely has to be dozens upon dozens of more efficient, less complex, and easier to maintain ways of generating power.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While this might be cool tech , and may even work , it 's using a sledgehammer to crack a nut .
There absolutely has to be dozens upon dozens of more efficient , less complex , and easier to maintain ways of generating power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While this might be cool tech, and may even work, it's using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
There absolutely has to be dozens upon dozens of more efficient, less complex, and easier to maintain ways of generating power.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467175</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Meumeu</author>
	<datestamp>1245948780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>First is the infrared, which is the heat energy.</p></div></blockquote><p>A bit off-topic, but I've always wondered why infrared is the only spectrum referred to as "heat energy".
Why is that?  If an object absorbs UV radiation, will it not increase in temperature?
Why is it that "heat-sensor" is synonymous with "infrared sensor"?
Do ALL objects emit only infrared based on temperature?</p><p>For example, I know that metal will glow in visible spectrum when heated (e.g. the "burner" on an electric stove).</p><p>So is it something magical about IR or is it simply that a wide variety of objects just so happen (by coincidence) to have a high correspondence between IR radiation and temperature?</p><p>Does my question make any sense?</p></div><p>Actually the relationship between the wavelength and the temperature does not depend on the material. And for the "heat energy" thing, I guess it's because the black body radiation at room temperature is mostly infrared.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>First is the infrared , which is the heat energy.A bit off-topic , but I 've always wondered why infrared is the only spectrum referred to as " heat energy " .
Why is that ?
If an object absorbs UV radiation , will it not increase in temperature ?
Why is it that " heat-sensor " is synonymous with " infrared sensor " ?
Do ALL objects emit only infrared based on temperature ? For example , I know that metal will glow in visible spectrum when heated ( e.g .
the " burner " on an electric stove ) .So is it something magical about IR or is it simply that a wide variety of objects just so happen ( by coincidence ) to have a high correspondence between IR radiation and temperature ? Does my question make any sense ? Actually the relationship between the wavelength and the temperature does not depend on the material .
And for the " heat energy " thing , I guess it 's because the black body radiation at room temperature is mostly infrared .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First is the infrared, which is the heat energy.A bit off-topic, but I've always wondered why infrared is the only spectrum referred to as "heat energy".
Why is that?
If an object absorbs UV radiation, will it not increase in temperature?
Why is it that "heat-sensor" is synonymous with "infrared sensor"?
Do ALL objects emit only infrared based on temperature?For example, I know that metal will glow in visible spectrum when heated (e.g.
the "burner" on an electric stove).So is it something magical about IR or is it simply that a wide variety of objects just so happen (by coincidence) to have a high correspondence between IR radiation and temperature?Does my question make any sense?Actually the relationship between the wavelength and the temperature does not depend on the material.
And for the "heat energy" thing, I guess it's because the black body radiation at room temperature is mostly infrared.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465849</id>
	<title>What could go wrong?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The list is endless. I wrote a short story once about a future similar to King's Gunslinger where technology has failed and nature has reclaimed most of our roads and infrastructure and people travel on a road burned into the earth by a slowly orbiting solar reflector that scorches a trail across the world. Of course you gotta know when to get off that road!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The list is endless .
I wrote a short story once about a future similar to King 's Gunslinger where technology has failed and nature has reclaimed most of our roads and infrastructure and people travel on a road burned into the earth by a slowly orbiting solar reflector that scorches a trail across the world .
Of course you got ta know when to get off that road !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The list is endless.
I wrote a short story once about a future similar to King's Gunslinger where technology has failed and nature has reclaimed most of our roads and infrastructure and people travel on a road burned into the earth by a slowly orbiting solar reflector that scorches a trail across the world.
Of course you gotta know when to get off that road!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466307</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>john.r.strohm</author>
	<datestamp>1245944400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's 1.3 kW/m^2 at ground level, in the form of sunlight.</p><p>You have a LOT of atmospheric attenuation (and consequent atmospheric heating) at optical wavelengths.  In this case, the heating is a Good Thing: it makes the planet livable.  Compare with the temperature variations on the moon, between shadow and sunlight.</p><p>I don't have a number for available solar power density in Earth orbit, but I would be very surprised if it was not a few (at least) orders of magnitude higher.  (Considering that direct sunlight vs. clouds is about THREE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE difference in attenuation, right there, as measured by any photographer's light meter...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's 1.3 kW/m ^ 2 at ground level , in the form of sunlight.You have a LOT of atmospheric attenuation ( and consequent atmospheric heating ) at optical wavelengths .
In this case , the heating is a Good Thing : it makes the planet livable .
Compare with the temperature variations on the moon , between shadow and sunlight.I do n't have a number for available solar power density in Earth orbit , but I would be very surprised if it was not a few ( at least ) orders of magnitude higher .
( Considering that direct sunlight vs. clouds is about THREE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE difference in attenuation , right there , as measured by any photographer 's light meter... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's 1.3 kW/m^2 at ground level, in the form of sunlight.You have a LOT of atmospheric attenuation (and consequent atmospheric heating) at optical wavelengths.
In this case, the heating is a Good Thing: it makes the planet livable.
Compare with the temperature variations on the moon, between shadow and sunlight.I don't have a number for available solar power density in Earth orbit, but I would be very surprised if it was not a few (at least) orders of magnitude higher.
(Considering that direct sunlight vs. clouds is about THREE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE difference in attenuation, right there, as measured by any photographer's light meter...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466731</id>
	<title>I wish the skeptic in me would be quiet.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245946620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wish the rest of you would be quiet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish the rest of you would be quiet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish the rest of you would be quiet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28473021</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>director\_mr</author>
	<datestamp>1245926820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even though you can get more power in space, this idea still doesn't make sense <br> <br>
Basically, lets say solar panels of a certain mass in space are 8x more efficient.   (Actually solar cells are LESS efficient in space, but there is greater amounts of energy up there) Take away losses in beaming down to earth, and lets be generous and say they are 7x more efficient.  So lets say you get 7x energy per unit of mass in space.  In what universe is it cheaper to put a pound of equipment in geo-synchronous orbit over 7 pounds of the same equipment on the ground?  This idea seems idiotic at this point unless they find a way to launch things into orbit WAY cheaper than they do now.  <br> <br>
For Example: The average cost of Geo-Synch orbit is $10000 per pound.  So I can save $10000 per pound by putting the solar cells on the ground.  That is a significant economy that I don't believe any space launch technology can overcome at this point.  Plus maintenance is a LOT cheaper when I don't have to launch people into space.  This guy is just talking to say things that sound cool.  No way are they going to do this in real life for a LONG time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even though you can get more power in space , this idea still does n't make sense Basically , lets say solar panels of a certain mass in space are 8x more efficient .
( Actually solar cells are LESS efficient in space , but there is greater amounts of energy up there ) Take away losses in beaming down to earth , and lets be generous and say they are 7x more efficient .
So lets say you get 7x energy per unit of mass in space .
In what universe is it cheaper to put a pound of equipment in geo-synchronous orbit over 7 pounds of the same equipment on the ground ?
This idea seems idiotic at this point unless they find a way to launch things into orbit WAY cheaper than they do now .
For Example : The average cost of Geo-Synch orbit is $ 10000 per pound .
So I can save $ 10000 per pound by putting the solar cells on the ground .
That is a significant economy that I do n't believe any space launch technology can overcome at this point .
Plus maintenance is a LOT cheaper when I do n't have to launch people into space .
This guy is just talking to say things that sound cool .
No way are they going to do this in real life for a LONG time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even though you can get more power in space, this idea still doesn't make sense  
Basically, lets say solar panels of a certain mass in space are 8x more efficient.
(Actually solar cells are LESS efficient in space, but there is greater amounts of energy up there) Take away losses in beaming down to earth, and lets be generous and say they are 7x more efficient.
So lets say you get 7x energy per unit of mass in space.
In what universe is it cheaper to put a pound of equipment in geo-synchronous orbit over 7 pounds of the same equipment on the ground?
This idea seems idiotic at this point unless they find a way to launch things into orbit WAY cheaper than they do now.
For Example: The average cost of Geo-Synch orbit is $10000 per pound.
So I can save $10000 per pound by putting the solar cells on the ground.
That is a significant economy that I don't believe any space launch technology can overcome at this point.
Plus maintenance is a LOT cheaper when I don't have to launch people into space.
This guy is just talking to say things that sound cool.
No way are they going to do this in real life for a LONG time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465661</id>
	<title>Dupe from months ago?</title>
	<author>Ihlosi</author>
	<datestamp>1245940980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think I remember seeing the same story, here on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., \_months\_ ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think I remember seeing the same story , here on /. , \ _months \ _ ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think I remember seeing the same story, here on /., \_months\_ ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28472523</id>
	<title>Re:Ouch!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245924960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rectenna?  Damn near killed-tenna!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rectenna ?
Damn near killed-tenna !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rectenna?
Damn near killed-tenna!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470765</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245962460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just a few times solar power eh?  At that point, just roll out the solar panels on the ground instead of paying billions of dollars just to stick them up in the sky.  Certainly would have a better KW/$ ratio.</p><p>Why the big push to put the solar cells in orbit anyway?  Is the incident power/area really that much higher without the atmosphere in the way?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just a few times solar power eh ?
At that point , just roll out the solar panels on the ground instead of paying billions of dollars just to stick them up in the sky .
Certainly would have a better KW/ $ ratio.Why the big push to put the solar cells in orbit anyway ?
Is the incident power/area really that much higher without the atmosphere in the way ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just a few times solar power eh?
At that point, just roll out the solar panels on the ground instead of paying billions of dollars just to stick them up in the sky.
Certainly would have a better KW/$ ratio.Why the big push to put the solar cells in orbit anyway?
Is the incident power/area really that much higher without the atmosphere in the way?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468927</id>
	<title>Re:In Space</title>
	<author>sam0vi</author>
	<datestamp>1245955320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree completely with parent. Why don't they take that money and just cover a few square miles with solar panels?? It would be cheaper, more efficient, more easily mantained, and there's no chance that a slight malfunction would vaporize people, cities or even whole lakes. Why the fuck are they doing this???!!!!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree completely with parent .
Why do n't they take that money and just cover a few square miles with solar panels ? ?
It would be cheaper , more efficient , more easily mantained , and there 's no chance that a slight malfunction would vaporize people , cities or even whole lakes .
Why the fuck are they doing this ? ? ? ! ! ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree completely with parent.
Why don't they take that money and just cover a few square miles with solar panels??
It would be cheaper, more efficient, more easily mantained, and there's no chance that a slight malfunction would vaporize people, cities or even whole lakes.
Why the fuck are they doing this???!!!!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466821</id>
	<title>Re:Miss</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1245947040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it's position. That's how I'd do it.</i></p><p>So how to you change electrical energy into Thrust?  Because I and NASA would love to know how you would do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it 's position .
That 's how I 'd do it.So how to you change electrical energy into Thrust ?
Because I and NASA would love to know how you would do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it's position.
That's how I'd do it.So how to you change electrical energy into Thrust?
Because I and NASA would love to know how you would do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465765</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245943860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Somethings seems wrong with this reasoning.</p><p>First, a "few times" noon sunlight power, I think would be pretty brutal. To take you literally, it would be like standing in the sun at noon where the sun is say three times brighter than it is. I'm not a physicist, so feel free to tell me why a three times more power sun at noon wouldn't be a problem for me.</p></div><p>Sunlight has two components that make it uncomfortable or dangerous.  First is the infrared, which is the heat energy.  Second is the Ultraviolet, which can damage skin cells.  Because the energy is not in infrared or UV radiation, you will experience neither of these effects.  If you're worried about microwave radiation, remember that this includes the frequencies that make up the WiFi, Bluetooth, and AM/FM radio waves that pass through your body all the time.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Secondly,
Doesn't a "few times" noon sunlight power mean that your getting only a "few times" what you'd be getting from the sun by itself, which isn't all that much. Doesn't sound like your going to deliver the concentrations of power that cities need.</p><p>So, I'm inclined not to put too much stake in what you said.</p></div><p>Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar.  Also remember that the solar panels placed in space have a large surface area than the antenna, receive more solar energy per area (due to not having losses due to the ozone layer, etc), and can beam power 24/7.  So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful, and the solar panels were 80\% efficient, rather than 20\%.  Using these (thumbnail estimate) numbers, that makes microwave 16x more efficient per unit area than solar.  It becomes even more efficient when you take into account that the sun is not as bright at other times of the day (such as 8AM, or 11PM).
</p><p>And yes, I am an Electrical Engineer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Somethings seems wrong with this reasoning.First , a " few times " noon sunlight power , I think would be pretty brutal .
To take you literally , it would be like standing in the sun at noon where the sun is say three times brighter than it is .
I 'm not a physicist , so feel free to tell me why a three times more power sun at noon would n't be a problem for me.Sunlight has two components that make it uncomfortable or dangerous .
First is the infrared , which is the heat energy .
Second is the Ultraviolet , which can damage skin cells .
Because the energy is not in infrared or UV radiation , you will experience neither of these effects .
If you 're worried about microwave radiation , remember that this includes the frequencies that make up the WiFi , Bluetooth , and AM/FM radio waves that pass through your body all the time.Secondly , Does n't a " few times " noon sunlight power mean that your getting only a " few times " what you 'd be getting from the sun by itself , which is n't all that much .
Does n't sound like your going to deliver the concentrations of power that cities need.So , I 'm inclined not to put too much stake in what you said.Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar .
Also remember that the solar panels placed in space have a large surface area than the antenna , receive more solar energy per area ( due to not having losses due to the ozone layer , etc ) , and can beam power 24/7 .
So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful , and the solar panels were 80 \ % efficient , rather than 20 \ % .
Using these ( thumbnail estimate ) numbers , that makes microwave 16x more efficient per unit area than solar .
It becomes even more efficient when you take into account that the sun is not as bright at other times of the day ( such as 8AM , or 11PM ) .
And yes , I am an Electrical Engineer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somethings seems wrong with this reasoning.First, a "few times" noon sunlight power, I think would be pretty brutal.
To take you literally, it would be like standing in the sun at noon where the sun is say three times brighter than it is.
I'm not a physicist, so feel free to tell me why a three times more power sun at noon wouldn't be a problem for me.Sunlight has two components that make it uncomfortable or dangerous.
First is the infrared, which is the heat energy.
Second is the Ultraviolet, which can damage skin cells.
Because the energy is not in infrared or UV radiation, you will experience neither of these effects.
If you're worried about microwave radiation, remember that this includes the frequencies that make up the WiFi, Bluetooth, and AM/FM radio waves that pass through your body all the time.Secondly,
Doesn't a "few times" noon sunlight power mean that your getting only a "few times" what you'd be getting from the sun by itself, which isn't all that much.
Doesn't sound like your going to deliver the concentrations of power that cities need.So, I'm inclined not to put too much stake in what you said.Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar.
Also remember that the solar panels placed in space have a large surface area than the antenna, receive more solar energy per area (due to not having losses due to the ozone layer, etc), and can beam power 24/7.
So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful, and the solar panels were 80\% efficient, rather than 20\%.
Using these (thumbnail estimate) numbers, that makes microwave 16x more efficient per unit area than solar.
It becomes even more efficient when you take into account that the sun is not as bright at other times of the day (such as 8AM, or 11PM).
And yes, I am an Electrical Engineer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465923</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>Sir\_Lewk</author>
	<datestamp>1245942480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What exactly is the issue with diversifying our efforts?  There is no rule that states we can only work on one type of technology at a time.  I'm tired of all of this "we shouldn't be doing <i>X</i> before we do <i>Y</i>" crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What exactly is the issue with diversifying our efforts ?
There is no rule that states we can only work on one type of technology at a time .
I 'm tired of all of this " we should n't be doing X before we do Y " crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What exactly is the issue with diversifying our efforts?
There is no rule that states we can only work on one type of technology at a time.
I'm tired of all of this "we shouldn't be doing X before we do Y" crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477111</id>
	<title>Re:Physics 102</title>
	<author>sean4u</author>
	<datestamp>1245948420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I imagine (RTFA? GTFO!) the solar collector won't often be casting a shadow on the Earth. That means it's collecting solar energy that the Earth wouldn't. The energy transmitted to Earth will eventually cause something to warm up, won't it? Isn't this a problem for any kind of 'extra terrestrial energy' idea that isn't direct sunlight or its ancient effect?</p><p>I think 'significant' might be hard to judge. If space solar makes a significant contribution to Earth's energy, I think it might make a significant contribution to the temperature of something terrestrial. Otherwise, I think it's a great idea. If the heating issue were really a problem, you could always run pipes up the side of the space elevator and dump the heat into the moon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I imagine ( RTFA ?
GTFO ! ) the solar collector wo n't often be casting a shadow on the Earth .
That means it 's collecting solar energy that the Earth would n't .
The energy transmitted to Earth will eventually cause something to warm up , wo n't it ?
Is n't this a problem for any kind of 'extra terrestrial energy ' idea that is n't direct sunlight or its ancient effect ? I think 'significant ' might be hard to judge .
If space solar makes a significant contribution to Earth 's energy , I think it might make a significant contribution to the temperature of something terrestrial .
Otherwise , I think it 's a great idea .
If the heating issue were really a problem , you could always run pipes up the side of the space elevator and dump the heat into the moon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I imagine (RTFA?
GTFO!) the solar collector won't often be casting a shadow on the Earth.
That means it's collecting solar energy that the Earth wouldn't.
The energy transmitted to Earth will eventually cause something to warm up, won't it?
Isn't this a problem for any kind of 'extra terrestrial energy' idea that isn't direct sunlight or its ancient effect?I think 'significant' might be hard to judge.
If space solar makes a significant contribution to Earth's energy, I think it might make a significant contribution to the temperature of something terrestrial.
Otherwise, I think it's a great idea.
If the heating issue were really a problem, you could always run pipes up the side of the space elevator and dump the heat into the moon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466239</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466741</id>
	<title>Re:An idea with a lack of vision</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245946680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amen brother.</p><p>We could power the US with a farm 100 miles to a side.<br>Sure, that's a lot of space, but the USA is very large, andwe ahve enough desserts to do it.<br>Industrial Solar Thermal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen brother.We could power the US with a farm 100 miles to a side.Sure , that 's a lot of space , but the USA is very large , andwe ahve enough desserts to do it.Industrial Solar Thermal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen brother.We could power the US with a farm 100 miles to a side.Sure, that's a lot of space, but the USA is very large, andwe ahve enough desserts to do it.Industrial Solar Thermal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28471533</id>
	<title>I call Fraud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245921840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The guy pushing this project is running this proposal from his home - his business address, listed in Dunn &amp; Bradstreet is 32 Monterrey Court, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266.  Glance at Google Maps and you'll find that this is a condo next to a golf course.  Look up in the white pages and you discover this address is Gary Spirnak's house.</p><p>Now, look at patent 6936760, "A Space Based Power System"  Right away, you see a mirror of diameter 1 to 2 kilometers, with a newtonian-telescope style optical pickoff.  Later, he talks about putting it into geosynchronous orbit.</p><p>Getting the power to earth is handled with the wave of his magic wand: "convert the electrical energy into a form for transmission to a pre-determined location"</p><p>This whole thing is prima-facie bogus<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... literally pie in the sky.</p><p>Give this guy a billion dollars, and in 6 years, his "company" will get a huge (2 km diameter mirror) spacecraft into geostationary orbit.</p><p>Some fools at PG&amp;E may have been paid off by this "inventor", but I see no scientist reviewing the proposal.</p><p>See <a href="http://cryptogon.com/?p=8029" title="cryptogon.com" rel="nofollow">http://cryptogon.com/?p=8029</a> [cryptogon.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The guy pushing this project is running this proposal from his home - his business address , listed in Dunn &amp; Bradstreet is 32 Monterrey Court , Manhattan Beach , CA 90266 .
Glance at Google Maps and you 'll find that this is a condo next to a golf course .
Look up in the white pages and you discover this address is Gary Spirnak 's house.Now , look at patent 6936760 , " A Space Based Power System " Right away , you see a mirror of diameter 1 to 2 kilometers , with a newtonian-telescope style optical pickoff .
Later , he talks about putting it into geosynchronous orbit.Getting the power to earth is handled with the wave of his magic wand : " convert the electrical energy into a form for transmission to a pre-determined location " This whole thing is prima-facie bogus ... literally pie in the sky.Give this guy a billion dollars , and in 6 years , his " company " will get a huge ( 2 km diameter mirror ) spacecraft into geostationary orbit.Some fools at PG&amp;E may have been paid off by this " inventor " , but I see no scientist reviewing the proposal.See http : //cryptogon.com/ ? p = 8029 [ cryptogon.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The guy pushing this project is running this proposal from his home - his business address, listed in Dunn &amp; Bradstreet is 32 Monterrey Court, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266.
Glance at Google Maps and you'll find that this is a condo next to a golf course.
Look up in the white pages and you discover this address is Gary Spirnak's house.Now, look at patent 6936760, "A Space Based Power System"  Right away, you see a mirror of diameter 1 to 2 kilometers, with a newtonian-telescope style optical pickoff.
Later, he talks about putting it into geosynchronous orbit.Getting the power to earth is handled with the wave of his magic wand: "convert the electrical energy into a form for transmission to a pre-determined location"This whole thing is prima-facie bogus ... literally pie in the sky.Give this guy a billion dollars, and in 6 years, his "company" will get a huge (2 km diameter mirror) spacecraft into geostationary orbit.Some fools at PG&amp;E may have been paid off by this "inventor", but I see no scientist reviewing the proposal.See http://cryptogon.com/?p=8029 [cryptogon.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467467</id>
	<title>The actual cost? 3.4 Billion!</title>
	<author>ahecht</author>
	<datestamp>1245949980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The article says that the electricity will cost $0.129/kWh and that the system will provide 200 MW for 15 years. Some quick google math shows that:<br> <br>

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=(12.9+(U.S.+cents+\%2F+kWh))+*+(15+years)+*+(200+megawatts)" title="google.com">(12.9 (U.S. cents / kWh)) * (15 years) * (200 megawatts) = 3.392 billion U.S. dollars</a> [google.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article says that the electricity will cost $ 0.129/kWh and that the system will provide 200 MW for 15 years .
Some quick google math shows that : ( 12.9 ( U.S. cents / kWh ) ) * ( 15 years ) * ( 200 megawatts ) = 3.392 billion U.S. dollars [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article says that the electricity will cost $0.129/kWh and that the system will provide 200 MW for 15 years.
Some quick google math shows that: 

(12.9 (U.S. cents / kWh)) * (15 years) * (200 megawatts) = 3.392 billion U.S. dollars [google.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466295</id>
	<title>An idea with a lack of vision</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1245944340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, the gigantic effort to put this solar plant into orbit will create... 200MW of power?</p><p>Contrast to this: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jul/23/solarpower.windpower" title="guardian.co.uk">0.3\% of the Sahara could power the whole of Europe</a> [guardian.co.uk]</p><p>It's expensive like hell, sure, but it would start delivering energy long before it's completed <b>and its goals are way more ambitious than this flying solar panel's!</b> Think no more unrenewable energy, no more CO2, no more pollutants (sulphur, heavy metals etc.) from coal plants, no more soil erosion due to dams, no more gas or oil (yeah, in italy they have plenty of those) power plants. Only a few windfarms and perhaps the French nuclear plants to iron out the energy needs during night time.</p><p>Don't tell me the USA has a lack of sun and deserts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , the gigantic effort to put this solar plant into orbit will create... 200MW of power ? Contrast to this : 0.3 \ % of the Sahara could power the whole of Europe [ guardian.co.uk ] It 's expensive like hell , sure , but it would start delivering energy long before it 's completed and its goals are way more ambitious than this flying solar panel 's !
Think no more unrenewable energy , no more CO2 , no more pollutants ( sulphur , heavy metals etc .
) from coal plants , no more soil erosion due to dams , no more gas or oil ( yeah , in italy they have plenty of those ) power plants .
Only a few windfarms and perhaps the French nuclear plants to iron out the energy needs during night time.Do n't tell me the USA has a lack of sun and deserts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, the gigantic effort to put this solar plant into orbit will create... 200MW of power?Contrast to this: 0.3\% of the Sahara could power the whole of Europe [guardian.co.uk]It's expensive like hell, sure, but it would start delivering energy long before it's completed and its goals are way more ambitious than this flying solar panel's!
Think no more unrenewable energy, no more CO2, no more pollutants (sulphur, heavy metals etc.
) from coal plants, no more soil erosion due to dams, no more gas or oil (yeah, in italy they have plenty of those) power plants.
Only a few windfarms and perhaps the French nuclear plants to iron out the energy needs during night time.Don't tell me the USA has a lack of sun and deserts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468563</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe it's just me</title>
	<author>2short</author>
	<datestamp>1245954000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"We know the distance"<br>Pointlessly distant.  We know the distance to geosyncronous orbit too.<br><br>"we know it's movements"<br>We know the movements of geosynchronous satellites too.<br><br>"it doesn't involve putting up more floating space junk"<br>You mean besides the discarded booster rockets needed to get such a ridiculously further distance out just so we can deal with the difficulties of an additional gravity well?<br><br>"it's surface is always facing the sun"<br>If by  "always", you mean half the time - 14 days out of every 28.<br><br>"unlike a synchronous satalite, would be our of the sun for at least a few hours"<br>If by "a few hours" you mean "about an hour a night, but only for a short period every six months near the equinox"<br><br>"(depending on distance) "<br>Did I say "we" knew the distance to geosynchronous?  Well, I do.<br><br>I was going to go on, questioning why you imagine there would be any question of beaming during a new moon vs a lunar eclipse.  But whatever conception of orbital mechanics you're working with I can't even make enough sense of it to mock.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" We know the distance " Pointlessly distant .
We know the distance to geosyncronous orbit too .
" we know it 's movements " We know the movements of geosynchronous satellites too .
" it does n't involve putting up more floating space junk " You mean besides the discarded booster rockets needed to get such a ridiculously further distance out just so we can deal with the difficulties of an additional gravity well ?
" it 's surface is always facing the sun " If by " always " , you mean half the time - 14 days out of every 28 .
" unlike a synchronous satalite , would be our of the sun for at least a few hours " If by " a few hours " you mean " about an hour a night , but only for a short period every six months near the equinox " " ( depending on distance ) " Did I say " we " knew the distance to geosynchronous ?
Well , I do.I was going to go on , questioning why you imagine there would be any question of beaming during a new moon vs a lunar eclipse .
But whatever conception of orbital mechanics you 're working with I ca n't even make enough sense of it to mock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We know the distance"Pointlessly distant.
We know the distance to geosyncronous orbit too.
"we know it's movements"We know the movements of geosynchronous satellites too.
"it doesn't involve putting up more floating space junk"You mean besides the discarded booster rockets needed to get such a ridiculously further distance out just so we can deal with the difficulties of an additional gravity well?
"it's surface is always facing the sun"If by  "always", you mean half the time - 14 days out of every 28.
"unlike a synchronous satalite, would be our of the sun for at least a few hours"If by "a few hours" you mean "about an hour a night, but only for a short period every six months near the equinox""(depending on distance) "Did I say "we" knew the distance to geosynchronous?
Well, I do.I was going to go on, questioning why you imagine there would be any question of beaming during a new moon vs a lunar eclipse.
But whatever conception of orbital mechanics you're working with I can't even make enough sense of it to mock.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466249</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466841</id>
	<title>Re:Miss</title>
	<author>Tubal-Cain</author>
	<datestamp>1245947160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the guiding signal is missing, the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it's position.</p></div><p>Are there any purely electric space propulsion systems?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the guiding signal is missing , the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it 's position.Are there any purely electric space propulsion systems ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the guiding signal is missing, the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it's position.Are there any purely electric space propulsion systems?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465765</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468779</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>dgatwood</author>
	<datestamp>1245954780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar. Also remember that the solar panels placed in space have a large surface area than the antenna, receive more solar energy per area (due to not having losses due to the ozone layer, etc), and can beam power 24/7. So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful, and the solar panels were 80\% efficient, rather than 20\%. Using these (thumbnail estimate) numbers, that makes microwave 16x more efficient per unit area than solar. It becomes even more efficient when you take into account that the sun is not as bright at other times of the day (such as 8AM, or 11PM).</p></div></blockquote><p>If the solar panels are 80\% efficient in space, you can make them 80\% efficient on Earth.  No matter what, you've still really only made a 4x improvement over an ideal array on Earth.  Now realize that the conversion to/from microwave energy is at best only 80\% efficient.  So now you're down to 3.2x the efficiency.</p><p>Now consider that even if you find panels that are 4 times as efficient, and even if you also got a 4x boost by putting it in space, that's still only about 320W per square foot.  200 MW of power would require 625,000 square feet, or about 14 acres.  High estimates for per-satellite energy production are only 4.8 MW per satellite.  This means launching 42 satellites to get 200 MW.  At a low estimate of $50 million per launch, this comes out to $2.1 billion.  With new panels at $1 per watt, the launch costs alone this would buy 2.1 GW on Earth, more than two orders of magnitude more power per dollar.  That's not even counting the cost of the equipment, the insane costs of maintenance, etc.  Even NASA's best-case estimates (if I read them correctly) put the price of space solar at about $3 per Watt, which is a significant premium over ground-based solar.</p><p>Worse, they almost certainly can't use any of the desirable lower frequency bands without causing harmful interference, so we can assume they'll be way up there (15+ GHz).  At higher frequencies, the atmosphere itself starts to be a serious problem.  At least ground stations still produce a decent fraction of their power in cloudy weather.  Satellite?  Oops.  We have a cumulonimbus cloud in the way.  There went 60 dB.  That 4 MW station now produces only 4W.</p><p>I'd like to use the phrase "not enough crack in the world" for this plan.  It looks to me like PG&amp;E is looking for ways to blow huge amounts of money on solar power so that they can turn around and say "See, look, we tried it.  Solar isn't practical," and then go back to shafting the public with absurdly inflated power and gas prices.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar .
Also remember that the solar panels placed in space have a large surface area than the antenna , receive more solar energy per area ( due to not having losses due to the ozone layer , etc ) , and can beam power 24/7 .
So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful , and the solar panels were 80 \ % efficient , rather than 20 \ % .
Using these ( thumbnail estimate ) numbers , that makes microwave 16x more efficient per unit area than solar .
It becomes even more efficient when you take into account that the sun is not as bright at other times of the day ( such as 8AM , or 11PM ) .If the solar panels are 80 \ % efficient in space , you can make them 80 \ % efficient on Earth .
No matter what , you 've still really only made a 4x improvement over an ideal array on Earth .
Now realize that the conversion to/from microwave energy is at best only 80 \ % efficient .
So now you 're down to 3.2x the efficiency.Now consider that even if you find panels that are 4 times as efficient , and even if you also got a 4x boost by putting it in space , that 's still only about 320W per square foot .
200 MW of power would require 625,000 square feet , or about 14 acres .
High estimates for per-satellite energy production are only 4.8 MW per satellite .
This means launching 42 satellites to get 200 MW .
At a low estimate of $ 50 million per launch , this comes out to $ 2.1 billion .
With new panels at $ 1 per watt , the launch costs alone this would buy 2.1 GW on Earth , more than two orders of magnitude more power per dollar .
That 's not even counting the cost of the equipment , the insane costs of maintenance , etc .
Even NASA 's best-case estimates ( if I read them correctly ) put the price of space solar at about $ 3 per Watt , which is a significant premium over ground-based solar.Worse , they almost certainly ca n't use any of the desirable lower frequency bands without causing harmful interference , so we can assume they 'll be way up there ( 15 + GHz ) .
At higher frequencies , the atmosphere itself starts to be a serious problem .
At least ground stations still produce a decent fraction of their power in cloudy weather .
Satellite ? Oops .
We have a cumulonimbus cloud in the way .
There went 60 dB .
That 4 MW station now produces only 4W.I 'd like to use the phrase " not enough crack in the world " for this plan .
It looks to me like PG&amp;E is looking for ways to blow huge amounts of money on solar power so that they can turn around and say " See , look , we tried it .
Solar is n't practical , " and then go back to shafting the public with absurdly inflated power and gas prices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar.
Also remember that the solar panels placed in space have a large surface area than the antenna, receive more solar energy per area (due to not having losses due to the ozone layer, etc), and can beam power 24/7.
So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful, and the solar panels were 80\% efficient, rather than 20\%.
Using these (thumbnail estimate) numbers, that makes microwave 16x more efficient per unit area than solar.
It becomes even more efficient when you take into account that the sun is not as bright at other times of the day (such as 8AM, or 11PM).If the solar panels are 80\% efficient in space, you can make them 80\% efficient on Earth.
No matter what, you've still really only made a 4x improvement over an ideal array on Earth.
Now realize that the conversion to/from microwave energy is at best only 80\% efficient.
So now you're down to 3.2x the efficiency.Now consider that even if you find panels that are 4 times as efficient, and even if you also got a 4x boost by putting it in space, that's still only about 320W per square foot.
200 MW of power would require 625,000 square feet, or about 14 acres.
High estimates for per-satellite energy production are only 4.8 MW per satellite.
This means launching 42 satellites to get 200 MW.
At a low estimate of $50 million per launch, this comes out to $2.1 billion.
With new panels at $1 per watt, the launch costs alone this would buy 2.1 GW on Earth, more than two orders of magnitude more power per dollar.
That's not even counting the cost of the equipment, the insane costs of maintenance, etc.
Even NASA's best-case estimates (if I read them correctly) put the price of space solar at about $3 per Watt, which is a significant premium over ground-based solar.Worse, they almost certainly can't use any of the desirable lower frequency bands without causing harmful interference, so we can assume they'll be way up there (15+ GHz).
At higher frequencies, the atmosphere itself starts to be a serious problem.
At least ground stations still produce a decent fraction of their power in cloudy weather.
Satellite?  Oops.
We have a cumulonimbus cloud in the way.
There went 60 dB.
That 4 MW station now produces only 4W.I'd like to use the phrase "not enough crack in the world" for this plan.
It looks to me like PG&amp;E is looking for ways to blow huge amounts of money on solar power so that they can turn around and say "See, look, we tried it.
Solar isn't practical," and then go back to shafting the public with absurdly inflated power and gas prices.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28476395</id>
	<title>Re:An idea with a lack of vision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245943080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The ground station does not HAVE to be on the equator, just like satellite TV dishes don't have to be on the equator. The receiving antennas would just be less efficient at higher latitudes. But the decreased cost of transmission lines would make up for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The ground station does not HAVE to be on the equator , just like satellite TV dishes do n't have to be on the equator .
The receiving antennas would just be less efficient at higher latitudes .
But the decreased cost of transmission lines would make up for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ground station does not HAVE to be on the equator, just like satellite TV dishes don't have to be on the equator.
The receiving antennas would just be less efficient at higher latitudes.
But the decreased cost of transmission lines would make up for that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28478247</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245958500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This isn't an efficient process at all, putting out about 30\% energy and 70\% heat.</p></div><p>This does not cause global warming.  The heat generated by human activity is insignificant compared to energy from the sun.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, there are all the waste products dumped into the atmosphere associated with burning coal.</p></div><p>This is the cause of global warming.  The pollutants induce a greenhouse effect which traps energy (from the sun), thereby increasing the temperature of the planet.</p><p>So, as you say, this concept could very much help avoid global warming.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't an efficient process at all , putting out about 30 \ % energy and 70 \ % heat.This does not cause global warming .
The heat generated by human activity is insignificant compared to energy from the sun.Also , there are all the waste products dumped into the atmosphere associated with burning coal.This is the cause of global warming .
The pollutants induce a greenhouse effect which traps energy ( from the sun ) , thereby increasing the temperature of the planet.So , as you say , this concept could very much help avoid global warming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't an efficient process at all, putting out about 30\% energy and 70\% heat.This does not cause global warming.
The heat generated by human activity is insignificant compared to energy from the sun.Also, there are all the waste products dumped into the atmosphere associated with burning coal.This is the cause of global warming.
The pollutants induce a greenhouse effect which traps energy (from the sun), thereby increasing the temperature of the planet.So, as you say, this concept could very much help avoid global warming.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466249</id>
	<title>Maybe it's just me</title>
	<author>kannibul</author>
	<datestamp>1245944100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe it's just me, but, I would think the moon would be THE best place to put a solar array.

We know the distance, we know it's movements, and it doesn't involve putting up more floating space junk, it's surface is always facing the sun (which unlike a synchronous satalite, would be our of the sun for at least a few hours (depending on distance) - and it's far enough that's visible from the poles, which is where I'd put the recieving stations - the sending stations would be on the moon's poles, so power coudl be recieved even with a "new moon" - the only exception would be in the case of a lunar eclipse...

I'd also make sure there was a way to turn it off...quickly...from someone near the equator, just in case!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it 's just me , but , I would think the moon would be THE best place to put a solar array .
We know the distance , we know it 's movements , and it does n't involve putting up more floating space junk , it 's surface is always facing the sun ( which unlike a synchronous satalite , would be our of the sun for at least a few hours ( depending on distance ) - and it 's far enough that 's visible from the poles , which is where I 'd put the recieving stations - the sending stations would be on the moon 's poles , so power coudl be recieved even with a " new moon " - the only exception would be in the case of a lunar eclipse.. . I 'd also make sure there was a way to turn it off...quickly...from someone near the equator , just in case !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it's just me, but, I would think the moon would be THE best place to put a solar array.
We know the distance, we know it's movements, and it doesn't involve putting up more floating space junk, it's surface is always facing the sun (which unlike a synchronous satalite, would be our of the sun for at least a few hours (depending on distance) - and it's far enough that's visible from the poles, which is where I'd put the recieving stations - the sending stations would be on the moon's poles, so power coudl be recieved even with a "new moon" - the only exception would be in the case of a lunar eclipse...

I'd also make sure there was a way to turn it off...quickly...from someone near the equator, just in case!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467305</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>BlueParrot</author>
	<datestamp>1245949320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar. "</p><p>I don't think "an order of magnitude" means what you think it means. If it did that sentence would imply the microwave conversion efficiency exceeded 100\%.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar .
" I do n't think " an order of magnitude " means what you think it means .
If it did that sentence would imply the microwave conversion efficiency exceeded 100 \ % .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar.
"I don't think "an order of magnitude" means what you think it means.
If it did that sentence would imply the microwave conversion efficiency exceeded 100\%.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468243</id>
	<title>Re:Assuming everything goes well</title>
	<author>Zashi</author>
	<datestamp>1245952800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Assuming everything goes well and this becomes a viable source of energy What stops any oil producing nation from blowing it up?</p></div><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rods\_from\_God&amp;redirect=no" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Rods from God</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Assuming everything goes well and this becomes a viable source of energy What stops any oil producing nation from blowing it up ?
Rods from God [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Assuming everything goes well and this becomes a viable source of energy What stops any oil producing nation from blowing it up?
Rods from God [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467953</id>
	<title>Re:Miss</title>
	<author>RandomFactor</author>
	<datestamp>1245951720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So does any other current power generation method for various reasons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So does any other current power generation method for various reasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So does any other current power generation method for various reasons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470233</id>
	<title>Not so fast...</title>
	<author>WheelDweller</author>
	<datestamp>1245960120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tom Beardon has been talking about something since about 1989 or so; I saw him on a cable TV show back then, when there was nothing else to watch.  I kept trying to decide whether the math was wrong, or if it was just another crank.</p><p>In spending time researching his work, "Scalar Waves", I turned up the fact that Tesla had the same idea in mind; send power by radio waves.  That way a solar station on the moon would be both extremely efficient AND safe.</p><p>It's 2009, and I STILL don't know if the guy was a whacko.  Nor have I managed to bump into a nuclear scientist who would research the topic. But if you're interested, especially if you're a nuclear scientist, please google "scalar waves".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tom Beardon has been talking about something since about 1989 or so ; I saw him on a cable TV show back then , when there was nothing else to watch .
I kept trying to decide whether the math was wrong , or if it was just another crank.In spending time researching his work , " Scalar Waves " , I turned up the fact that Tesla had the same idea in mind ; send power by radio waves .
That way a solar station on the moon would be both extremely efficient AND safe.It 's 2009 , and I STILL do n't know if the guy was a whacko .
Nor have I managed to bump into a nuclear scientist who would research the topic .
But if you 're interested , especially if you 're a nuclear scientist , please google " scalar waves " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tom Beardon has been talking about something since about 1989 or so; I saw him on a cable TV show back then, when there was nothing else to watch.
I kept trying to decide whether the math was wrong, or if it was just another crank.In spending time researching his work, "Scalar Waves", I turned up the fact that Tesla had the same idea in mind; send power by radio waves.
That way a solar station on the moon would be both extremely efficient AND safe.It's 2009, and I STILL don't know if the guy was a whacko.
Nor have I managed to bump into a nuclear scientist who would research the topic.
But if you're interested, especially if you're a nuclear scientist, please google "scalar waves".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465477</id>
	<title>In Space</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245940080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In space nobody can hear your company go bankrupt.</p><p>There will be a lot of pissed off investors on Earth though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In space nobody can hear your company go bankrupt.There will be a lot of pissed off investors on Earth though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In space nobody can hear your company go bankrupt.There will be a lot of pissed off investors on Earth though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28471235</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>smaddox</author>
	<datestamp>1245920880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The solar irradiance outside of our atmosphere is only 40\% stronger than that on the surface. 1400 W/m^2 compared to 1000 W/m^2. Also, most of the extra energy is in a relatively small number of high energy photons (from which we can only extract a fraction of the energy), and a large number of low energy photons (which are too low energy to absorb). So you really don't get much of a boost. Not enough to consider sending a satellite into orbit and beaming back the power, anyway.</p><p>Terrestrial solar is superior to space solar in every way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The solar irradiance outside of our atmosphere is only 40 \ % stronger than that on the surface .
1400 W/m ^ 2 compared to 1000 W/m ^ 2 .
Also , most of the extra energy is in a relatively small number of high energy photons ( from which we can only extract a fraction of the energy ) , and a large number of low energy photons ( which are too low energy to absorb ) .
So you really do n't get much of a boost .
Not enough to consider sending a satellite into orbit and beaming back the power , anyway.Terrestrial solar is superior to space solar in every way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The solar irradiance outside of our atmosphere is only 40\% stronger than that on the surface.
1400 W/m^2 compared to 1000 W/m^2.
Also, most of the extra energy is in a relatively small number of high energy photons (from which we can only extract a fraction of the energy), and a large number of low energy photons (which are too low energy to absorb).
So you really don't get much of a boost.
Not enough to consider sending a satellite into orbit and beaming back the power, anyway.Terrestrial solar is superior to space solar in every way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466851</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>CrimsonAvenger</author>
	<datestamp>1245947220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I don't have a number for available solar power density in Earth orbit,</p></div></blockquote><p>Luckily, I do, after a quick Wikipedia check on the Sun...
</p><blockquote><div><p>That's 1.3 kW/m^2 at ground level, in the form of sunlight.</p></div></blockquote><p>Actually, that's 1.368 kW/m^2 in orbit.  In the form of sunlight.
</p><blockquote><div><p>but I would be very surprised if it was not a few (at least) orders of magnitude higher.</p></div></blockquote><p>I presume you're surprised by now, since it's not, in fact, "a few (at least) orders of magnitude higher"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have a number for available solar power density in Earth orbit,Luckily , I do , after a quick Wikipedia check on the Sun.. . That 's 1.3 kW/m ^ 2 at ground level , in the form of sunlight.Actually , that 's 1.368 kW/m ^ 2 in orbit .
In the form of sunlight .
but I would be very surprised if it was not a few ( at least ) orders of magnitude higher.I presume you 're surprised by now , since it 's not , in fact , " a few ( at least ) orders of magnitude higher " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have a number for available solar power density in Earth orbit,Luckily, I do, after a quick Wikipedia check on the Sun...
That's 1.3 kW/m^2 at ground level, in the form of sunlight.Actually, that's 1.368 kW/m^2 in orbit.
In the form of sunlight.
but I would be very surprised if it was not a few (at least) orders of magnitude higher.I presume you're surprised by now, since it's not, in fact, "a few (at least) orders of magnitude higher"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466307</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466601</id>
	<title>There must be some magic to 7 year announcements</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245945900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've noticed over my life, that incredible claims of new ways to deal with energy issues are '7 years out'.</p><p>BlackLight Power back in 2000 were claiming a 'battery the size of a briefcase that can power an electric car 1000 miles' as an example.</p><p>Now, here we have this new claim.</p><p>Yet these people point out that the energy here on earth from one of the downlinks is only 2X that of regular old PV.<br><a href="http://www.ursi.org/WP/WP-SPS\%20final.htm" title="ursi.org" rel="nofollow">URSI White Paper on Solar Power Satellite (SPS) Systems</a> [ursi.org]</p><p>So whom to believe?   A guy seeking venture capital OR a bunch of wet blanket boffins?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've noticed over my life , that incredible claims of new ways to deal with energy issues are '7 years out'.BlackLight Power back in 2000 were claiming a 'battery the size of a briefcase that can power an electric car 1000 miles ' as an example.Now , here we have this new claim.Yet these people point out that the energy here on earth from one of the downlinks is only 2X that of regular old PV.URSI White Paper on Solar Power Satellite ( SPS ) Systems [ ursi.org ] So whom to believe ?
A guy seeking venture capital OR a bunch of wet blanket boffins ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've noticed over my life, that incredible claims of new ways to deal with energy issues are '7 years out'.BlackLight Power back in 2000 were claiming a 'battery the size of a briefcase that can power an electric car 1000 miles' as an example.Now, here we have this new claim.Yet these people point out that the energy here on earth from one of the downlinks is only 2X that of regular old PV.URSI White Paper on Solar Power Satellite (SPS) Systems [ursi.org]So whom to believe?
A guy seeking venture capital OR a bunch of wet blanket boffins?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477067</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Canada</title>
	<author>Eclipse-now</author>
	<datestamp>1245948120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ooo! Ooo! I saw this movie on the "historical documents"! But disaster was prevented, because the studly young Captain Kirk parachutes in and kicks some butt, and then his mate pulls out a sword, and then something happened involving rifles that somehow destroyed industrial strength, planet mining, planet destroying hardware... didn't quite get that bit... but the good news is STUDLY YOUNG KIRK SAVES THE DAY AGAIN!

If only he'd show up at Cophenhagen?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ooo !
Ooo ! I saw this movie on the " historical documents " !
But disaster was prevented , because the studly young Captain Kirk parachutes in and kicks some butt , and then his mate pulls out a sword , and then something happened involving rifles that somehow destroyed industrial strength , planet mining , planet destroying hardware... did n't quite get that bit... but the good news is STUDLY YOUNG KIRK SAVES THE DAY AGAIN !
If only he 'd show up at Cophenhagen ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ooo!
Ooo! I saw this movie on the "historical documents"!
But disaster was prevented, because the studly young Captain Kirk parachutes in and kicks some butt, and then his mate pulls out a sword, and then something happened involving rifles that somehow destroyed industrial strength, planet mining, planet destroying hardware... didn't quite get that bit... but the good news is STUDLY YOUNG KIRK SAVES THE DAY AGAIN!
If only he'd show up at Cophenhagen?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465781</id>
	<title>New tag required</title>
	<author>SoundGuyNoise</author>
	<datestamp>1245941700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wormstrom!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wormstrom !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wormstrom!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28478357</id>
	<title>Re:Miss</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245959460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>ion thruster use sort of fuel, but they generally outlast the life of the satellite</htmltext>
<tokenext>ion thruster use sort of fuel , but they generally outlast the life of the satellite</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ion thruster use sort of fuel, but they generally outlast the life of the satellite</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466599</id>
	<title>global warming again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245945900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As this introduces \_extra\_ energy beyond the regular amount that daily reaches the planet's surface, I expect that it will cause an extra global warming. Now we burn fossil energy stored over eon's of time and release this stored energy in a short time. Adding extra energy to the scale will cause problems earlier or later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As this introduces \ _extra \ _ energy beyond the regular amount that daily reaches the planet 's surface , I expect that it will cause an extra global warming .
Now we burn fossil energy stored over eon 's of time and release this stored energy in a short time .
Adding extra energy to the scale will cause problems earlier or later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As this introduces \_extra\_ energy beyond the regular amount that daily reaches the planet's surface, I expect that it will cause an extra global warming.
Now we burn fossil energy stored over eon's of time and release this stored energy in a short time.
Adding extra energy to the scale will cause problems earlier or later.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466115</id>
	<title>Sims</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1245943500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> wish the skeptic in me would be quiet.</p></div><p>I wish people wouldn't use video games as their scientific cites.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>wish the skeptic in me would be quiet.I wish people would n't use video games as their scientific cites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> wish the skeptic in me would be quiet.I wish people wouldn't use video games as their scientific cites.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468139</id>
	<title>Hope you don't like your television</title>
	<author>NoleusMaximus</author>
	<datestamp>1245952440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>because your digital tuner filters are no where near strong enough to reject the signal of a power satelite.</htmltext>
<tokenext>because your digital tuner filters are no where near strong enough to reject the signal of a power satelite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because your digital tuner filters are no where near strong enough to reject the signal of a power satelite.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467255</id>
	<title>Numbers</title>
	<author>Baldrson</author>
	<datestamp>1245949080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The launch costs (Falcon 9 $2500/kg) of satellite solar panels (30W/kg with 15 year lifetime) and basically 0\% interest rate (straight line depreciation over 15 years) yields a little over 60 cents per kWh at the satellite.  Account for transmission losses and you're talking over $1/kWh at the grid.
<p>
They must have some big economies somewhere they aren't talking about to make this profitable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The launch costs ( Falcon 9 $ 2500/kg ) of satellite solar panels ( 30W/kg with 15 year lifetime ) and basically 0 \ % interest rate ( straight line depreciation over 15 years ) yields a little over 60 cents per kWh at the satellite .
Account for transmission losses and you 're talking over $ 1/kWh at the grid .
They must have some big economies somewhere they are n't talking about to make this profitable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The launch costs (Falcon 9 $2500/kg) of satellite solar panels (30W/kg with 15 year lifetime) and basically 0\% interest rate (straight line depreciation over 15 years) yields a little over 60 cents per kWh at the satellite.
Account for transmission losses and you're talking over $1/kWh at the grid.
They must have some big economies somewhere they aren't talking about to make this profitable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28471187</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>thethibs</author>
	<datestamp>1245920760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what happens to all that power when it's used on the ground? Oh yeah, it's teleported into outer space to keep it from heating up the atmosphere.</p><p>Let me try again: all the power transmitted, since it will be used to do work, will sooner or later be released as heat and warm the atmosphere.</p><p>It's not sufficient to have studied thermodynamics, you have to have understood it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what happens to all that power when it 's used on the ground ?
Oh yeah , it 's teleported into outer space to keep it from heating up the atmosphere.Let me try again : all the power transmitted , since it will be used to do work , will sooner or later be released as heat and warm the atmosphere.It 's not sufficient to have studied thermodynamics , you have to have understood it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what happens to all that power when it's used on the ground?
Oh yeah, it's teleported into outer space to keep it from heating up the atmosphere.Let me try again: all the power transmitted, since it will be used to do work, will sooner or later be released as heat and warm the atmosphere.It's not sufficient to have studied thermodynamics, you have to have understood it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466239</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465891</id>
	<title>Re:Science/tech illiteracy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Science/tech illiteracy indeed. Microwaves are not a power generation scheme, they're a transport scheme. 50\% efficiency is very low for getting power from A to B. Also, space based power will indeed put additional energy into our system, which would otherwise have gone past Earth and vanished into space.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Science/tech illiteracy indeed .
Microwaves are not a power generation scheme , they 're a transport scheme .
50 \ % efficiency is very low for getting power from A to B. Also , space based power will indeed put additional energy into our system , which would otherwise have gone past Earth and vanished into space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Science/tech illiteracy indeed.
Microwaves are not a power generation scheme, they're a transport scheme.
50\% efficiency is very low for getting power from A to B. Also, space based power will indeed put additional energy into our system, which would otherwise have gone past Earth and vanished into space.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466139</id>
	<title>Solar Flares</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245943560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So with trying to put solar cells in space they forgo the protection the the atmosphere gives from the sun's non-visible rays.  Solar flares and solar storms are going to be huge issues of them.  If these events don't destroy the solar cells, they will surely muck up the microwave transmittance to the ground station, and they could cause catastrophic power surges.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So with trying to put solar cells in space they forgo the protection the the atmosphere gives from the sun 's non-visible rays .
Solar flares and solar storms are going to be huge issues of them .
If these events do n't destroy the solar cells , they will surely muck up the microwave transmittance to the ground station , and they could cause catastrophic power surges .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So with trying to put solar cells in space they forgo the protection the the atmosphere gives from the sun's non-visible rays.
Solar flares and solar storms are going to be huge issues of them.
If these events don't destroy the solar cells, they will surely muck up the microwave transmittance to the ground station, and they could cause catastrophic power surges.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465491</id>
	<title>Nice tag</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245940140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"whatcouldpossiblygowrong".  Yea, let's never do anything unless the safety is known to be 100\%.</p><p>You have to take risks to move forward.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" whatcouldpossiblygowrong " .
Yea , let 's never do anything unless the safety is known to be 100 \ % .You have to take risks to move forward .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"whatcouldpossiblygowrong".
Yea, let's never do anything unless the safety is known to be 100\%.You have to take risks to move forward.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468407</id>
	<title>Re:They should try this over San Francisco</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245953460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They have their own thing going on with Geothermal right now. I guess they could just bundle a bunch of experimental energy solutions since Pelosi wants everyone to be green whether they want to or not. If something goes wrong (earthquake or fire) she can always just hold up the book of Gore and blame Global Warming. (Not against the whole Global Warming thing, just hate how politicized it is.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They have their own thing going on with Geothermal right now .
I guess they could just bundle a bunch of experimental energy solutions since Pelosi wants everyone to be green whether they want to or not .
If something goes wrong ( earthquake or fire ) she can always just hold up the book of Gore and blame Global Warming .
( Not against the whole Global Warming thing , just hate how politicized it is .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have their own thing going on with Geothermal right now.
I guess they could just bundle a bunch of experimental energy solutions since Pelosi wants everyone to be green whether they want to or not.
If something goes wrong (earthquake or fire) she can always just hold up the book of Gore and blame Global Warming.
(Not against the whole Global Warming thing, just hate how politicized it is.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465481</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847</id>
	<title>Assuming everything goes well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Assuming everything goes well
and this becomes a viable source of energy
What stops any oil producing nation from blowing it up?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Assuming everything goes well and this becomes a viable source of energy What stops any oil producing nation from blowing it up ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Assuming everything goes well
and this becomes a viable source of energy
What stops any oil producing nation from blowing it up?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468061</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>schmiddy</author>
	<datestamp>1245952140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Remember folks, we all have to do our parts to fight global warming. If you live in a dense southern urban environment, you know that the cities can get very hot from absorbed sunlight and industrial machinery, so make sure you keep your A/C running full blast to absorb the waste heat around you. I estimate that if every person in Atlanta cools down the city by using 25\% more A/C during just the month of June, the city's mean temperature will decrease by 1-2 degrees Celsius per year!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember folks , we all have to do our parts to fight global warming .
If you live in a dense southern urban environment , you know that the cities can get very hot from absorbed sunlight and industrial machinery , so make sure you keep your A/C running full blast to absorb the waste heat around you .
I estimate that if every person in Atlanta cools down the city by using 25 \ % more A/C during just the month of June , the city 's mean temperature will decrease by 1-2 degrees Celsius per year !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember folks, we all have to do our parts to fight global warming.
If you live in a dense southern urban environment, you know that the cities can get very hot from absorbed sunlight and industrial machinery, so make sure you keep your A/C running full blast to absorb the waste heat around you.
I estimate that if every person in Atlanta cools down the city by using 25\% more A/C during just the month of June, the city's mean temperature will decrease by 1-2 degrees Celsius per year!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467081</id>
	<title>Solar energy from space</title>
	<author>BlackSnake112</author>
	<datestamp>1245948360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And no gundum reference yet?</p><p>I actually wonder what would happen if this can be made real? All that solar energy. Countries move away from oil. What happens to countries which depend on oil for revenue? Will the oil countries start a war to stop the other countries from making/using this solar energy from space?</p><p>I hope no war breaks out if this can be made into reality. But human greed says some kind of war will happen if space solar energy becomes reality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And no gundum reference yet ? I actually wonder what would happen if this can be made real ?
All that solar energy .
Countries move away from oil .
What happens to countries which depend on oil for revenue ?
Will the oil countries start a war to stop the other countries from making/using this solar energy from space ? I hope no war breaks out if this can be made into reality .
But human greed says some kind of war will happen if space solar energy becomes reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And no gundum reference yet?I actually wonder what would happen if this can be made real?
All that solar energy.
Countries move away from oil.
What happens to countries which depend on oil for revenue?
Will the oil countries start a war to stop the other countries from making/using this solar energy from space?I hope no war breaks out if this can be made into reality.
But human greed says some kind of war will happen if space solar energy becomes reality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465911</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>zehaeva</author>
	<datestamp>1245942420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you know i have been wondering about geothermal myself. IIRC current thinking as to why mars died is because it cooled too fast. no molten core means no magnetic field which means the atmosphere gets stripped away by the solar winds. </p><p>So what happens when we start leeching heat from the earth. would we, could we siphon off so much to accelerate the cooling of the outer core? </p><p>Thoughts like this make me think that maybe its better to add energy to the system rather than remove it.</p><p>but then again this is wild conjecture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you know i have been wondering about geothermal myself .
IIRC current thinking as to why mars died is because it cooled too fast .
no molten core means no magnetic field which means the atmosphere gets stripped away by the solar winds .
So what happens when we start leeching heat from the earth .
would we , could we siphon off so much to accelerate the cooling of the outer core ?
Thoughts like this make me think that maybe its better to add energy to the system rather than remove it.but then again this is wild conjecture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you know i have been wondering about geothermal myself.
IIRC current thinking as to why mars died is because it cooled too fast.
no molten core means no magnetic field which means the atmosphere gets stripped away by the solar winds.
So what happens when we start leeching heat from the earth.
would we, could we siphon off so much to accelerate the cooling of the outer core?
Thoughts like this make me think that maybe its better to add energy to the system rather than remove it.but then again this is wild conjecture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467185</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>Gilmoure</author>
	<datestamp>1245948780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to mention, this would be taking energy away from space. We don't know what effect that would have. Maybe with less energy flowing outwards, more comets and asteroids might fall on earth. That would suck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to mention , this would be taking energy away from space .
We do n't know what effect that would have .
Maybe with less energy flowing outwards , more comets and asteroids might fall on earth .
That would suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to mention, this would be taking energy away from space.
We don't know what effect that would have.
Maybe with less energy flowing outwards, more comets and asteroids might fall on earth.
That would suck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465523</id>
	<title>Woops sorry about your farm...</title>
	<author>Rooked\_One</author>
	<datestamp>1245940320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>My mirror up there in the sky got dinked by a marble sized piece of green cheese and burned up your crop.   But don't worry about green, in paper form, cheese form or your crops because you won't be needing those eyes as you looked up at the unusual shiny bright thingy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My mirror up there in the sky got dinked by a marble sized piece of green cheese and burned up your crop .
But do n't worry about green , in paper form , cheese form or your crops because you wo n't be needing those eyes as you looked up at the unusual shiny bright thingy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My mirror up there in the sky got dinked by a marble sized piece of green cheese and burned up your crop.
But don't worry about green, in paper form, cheese form or your crops because you won't be needing those eyes as you looked up at the unusual shiny bright thingy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767</id>
	<title>Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245941640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because you haven't run the numbers on the beam power density.  The Microwave beam is wide, because it's trivial and cheap to make a huge ground antenna, and because agriculture can be carried out under the antenna.  THe beam power density can be held down to just a few times noon sunlight power, and still deliver plenty of energy.</p><p>That way, both airplane and albatross are safe to transit the beam area.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because you have n't run the numbers on the beam power density .
The Microwave beam is wide , because it 's trivial and cheap to make a huge ground antenna , and because agriculture can be carried out under the antenna .
THe beam power density can be held down to just a few times noon sunlight power , and still deliver plenty of energy.That way , both airplane and albatross are safe to transit the beam area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because you haven't run the numbers on the beam power density.
The Microwave beam is wide, because it's trivial and cheap to make a huge ground antenna, and because agriculture can be carried out under the antenna.
THe beam power density can be held down to just a few times noon sunlight power, and still deliver plenty of energy.That way, both airplane and albatross are safe to transit the beam area.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467181</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>alleycat0</author>
	<datestamp>1245948780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bluetooth (at 2.4 GHz) and WiFi (at 2.4 GHz and up) do indeed utilize the microwave spectrum (300 MHz - 300 GHz), but not AM radio (0.5 - 1.8 MHz) nor FM radio (88 - 108 MHz).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bluetooth ( at 2.4 GHz ) and WiFi ( at 2.4 GHz and up ) do indeed utilize the microwave spectrum ( 300 MHz - 300 GHz ) , but not AM radio ( 0.5 - 1.8 MHz ) nor FM radio ( 88 - 108 MHz ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bluetooth (at 2.4 GHz) and WiFi (at 2.4 GHz and up) do indeed utilize the microwave spectrum (300 MHz - 300 GHz), but not AM radio (0.5 - 1.8 MHz) nor FM radio (88 - 108 MHz).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468913</id>
	<title>Re:Science/tech illiteracy</title>
	<author>seven of five</author>
	<datestamp>1245955320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>And what it the human body 97\% made of ?</i> <br> <br>If you're talking about water, it's more like 70\%.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And what it the human body 97 \ % made of ?
If you 're talking about water , it 's more like 70 \ % .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what it the human body 97\% made of ?
If you're talking about water, it's more like 70\%.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28474873</id>
	<title>Failsafe against disasters</title>
	<author>ScaryMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1245934380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lots of people have pointed out that this kind of power would be more expensive that just getting plain old solar from a desert somewhere, but I think an important point has been overlooked. This kind of system might still function in the face of several different kind of "extinction level events": asteroid collision, supervolcano eruption, or even a "nuclear winter"; my understanding is that this would still provide power if the atmosphere suddenly became more opaque to sunlight.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lots of people have pointed out that this kind of power would be more expensive that just getting plain old solar from a desert somewhere , but I think an important point has been overlooked .
This kind of system might still function in the face of several different kind of " extinction level events " : asteroid collision , supervolcano eruption , or even a " nuclear winter " ; my understanding is that this would still provide power if the atmosphere suddenly became more opaque to sunlight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lots of people have pointed out that this kind of power would be more expensive that just getting plain old solar from a desert somewhere, but I think an important point has been overlooked.
This kind of system might still function in the face of several different kind of "extinction level events": asteroid collision, supervolcano eruption, or even a "nuclear winter"; my understanding is that this would still provide power if the atmosphere suddenly became more opaque to sunlight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465763</id>
	<title>Sim City 2000</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245941640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't anyone PAY ATTENTION when building this type of power plant in Sim City 2000?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't anyone PAY ATTENTION when building this type of power plant in Sim City 2000 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't anyone PAY ATTENTION when building this type of power plant in Sim City 2000?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28476281</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>adavies42</author>
	<datestamp>1245942300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If wifi,bluetooth and am/fm waves are so similar, there must be plenty of energy floating around us.  Why can't we just recover that energy?</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/communications/22764/" title="technologyreview.com">nokia's working on it</a> [technologyreview.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If wifi,bluetooth and am/fm waves are so similar , there must be plenty of energy floating around us .
Why ca n't we just recover that energy ?
nokia 's working on it [ technologyreview.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If wifi,bluetooth and am/fm waves are so similar, there must be plenty of energy floating around us.
Why can't we just recover that energy?
nokia's working on it [technologyreview.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466985</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470403</id>
	<title>Wow...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245960840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All I can say is the satellite better line up with its ground station via a laser, and be DAMN sure it doesn't fire unless it gets an exact lock.</p><p>I wouldn't want the ground station in MY neighborhood... From that kind of altitude, it doesn't take very much variance to make that beam of power hit entirely the wrong spot...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All I can say is the satellite better line up with its ground station via a laser , and be DAMN sure it does n't fire unless it gets an exact lock.I would n't want the ground station in MY neighborhood... From that kind of altitude , it does n't take very much variance to make that beam of power hit entirely the wrong spot.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All I can say is the satellite better line up with its ground station via a laser, and be DAMN sure it doesn't fire unless it gets an exact lock.I wouldn't want the ground station in MY neighborhood... From that kind of altitude, it doesn't take very much variance to make that beam of power hit entirely the wrong spot...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466673</id>
	<title>Re:Science/tech illiteracy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245946260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphere</p><p>&gt;Fail.</p><p>No Ma'am.   It is you who have failed due to your taking of home-ec classes and not science!</p><p>The Earth, as a simple model, radiates heat to space and much of this heat comes via photons from the sun.</p><p>If one is taking photons that would not have otherwise entered the heat trapping gas and then ADD that to the heat trapping gas, the planet will be warmer than it was before.</p><p>The only thing up for debate is if this change in the total energy is detectable to humans over the lifetime of a human.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphere &gt; Fail.No Ma'am .
It is you who have failed due to your taking of home-ec classes and not science ! The Earth , as a simple model , radiates heat to space and much of this heat comes via photons from the sun.If one is taking photons that would not have otherwise entered the heat trapping gas and then ADD that to the heat trapping gas , the planet will be warmer than it was before.The only thing up for debate is if this change in the total energy is detectable to humans over the lifetime of a human .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphere&gt;Fail.No Ma'am.
It is you who have failed due to your taking of home-ec classes and not science!The Earth, as a simple model, radiates heat to space and much of this heat comes via photons from the sun.If one is taking photons that would not have otherwise entered the heat trapping gas and then ADD that to the heat trapping gas, the planet will be warmer than it was before.The only thing up for debate is if this change in the total energy is detectable to humans over the lifetime of a human.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466157</id>
	<title>Re:Dupe from months ago?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245943680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your're correct. Timframe I'm not sure about though.</p><p>I hav noticed<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. having a lot of news coming up that has been reported earlier on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.. Not only months it can be years in between even. I remember 2 reportings of using Virus for fighting canser and it was years between, at least felt like years between the 2 reports.</p><p>The 2:nd report was more informative thouhg.</p><p>I'v considerd<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. site to be a site that reports about the newest news thefore I'm bit suprised of the repitedness here. And also that drains<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. image of reporting the latest news.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. If repetitions is done please link to earlier reports of the same thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your 're correct .
Timframe I 'm not sure about though.I hav noticed / .
having a lot of news coming up that has been reported earlier on /.. Not only months it can be years in between even .
I remember 2 reportings of using Virus for fighting canser and it was years between , at least felt like years between the 2 reports.The 2 : nd report was more informative thouhg.I'v considerd / .
site to be a site that reports about the newest news thefore I 'm bit suprised of the repitedness here .
And also that drains / .
image of reporting the latest news .
/. If repetitions is done please link to earlier reports of the same thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your're correct.
Timframe I'm not sure about though.I hav noticed /.
having a lot of news coming up that has been reported earlier on /.. Not only months it can be years in between even.
I remember 2 reportings of using Virus for fighting canser and it was years between, at least felt like years between the 2 reports.The 2:nd report was more informative thouhg.I'v considerd /.
site to be a site that reports about the newest news thefore I'm bit suprised of the repitedness here.
And also that drains /.
image of reporting the latest news.
/. If repetitions is done please link to earlier reports of the same thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466475</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1245945300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The sun strikes the earth with petawatts of power. On average, the earth radiates petawatts of power into space. Adding even a few terawatts to that will not shift the average temperature in any noticeable way. Gigawatts even less.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The sun strikes the earth with petawatts of power .
On average , the earth radiates petawatts of power into space .
Adding even a few terawatts to that will not shift the average temperature in any noticeable way .
Gigawatts even less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sun strikes the earth with petawatts of power.
On average, the earth radiates petawatts of power into space.
Adding even a few terawatts to that will not shift the average temperature in any noticeable way.
Gigawatts even less.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466089</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Canada</title>
	<author>networkconsultant</author>
	<datestamp>1245943320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dear America<br>
<br>
We regret to inform you that the lake you vaporized was one of the major sources feeding most of your aquifers. And Due to mass riots in the western provinces And sheer firestorms from the Oil Sands vapor that Gas prices will now be $10 / gallon.
<br> <br>
We have instituted martial law however the natives have decided to torch the white house again; we do apologize we decided that it would be nice to treat them like people; that and they are the only canadians allowed assult weapons and rocket launchers; we have tried to control them previously but sadly we decided that it was a sensitive issue and the budgets for the military force required to opress them were spent fighting terror in Afgahnistan and improving the health of our citizens. Sadly due to the number of joint reserves on the unmanned and undefended border we expect they should arrive in washington posed as tourists in a few minutes. You'll be able to spot them as they will be increadably polite and kind hearted people and they may ask for some directions whilst there. We in no way endorse this action and will seek legal action should they survive.
<br> <br>
Due to Saskatchewan burning up and rioting, cigar lake has been flodded again and Uranium prices will now soar and as a result I fear that we may not be able to supply your UxO for all those nuclear reactors you have. I understand this will aid non-proliforation but it has the unfortunate side effect of leaving a few hundred million people in the dark. We have switched all available hydro power to our own supplies thus we can no longer export it as we did previously; this will leave New York, Chicogo, Boston and most of the eastern seaboard in the dark. In addition to this the Fly's have some how mutated due to the microwave interaction with the lakes resulting in gigantisam; and they are now capable of removing large vehicles from the 401, last we saw them headed for california; we've tried raid and a number of other insecticides but they seem impervious some how.<br> <br>

I understand that the sheer lack of power will affect your various exchanges and we are very sorry however I'm certain the Nasdaq, Chicogo Mercantile, NYSE and NYNEX aren't very large and that markets may be provided by TSE, VSE, Brut and Archipellego in your economic stability's absence.
<br> <br>
Since we do have lots of fresh water it will now be tarried the taxes now applied to exports should put the price at $1000 USD / L to make up the losses due to destruction, also we now request the 6 billion owed for previous software lumber disputes, we also ask that you prorate the amounts to compensate for your weak dollar.
<br> <br>
Signed,
The Right Hon. Governer General of Canada.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear America We regret to inform you that the lake you vaporized was one of the major sources feeding most of your aquifers .
And Due to mass riots in the western provinces And sheer firestorms from the Oil Sands vapor that Gas prices will now be $ 10 / gallon .
We have instituted martial law however the natives have decided to torch the white house again ; we do apologize we decided that it would be nice to treat them like people ; that and they are the only canadians allowed assult weapons and rocket launchers ; we have tried to control them previously but sadly we decided that it was a sensitive issue and the budgets for the military force required to opress them were spent fighting terror in Afgahnistan and improving the health of our citizens .
Sadly due to the number of joint reserves on the unmanned and undefended border we expect they should arrive in washington posed as tourists in a few minutes .
You 'll be able to spot them as they will be increadably polite and kind hearted people and they may ask for some directions whilst there .
We in no way endorse this action and will seek legal action should they survive .
Due to Saskatchewan burning up and rioting , cigar lake has been flodded again and Uranium prices will now soar and as a result I fear that we may not be able to supply your UxO for all those nuclear reactors you have .
I understand this will aid non-proliforation but it has the unfortunate side effect of leaving a few hundred million people in the dark .
We have switched all available hydro power to our own supplies thus we can no longer export it as we did previously ; this will leave New York , Chicogo , Boston and most of the eastern seaboard in the dark .
In addition to this the Fly 's have some how mutated due to the microwave interaction with the lakes resulting in gigantisam ; and they are now capable of removing large vehicles from the 401 , last we saw them headed for california ; we 've tried raid and a number of other insecticides but they seem impervious some how .
I understand that the sheer lack of power will affect your various exchanges and we are very sorry however I 'm certain the Nasdaq , Chicogo Mercantile , NYSE and NYNEX are n't very large and that markets may be provided by TSE , VSE , Brut and Archipellego in your economic stability 's absence .
Since we do have lots of fresh water it will now be tarried the taxes now applied to exports should put the price at $ 1000 USD / L to make up the losses due to destruction , also we now request the 6 billion owed for previous software lumber disputes , we also ask that you prorate the amounts to compensate for your weak dollar .
Signed , The Right Hon .
Governer General of Canada .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear America

We regret to inform you that the lake you vaporized was one of the major sources feeding most of your aquifers.
And Due to mass riots in the western provinces And sheer firestorms from the Oil Sands vapor that Gas prices will now be $10 / gallon.
We have instituted martial law however the natives have decided to torch the white house again; we do apologize we decided that it would be nice to treat them like people; that and they are the only canadians allowed assult weapons and rocket launchers; we have tried to control them previously but sadly we decided that it was a sensitive issue and the budgets for the military force required to opress them were spent fighting terror in Afgahnistan and improving the health of our citizens.
Sadly due to the number of joint reserves on the unmanned and undefended border we expect they should arrive in washington posed as tourists in a few minutes.
You'll be able to spot them as they will be increadably polite and kind hearted people and they may ask for some directions whilst there.
We in no way endorse this action and will seek legal action should they survive.
Due to Saskatchewan burning up and rioting, cigar lake has been flodded again and Uranium prices will now soar and as a result I fear that we may not be able to supply your UxO for all those nuclear reactors you have.
I understand this will aid non-proliforation but it has the unfortunate side effect of leaving a few hundred million people in the dark.
We have switched all available hydro power to our own supplies thus we can no longer export it as we did previously; this will leave New York, Chicogo, Boston and most of the eastern seaboard in the dark.
In addition to this the Fly's have some how mutated due to the microwave interaction with the lakes resulting in gigantisam; and they are now capable of removing large vehicles from the 401, last we saw them headed for california; we've tried raid and a number of other insecticides but they seem impervious some how.
I understand that the sheer lack of power will affect your various exchanges and we are very sorry however I'm certain the Nasdaq, Chicogo Mercantile, NYSE and NYNEX aren't very large and that markets may be provided by TSE, VSE, Brut and Archipellego in your economic stability's absence.
Since we do have lots of fresh water it will now be tarried the taxes now applied to exports should put the price at $1000 USD / L to make up the losses due to destruction, also we now request the 6 billion owed for previous software lumber disputes, we also ask that you prorate the amounts to compensate for your weak dollar.
Signed,
The Right Hon.
Governer General of Canada.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467477</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>2short</author>
	<datestamp>1245949980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, we lack a launch capacity for human astronauts.<br><br>Most orbital launches do not include human astronauts, and hence are much cheaper to do than the launches you have heard of and imagine are all that there is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , we lack a launch capacity for human astronauts.Most orbital launches do not include human astronauts , and hence are much cheaper to do than the launches you have heard of and imagine are all that there is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, we lack a launch capacity for human astronauts.Most orbital launches do not include human astronauts, and hence are much cheaper to do than the launches you have heard of and imagine are all that there is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466551</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245945660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful, and the solar panels were 80\% efficient, rather than 20\%.
</p><p>And yes, I am an Electrical Engineer.</p></div><p>The issue is that the best cells in the world are still in the high 30\% range...

And yes, I do build satellites for a living, and will certainly not invest my money in this company.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful , and the solar panels were 80 \ % efficient , rather than 20 \ % .
And yes , I am an Electrical Engineer.The issue is that the best cells in the world are still in the high 30 \ % range.. . And yes , I do build satellites for a living , and will certainly not invest my money in this company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful, and the solar panels were 80\% efficient, rather than 20\%.
And yes, I am an Electrical Engineer.The issue is that the best cells in the world are still in the high 30\% range...

And yes, I do build satellites for a living, and will certainly not invest my money in this company.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469495</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Bakkster</author>
	<datestamp>1245957420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar. Also remember that the solar panels placed in space have a large surface area than the antenna, receive more solar energy per area (due to not having losses due to the ozone layer, etc), and can beam power 24/7. So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful, and the solar panels were 80\% efficient, rather than 20\%. Using these (thumbnail estimate) numbers, that makes microwave 16x more efficient per unit area than solar. It becomes even more efficient when you take into account that the sun is not as bright at other times of the day (such as 8AM, or 11PM).</p></div></blockquote><p>If the solar panels are 80\% efficient in space, you can make them 80\% efficient on Earth.  No matter what, you've still really only made a 4x improvement over an ideal array on Earth.  Now realize that the conversion to/from microwave energy is at best only 80\% efficient.  So now you're down to 3.2x the efficiency.</p></div><p>You misunderstand, and I misspoke.  It's not the panels that are more efficient, but the total system.  A better way to put it is imagine the sun was 4x stronger and was high in the sky 23 hours every day.  With the same panel in space, you get 16x the energy per day.  After an 80\% efficient microwave transmission, that comes to about 13x the power for the same number of panels.
</p><p>You bring up good points about the economics of it all, I merely wanted to point out that from a physics and engineering standpoint it's a sound idea.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar .
Also remember that the solar panels placed in space have a large surface area than the antenna , receive more solar energy per area ( due to not having losses due to the ozone layer , etc ) , and can beam power 24/7 .
So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful , and the solar panels were 80 \ % efficient , rather than 20 \ % .
Using these ( thumbnail estimate ) numbers , that makes microwave 16x more efficient per unit area than solar .
It becomes even more efficient when you take into account that the sun is not as bright at other times of the day ( such as 8AM , or 11PM ) .If the solar panels are 80 \ % efficient in space , you can make them 80 \ % efficient on Earth .
No matter what , you 've still really only made a 4x improvement over an ideal array on Earth .
Now realize that the conversion to/from microwave energy is at best only 80 \ % efficient .
So now you 're down to 3.2x the efficiency.You misunderstand , and I misspoke .
It 's not the panels that are more efficient , but the total system .
A better way to put it is imagine the sun was 4x stronger and was high in the sky 23 hours every day .
With the same panel in space , you get 16x the energy per day .
After an 80 \ % efficient microwave transmission , that comes to about 13x the power for the same number of panels .
You bring up good points about the economics of it all , I merely wanted to point out that from a physics and engineering standpoint it 's a sound idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Converting electrical power to and from microwave radiation is an order of magnitude more efficient than solar.
Also remember that the solar panels placed in space have a large surface area than the antenna, receive more solar energy per area (due to not having losses due to the ozone layer, etc), and can beam power 24/7.
So imagine if the sun was 4x more powerful, and the solar panels were 80\% efficient, rather than 20\%.
Using these (thumbnail estimate) numbers, that makes microwave 16x more efficient per unit area than solar.
It becomes even more efficient when you take into account that the sun is not as bright at other times of the day (such as 8AM, or 11PM).If the solar panels are 80\% efficient in space, you can make them 80\% efficient on Earth.
No matter what, you've still really only made a 4x improvement over an ideal array on Earth.
Now realize that the conversion to/from microwave energy is at best only 80\% efficient.
So now you're down to 3.2x the efficiency.You misunderstand, and I misspoke.
It's not the panels that are more efficient, but the total system.
A better way to put it is imagine the sun was 4x stronger and was high in the sky 23 hours every day.
With the same panel in space, you get 16x the energy per day.
After an 80\% efficient microwave transmission, that comes to about 13x the power for the same number of panels.
You bring up good points about the economics of it all, I merely wanted to point out that from a physics and engineering standpoint it's a sound idea.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468779</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465909</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>pedestrian crossing</author>
	<datestamp>1245942420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Personally I think that geothermal energy is still a method of energy production that has yet to be tapped on a more massive scale.</p></div><p>Strictly speaking, you are correct, geothermal is a method that hasn't been tapped on a massive scale (outside of a few places like Iceland).  Problem is, there are issues with induced earthquakes with geothermal.  Google Basel Geothermal for an example...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally I think that geothermal energy is still a method of energy production that has yet to be tapped on a more massive scale.Strictly speaking , you are correct , geothermal is a method that has n't been tapped on a massive scale ( outside of a few places like Iceland ) .
Problem is , there are issues with induced earthquakes with geothermal .
Google Basel Geothermal for an example.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally I think that geothermal energy is still a method of energy production that has yet to be tapped on a more massive scale.Strictly speaking, you are correct, geothermal is a method that hasn't been tapped on a massive scale (outside of a few places like Iceland).
Problem is, there are issues with induced earthquakes with geothermal.
Google Basel Geothermal for an example...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469067</id>
	<title>Re:Miss</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1245955800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What could possibly go wrong?</p><p>1. With the horror stories about living near power lines, and cell phone usage, what possibke problems could a massive beam of energy blasting from overhead cause?</p><p>2. Terrorist with a simple transmitter causing the beam to come down into a nearby city.</p><p>3. How to you intend on using a power beam to adjust a satellites position, without blasting random sites on the earth? I doubt you can make manouver as necessary without pointing the beam in all directions.</p><p>4. You have your power at the equator. Now what? Load it on a boat it to Canada where it's needed? 2000 miles of wire with minimal losses?</p><p>5. If you're worried about global warming right now, how will you feel about massive amounts of energy pumped into the atmosphere every day? You cannot send a beam through the air without affecting it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What could possibly go wrong ? 1 .
With the horror stories about living near power lines , and cell phone usage , what possibke problems could a massive beam of energy blasting from overhead cause ? 2 .
Terrorist with a simple transmitter causing the beam to come down into a nearby city.3 .
How to you intend on using a power beam to adjust a satellites position , without blasting random sites on the earth ?
I doubt you can make manouver as necessary without pointing the beam in all directions.4 .
You have your power at the equator .
Now what ?
Load it on a boat it to Canada where it 's needed ?
2000 miles of wire with minimal losses ? 5 .
If you 're worried about global warming right now , how will you feel about massive amounts of energy pumped into the atmosphere every day ?
You can not send a beam through the air without affecting it .
.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What could possibly go wrong?1.
With the horror stories about living near power lines, and cell phone usage, what possibke problems could a massive beam of energy blasting from overhead cause?2.
Terrorist with a simple transmitter causing the beam to come down into a nearby city.3.
How to you intend on using a power beam to adjust a satellites position, without blasting random sites on the earth?
I doubt you can make manouver as necessary without pointing the beam in all directions.4.
You have your power at the equator.
Now what?
Load it on a boat it to Canada where it's needed?
2000 miles of wire with minimal losses?5.
If you're worried about global warming right now, how will you feel about massive amounts of energy pumped into the atmosphere every day?
You cannot send a beam through the air without affecting it.
...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465765</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465473</id>
	<title>woot!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245940020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465919</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>condour75</author>
	<datestamp>1245942420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, well some day maybe we'll have the ability to quantitatively compare two scenarios. I hear mathematicians are working on some new fangled thing called a comparison operator.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , well some day maybe we 'll have the ability to quantitatively compare two scenarios .
I hear mathematicians are working on some new fangled thing called a comparison operator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, well some day maybe we'll have the ability to quantitatively compare two scenarios.
I hear mathematicians are working on some new fangled thing called a comparison operator.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477347</id>
	<title>Use Arizona, Nevada</title>
	<author>benow</author>
	<datestamp>1245950160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It'd be much cheaper to blanket 100 km2 of the desert with solar cells.  Store excess power in flywheels or similar for night use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 'd be much cheaper to blanket 100 km2 of the desert with solar cells .
Store excess power in flywheels or similar for night use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It'd be much cheaper to blanket 100 km2 of the desert with solar cells.
Store excess power in flywheels or similar for night use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466885</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245947400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stop confusing provable science with religion.</p><p>And yes, this is a hare brained idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop confusing provable science with religion.And yes , this is a hare brained idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop confusing provable science with religion.And yes, this is a hare brained idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467641</id>
	<title>Re:Oh, come on... You can't have it both ways.</title>
	<author>ZwJGR</author>
	<datestamp>1245950640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate to disappoint you but solar output isn't measured in degrees Celsius.<br>Trying to argue that 2.5 times solar output means 40C x 2.5 = enough to produce steam, just makes you look like you haven't a clue what you are talking about.<br>The output is generally measured in Wm^-2 (1000 on a sunny equatorial day more or less), and as frankly the vast majority of microwave radiation would go straight through a human obstacle and out the other side anyway, if you are worried about being being caught in the beam being boiled alive or whatever, you've missed the point a little.<br>If they were just using a solar collector and focusing device (ie. a big mirror) in orbit &#224; la shitty films like Die Another Die then yes, it would be an issue (the temperature to output power per area ratio would still be in absolutely no way linear though).</p><p>Mostly, you seem to have forgotten in general that the Celsius temperature scale has an arbitrary zero point, so doing any kind of multiplication on it will almost always give you a rubbish answer.</p><p>As for using other kinds of liquids/thermal solar collection, people do that already in deserts (on a medium scale) and there's absolutely no need for having orbiting mechanisms to increase throughput. Just use focusing mirrors on the ground.</p><p>Frankly the idea is a bit of a waste of time in my eyes. There's plenty of empty sunny desert where solar collection systems can be set up. Cheaper to create a 10km^2 grid on the ground that produces much more, than to try and put a 0.1km^2 array in orbit and try to beam power down somehow...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to disappoint you but solar output is n't measured in degrees Celsius.Trying to argue that 2.5 times solar output means 40C x 2.5 = enough to produce steam , just makes you look like you have n't a clue what you are talking about.The output is generally measured in Wm ^ -2 ( 1000 on a sunny equatorial day more or less ) , and as frankly the vast majority of microwave radiation would go straight through a human obstacle and out the other side anyway , if you are worried about being being caught in the beam being boiled alive or whatever , you 've missed the point a little.If they were just using a solar collector and focusing device ( ie .
a big mirror ) in orbit   la shitty films like Die Another Die then yes , it would be an issue ( the temperature to output power per area ratio would still be in absolutely no way linear though ) .Mostly , you seem to have forgotten in general that the Celsius temperature scale has an arbitrary zero point , so doing any kind of multiplication on it will almost always give you a rubbish answer.As for using other kinds of liquids/thermal solar collection , people do that already in deserts ( on a medium scale ) and there 's absolutely no need for having orbiting mechanisms to increase throughput .
Just use focusing mirrors on the ground.Frankly the idea is a bit of a waste of time in my eyes .
There 's plenty of empty sunny desert where solar collection systems can be set up .
Cheaper to create a 10km ^ 2 grid on the ground that produces much more , than to try and put a 0.1km ^ 2 array in orbit and try to beam power down somehow.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to disappoint you but solar output isn't measured in degrees Celsius.Trying to argue that 2.5 times solar output means 40C x 2.5 = enough to produce steam, just makes you look like you haven't a clue what you are talking about.The output is generally measured in Wm^-2 (1000 on a sunny equatorial day more or less), and as frankly the vast majority of microwave radiation would go straight through a human obstacle and out the other side anyway, if you are worried about being being caught in the beam being boiled alive or whatever, you've missed the point a little.If they were just using a solar collector and focusing device (ie.
a big mirror) in orbit à la shitty films like Die Another Die then yes, it would be an issue (the temperature to output power per area ratio would still be in absolutely no way linear though).Mostly, you seem to have forgotten in general that the Celsius temperature scale has an arbitrary zero point, so doing any kind of multiplication on it will almost always give you a rubbish answer.As for using other kinds of liquids/thermal solar collection, people do that already in deserts (on a medium scale) and there's absolutely no need for having orbiting mechanisms to increase throughput.
Just use focusing mirrors on the ground.Frankly the idea is a bit of a waste of time in my eyes.
There's plenty of empty sunny desert where solar collection systems can be set up.
Cheaper to create a 10km^2 grid on the ground that produces much more, than to try and put a 0.1km^2 array in orbit and try to beam power down somehow...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466429</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466279</id>
	<title>Re:Assuming everything goes well</title>
	<author>bcmm</author>
	<datestamp>1245944220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Same applies to nuclear?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Same applies to nuclear ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same applies to nuclear?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468871</id>
	<title>Re:200 measly MegaWhats? seriously?</title>
	<author>phayes</author>
	<datestamp>1245955140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pfff... His<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.name contains "geek" &amp; he still believes that geosync sats can "fall out of orbit"... Tell us, geekoid, how much time do you think it takes for something orbiting in a geosync orbit to degrade to the point that it would risk "falling" out of orbit? A few hours? A few days? A couple months? A year or two? Decades?</p><p>Try thousands of years...</p><p>While you're building your supposedly cheaper terrestrial solar thermal plant, don't forget to add in the cost of laying power lines needed to supply power to those of us who live above the arctic circle &amp; see no sun for months at a time. Oh, and the other power sources you'll need to add in for the rest of the planet that has those pesky things called clouds that will render your power source too inefficient for much of the planet.</p><p>The next time you fill your tank up with gas, you might also want to reflect on the remote controlled automation which has made exploitation of deep sea oil deposits possible &amp; what that promises for remote reparations in orbit.</p><p>Talk about stupid...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pfff... His /.name contains " geek " &amp; he still believes that geosync sats can " fall out of orbit " ... Tell us , geekoid , how much time do you think it takes for something orbiting in a geosync orbit to degrade to the point that it would risk " falling " out of orbit ?
A few hours ?
A few days ?
A couple months ?
A year or two ?
Decades ? Try thousands of years...While you 're building your supposedly cheaper terrestrial solar thermal plant , do n't forget to add in the cost of laying power lines needed to supply power to those of us who live above the arctic circle &amp; see no sun for months at a time .
Oh , and the other power sources you 'll need to add in for the rest of the planet that has those pesky things called clouds that will render your power source too inefficient for much of the planet.The next time you fill your tank up with gas , you might also want to reflect on the remote controlled automation which has made exploitation of deep sea oil deposits possible &amp; what that promises for remote reparations in orbit.Talk about stupid.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pfff... His /.name contains "geek" &amp; he still believes that geosync sats can "fall out of orbit"... Tell us, geekoid, how much time do you think it takes for something orbiting in a geosync orbit to degrade to the point that it would risk "falling" out of orbit?
A few hours?
A few days?
A couple months?
A year or two?
Decades?Try thousands of years...While you're building your supposedly cheaper terrestrial solar thermal plant, don't forget to add in the cost of laying power lines needed to supply power to those of us who live above the arctic circle &amp; see no sun for months at a time.
Oh, and the other power sources you'll need to add in for the rest of the planet that has those pesky things called clouds that will render your power source too inefficient for much of the planet.The next time you fill your tank up with gas, you might also want to reflect on the remote controlled automation which has made exploitation of deep sea oil deposits possible &amp; what that promises for remote reparations in orbit.Talk about stupid...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465827</id>
	<title>Re:Ouch!</title>
	<author>tomzyk</author>
	<datestamp>1245942000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Heh, rectenna sounds like some alien probing device</p></div></blockquote><p>Actually, I thought it sounds like something <a href="http://futurama.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Inventions" title="wikia.com">Professor Farnsworth would come up with</a> [wikia.com]. (Fing-Longer, Maternifuge, Smell-O-Scope, etc...)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Heh , rectenna sounds like some alien probing deviceActually , I thought it sounds like something Professor Farnsworth would come up with [ wikia.com ] .
( Fing-Longer , Maternifuge , Smell-O-Scope , etc... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heh, rectenna sounds like some alien probing deviceActually, I thought it sounds like something Professor Farnsworth would come up with [wikia.com].
(Fing-Longer, Maternifuge, Smell-O-Scope, etc...)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465641</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599</id>
	<title>Dear Canada</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245940620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Memo from the United States<br>
February 12th, 2020<br> <br>

Dear Canada, <br> <br>

Yesterday a piece of space trash knocked our Microwave Power Plant operating over Oregon off target from its station.  Unfortunately, it continued to beam a strong powerful ray of energy down as its sights fell over your Western provinces.  We are sorry.  <br> <br>

We urge you not to think of it as "a swath of destruction" so much as "a wicked cool tattoo"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I heard Mexico is very jealous.  <br> <br>

Williston Lake was a very beautiful lake right up until it evaporated<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but look on the bright side--there sure the hell ain't no zebra mussels left in there now!  <br> <br>

We're also sorry that instead of shutting it down, we just swung it back over Canada to its power station in Oregon and next time we will totally just stop it before this happens.  To make up for it, we'll send you some extra power so your people stop rioting and Mad Maxing.  <br> <br>

We hope there's no hard feelings, <br> <br>

Sincerely,<br> <br>

The United States</htmltext>
<tokenext>Memo from the United States February 12th , 2020 Dear Canada , Yesterday a piece of space trash knocked our Microwave Power Plant operating over Oregon off target from its station .
Unfortunately , it continued to beam a strong powerful ray of energy down as its sights fell over your Western provinces .
We are sorry .
We urge you not to think of it as " a swath of destruction " so much as " a wicked cool tattoo " ... I heard Mexico is very jealous .
Williston Lake was a very beautiful lake right up until it evaporated ... but look on the bright side--there sure the hell ai n't no zebra mussels left in there now !
We 're also sorry that instead of shutting it down , we just swung it back over Canada to its power station in Oregon and next time we will totally just stop it before this happens .
To make up for it , we 'll send you some extra power so your people stop rioting and Mad Maxing .
We hope there 's no hard feelings , Sincerely , The United States</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Memo from the United States
February 12th, 2020 

Dear Canada,  

Yesterday a piece of space trash knocked our Microwave Power Plant operating over Oregon off target from its station.
Unfortunately, it continued to beam a strong powerful ray of energy down as its sights fell over your Western provinces.
We are sorry.
We urge you not to think of it as "a swath of destruction" so much as "a wicked cool tattoo" ... I heard Mexico is very jealous.
Williston Lake was a very beautiful lake right up until it evaporated ... but look on the bright side--there sure the hell ain't no zebra mussels left in there now!
We're also sorry that instead of shutting it down, we just swung it back over Canada to its power station in Oregon and next time we will totally just stop it before this happens.
To make up for it, we'll send you some extra power so your people stop rioting and Mad Maxing.
We hope there's no hard feelings,  

Sincerely, 

The United States</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466987</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>geobeck</author>
	<datestamp>1245947940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What do you mean?  An African or European swallow?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you mean ?
An African or European swallow ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you mean?
An African or European swallow?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468297</id>
	<title>Re:"Solaren Insta-Tan (tm)"</title>
	<author>phayes</author>
	<datestamp>1245952980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Only Microwaves in the immediate neighborhood of 2450 Mhz will have any effect. 99\% of Microwave frequencies have absolutely no effect whatsoever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only Microwaves in the immediate neighborhood of 2450 Mhz will have any effect .
99 \ % of Microwave frequencies have absolutely no effect whatsoever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only Microwaves in the immediate neighborhood of 2450 Mhz will have any effect.
99\% of Microwave frequencies have absolutely no effect whatsoever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465937</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466309</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Canada</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245944400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This resembles the protests against trains, that thirty miles an hour was too fast for the human frame to withstand. The off-target beam has been thought of and is quite simply fixed by bouncing the reference beam for the phased arrays back off the target area. If it goes off target, the beam de-coheres and becomes harmless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This resembles the protests against trains , that thirty miles an hour was too fast for the human frame to withstand .
The off-target beam has been thought of and is quite simply fixed by bouncing the reference beam for the phased arrays back off the target area .
If it goes off target , the beam de-coheres and becomes harmless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This resembles the protests against trains, that thirty miles an hour was too fast for the human frame to withstand.
The off-target beam has been thought of and is quite simply fixed by bouncing the reference beam for the phased arrays back off the target area.
If it goes off target, the beam de-coheres and becomes harmless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466191</id>
	<title>Re:Assuming everything goes well</title>
	<author>cfalcon</author>
	<datestamp>1245943800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Uh, that would be an act of war?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , that would be an act of war ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, that would be an act of war?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465937</id>
	<title>Re:"Solaren Insta-Tan (tm)"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate to rain on your +Funny parade, but it's ultraviolet radiation that causes a tan.</p><p>Microwaves will just heat you up to about a depth of 1cm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to rain on your + Funny parade , but it 's ultraviolet radiation that causes a tan.Microwaves will just heat you up to about a depth of 1cm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to rain on your +Funny parade, but it's ultraviolet radiation that causes a tan.Microwaves will just heat you up to about a depth of 1cm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465569</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467013</id>
	<title>Re:Won't someone...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245948060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and to think I thought you were going to say children.</p><p>I did, at least...</p><p>Should be 'bout 30 seconds to a very nice slow roast rotisserie.</p><p>Mmmm... tasty.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/drool</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and to think I thought you were going to say children.I did , at least...Should be 'bout 30 seconds to a very nice slow roast rotisserie.Mmmm... tasty. /drool</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and to think I thought you were going to say children.I did, at least...Should be 'bout 30 seconds to a very nice slow roast rotisserie.Mmmm... tasty. /drool</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465843</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>Quantumstate</author>
	<datestamp>1245942120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Based on Wolfram Alpha the Earth gets about 1.3 kW per square meter.  with the earth being 6.4*10^6 m radius with find the area facing the sun is pi*r^2 = 1.28*10^14.  Multiplied by the power gives 1.67*10^17 W hitting the earth.  Now since the power company wants to sell 2*10^8 W of power we can conclude that the extra energy reaching the Earth would be in the region of 0.0000001\%.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Based on Wolfram Alpha the Earth gets about 1.3 kW per square meter .
with the earth being 6.4 * 10 ^ 6 m radius with find the area facing the sun is pi * r ^ 2 = 1.28 * 10 ^ 14 .
Multiplied by the power gives 1.67 * 10 ^ 17 W hitting the earth .
Now since the power company wants to sell 2 * 10 ^ 8 W of power we can conclude that the extra energy reaching the Earth would be in the region of 0.0000001 \ % .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Based on Wolfram Alpha the Earth gets about 1.3 kW per square meter.
with the earth being 6.4*10^6 m radius with find the area facing the sun is pi*r^2 = 1.28*10^14.
Multiplied by the power gives 1.67*10^17 W hitting the earth.
Now since the power company wants to sell 2*10^8 W of power we can conclude that the extra energy reaching the Earth would be in the region of 0.0000001\%.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467299</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1245949320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... explain to me, Mr Engineer, how you get around line of sight?  How are you going to beam 24/7 when your satelitte is in geosyncronise orbit?  It goes dark too, it may see more daylight, but its still going dark.</p><p>Wind is a far more intelligent choice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So ... explain to me , Mr Engineer , how you get around line of sight ?
How are you going to beam 24/7 when your satelitte is in geosyncronise orbit ?
It goes dark too , it may see more daylight , but its still going dark.Wind is a far more intelligent choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So ... explain to me, Mr Engineer, how you get around line of sight?
How are you going to beam 24/7 when your satelitte is in geosyncronise orbit?
It goes dark too, it may see more daylight, but its still going dark.Wind is a far more intelligent choice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28472941</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>feepness</author>
	<datestamp>1245926580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Because the energy is not in infrared or UV radiation, you will experience neither of these effects. If you're worried about microwave radiation, remember that this includes the frequencies that make up the WiFi, Bluetooth, and AM/FM radio waves that pass through your body all the time.</p></div><p>For those concerned I am going to be selling custom tinfoil hats for protection.
<br> <br>
Stylish AND they keep out government brain wave interference as well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the energy is not in infrared or UV radiation , you will experience neither of these effects .
If you 're worried about microwave radiation , remember that this includes the frequencies that make up the WiFi , Bluetooth , and AM/FM radio waves that pass through your body all the time.For those concerned I am going to be selling custom tinfoil hats for protection .
Stylish AND they keep out government brain wave interference as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the energy is not in infrared or UV radiation, you will experience neither of these effects.
If you're worried about microwave radiation, remember that this includes the frequencies that make up the WiFi, Bluetooth, and AM/FM radio waves that pass through your body all the time.For those concerned I am going to be selling custom tinfoil hats for protection.
Stylish AND they keep out government brain wave interference as well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470061</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245959520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is the most retarded thing I have heard today heat = energy. The last time I heard coal is used to to produce heat, to heat water, to turn a dynamo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is the most retarded thing I have heard today heat = energy .
The last time I heard coal is used to to produce heat , to heat water , to turn a dynamo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is the most retarded thing I have heard today heat = energy.
The last time I heard coal is used to to produce heat, to heat water, to turn a dynamo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477559</id>
	<title>Re:In Space</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245952020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In space...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...Russian Solar Power Plants beam you</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In space... ...Russian Solar Power Plants beam you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In space... ...Russian Solar Power Plants beam you</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467761</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>J05H</author>
	<datestamp>1245951060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And you certainly know nothing about the launch market. Every major rocket production line is under-producing because they were expanded to meet a demand for telecom satellites in the late 90s that never materialized. Delta and Atlas are at less than 1/4 capacity.</p><p>Build more payloads!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And you certainly know nothing about the launch market .
Every major rocket production line is under-producing because they were expanded to meet a demand for telecom satellites in the late 90s that never materialized .
Delta and Atlas are at less than 1/4 capacity.Build more payloads !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you certainly know nothing about the launch market.
Every major rocket production line is under-producing because they were expanded to meet a demand for telecom satellites in the late 90s that never materialized.
Delta and Atlas are at less than 1/4 capacity.Build more payloads!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466237</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Tx</author>
	<datestamp>1245944040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since the OP didn't reply, I'll have a stab.</p><p><i>"First, a "few times" noon sunlight power, I think would be pretty brutal."</i></p><p>The OP was talking about transiting the collection area, not camping out there. Also we're talking about microwaves rather than visible/UV from sunlight, you will have to ask someone else what the equivalent energy of 3x noon sunlight in microwave form will do, but the point is we're not simply talking about noon sunlight x3, it's not visible/UV at all.</p><p><i>"Doesn't a "few times" noon sunlight power mean that your getting only a "few times" what you'd be getting from the sun by itself..."</i></p><p>Again, we're talking microwaves. Microwaves can be converted to electricity with an efficiency of 75\% plus using a rectenna, this is many times the best efficiency we can currently achieve with visible light (typically ~15\%). So if you have a beam energy density 3x sunlight, and a conversion efficiency 5x photovoltaics, that give you and output energy 15x what you would get directly converting sunlight using photovoltaics, not just 3x.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the OP did n't reply , I 'll have a stab .
" First , a " few times " noon sunlight power , I think would be pretty brutal .
" The OP was talking about transiting the collection area , not camping out there .
Also we 're talking about microwaves rather than visible/UV from sunlight , you will have to ask someone else what the equivalent energy of 3x noon sunlight in microwave form will do , but the point is we 're not simply talking about noon sunlight x3 , it 's not visible/UV at all .
" Does n't a " few times " noon sunlight power mean that your getting only a " few times " what you 'd be getting from the sun by itself... " Again , we 're talking microwaves .
Microwaves can be converted to electricity with an efficiency of 75 \ % plus using a rectenna , this is many times the best efficiency we can currently achieve with visible light ( typically ~ 15 \ % ) .
So if you have a beam energy density 3x sunlight , and a conversion efficiency 5x photovoltaics , that give you and output energy 15x what you would get directly converting sunlight using photovoltaics , not just 3x .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the OP didn't reply, I'll have a stab.
"First, a "few times" noon sunlight power, I think would be pretty brutal.
"The OP was talking about transiting the collection area, not camping out there.
Also we're talking about microwaves rather than visible/UV from sunlight, you will have to ask someone else what the equivalent energy of 3x noon sunlight in microwave form will do, but the point is we're not simply talking about noon sunlight x3, it's not visible/UV at all.
"Doesn't a "few times" noon sunlight power mean that your getting only a "few times" what you'd be getting from the sun by itself..."Again, we're talking microwaves.
Microwaves can be converted to electricity with an efficiency of 75\% plus using a rectenna, this is many times the best efficiency we can currently achieve with visible light (typically ~15\%).
So if you have a beam energy density 3x sunlight, and a conversion efficiency 5x photovoltaics, that give you and output energy 15x what you would get directly converting sunlight using photovoltaics, not just 3x.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28474289</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1245932100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, we just call IR "heat" because it's the band that we radiate in, so anything we're likely to encounter that won't burn us or freeze us also radiates in the IR.  The GP is incorrect - what we feel as heat from the sun is due to the IR and up, including visible, being absorbed by our skin.  Since the sun's peak radiation is in the middle of the visible spectrum, we are actually warmed MORE by any given range of visible light than we are by any given range of IR spectrum.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , we just call IR " heat " because it 's the band that we radiate in , so anything we 're likely to encounter that wo n't burn us or freeze us also radiates in the IR .
The GP is incorrect - what we feel as heat from the sun is due to the IR and up , including visible , being absorbed by our skin .
Since the sun 's peak radiation is in the middle of the visible spectrum , we are actually warmed MORE by any given range of visible light than we are by any given range of IR spectrum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, we just call IR "heat" because it's the band that we radiate in, so anything we're likely to encounter that won't burn us or freeze us also radiates in the IR.
The GP is incorrect - what we feel as heat from the sun is due to the IR and up, including visible, being absorbed by our skin.
Since the sun's peak radiation is in the middle of the visible spectrum, we are actually warmed MORE by any given range of visible light than we are by any given range of IR spectrum.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467023</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467023</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Absolut187</author>
	<datestamp>1245948180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>First is the infrared, which is the heat energy.</p></div></blockquote><p>A bit off-topic, but I've always wondered why infrared is the only spectrum referred to as "heat energy".<br>Why is that?  If an object absorbs UV radiation, will it not increase in temperature?<br>Why is it that "heat-sensor" is synonymous with "infrared sensor"?<br>Do ALL objects emit only infrared based on temperature?</p><p>For example, I know that metal will glow in visible spectrum when heated (e.g. the "burner" on an electric stove).</p><p>So is it something magical about IR or is it simply that a wide variety of objects just so happen (by coincidence) to have a high correspondence between IR radiation and temperature?</p><p>Does my question make any sense?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>First is the infrared , which is the heat energy.A bit off-topic , but I 've always wondered why infrared is the only spectrum referred to as " heat energy " .Why is that ?
If an object absorbs UV radiation , will it not increase in temperature ? Why is it that " heat-sensor " is synonymous with " infrared sensor " ? Do ALL objects emit only infrared based on temperature ? For example , I know that metal will glow in visible spectrum when heated ( e.g .
the " burner " on an electric stove ) .So is it something magical about IR or is it simply that a wide variety of objects just so happen ( by coincidence ) to have a high correspondence between IR radiation and temperature ? Does my question make any sense ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First is the infrared, which is the heat energy.A bit off-topic, but I've always wondered why infrared is the only spectrum referred to as "heat energy".Why is that?
If an object absorbs UV radiation, will it not increase in temperature?Why is it that "heat-sensor" is synonymous with "infrared sensor"?Do ALL objects emit only infrared based on temperature?For example, I know that metal will glow in visible spectrum when heated (e.g.
the "burner" on an electric stove).So is it something magical about IR or is it simply that a wide variety of objects just so happen (by coincidence) to have a high correspondence between IR radiation and temperature?Does my question make any sense?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465809</id>
	<title>It's not a laser folks, stop crying?</title>
	<author>cfalcon</author>
	<datestamp>1245941880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A microwave power transmission of this magnitude will use a broad cross section for the beam, such that a big power station is required to absorb the power.  If it was suddenly turned and flipped across several miles in a couple seconds, the total amount of extra energy delivered to anyone or anything would be unnoticeable-  and microwaves are not ionizing radiation in any event, so if anything bad were to happen, it would be via heat.

Does the fact that a person would supposedly be able to be on top of the collector make me want to hang out on top of one?  Of course not.  But this is not a big deal.  It's safer that nuclear power, and that's pretty safe.  But unlike nuclear plants, it can't be meaningfully targeted by terrorists any more than any power plant could be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A microwave power transmission of this magnitude will use a broad cross section for the beam , such that a big power station is required to absorb the power .
If it was suddenly turned and flipped across several miles in a couple seconds , the total amount of extra energy delivered to anyone or anything would be unnoticeable- and microwaves are not ionizing radiation in any event , so if anything bad were to happen , it would be via heat .
Does the fact that a person would supposedly be able to be on top of the collector make me want to hang out on top of one ?
Of course not .
But this is not a big deal .
It 's safer that nuclear power , and that 's pretty safe .
But unlike nuclear plants , it ca n't be meaningfully targeted by terrorists any more than any power plant could be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A microwave power transmission of this magnitude will use a broad cross section for the beam, such that a big power station is required to absorb the power.
If it was suddenly turned and flipped across several miles in a couple seconds, the total amount of extra energy delivered to anyone or anything would be unnoticeable-  and microwaves are not ionizing radiation in any event, so if anything bad were to happen, it would be via heat.
Does the fact that a person would supposedly be able to be on top of the collector make me want to hang out on top of one?
Of course not.
But this is not a big deal.
It's safer that nuclear power, and that's pretty safe.
But unlike nuclear plants, it can't be meaningfully targeted by terrorists any more than any power plant could be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468359</id>
	<title>Re:They should try this over San Francisco</title>
	<author>SeePage87</author>
	<datestamp>1245953280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Poppycock. You can spout all you want about the merits of green energy, but solar power is a terribly inefficient use of space.  What will we do once we've filled up space with solar panels, huh?  It'd be much better to just build a bunch of nuclear plants up there instead.

Sarcasm aside, nuclear plants in space might not be such a bad idea if we can actually beam the energy to earth.  Nuclear waste is no longer a problem, cooling is no longer a problem, not-in-my-backyard is no longer a problem, if we built a space elevator (which with a budget tied to the energy market [a multi-trillion dollar industry worldwide] would be pretty easy), then upkeep would be much more reasonable.  It's worth a thought.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Poppycock .
You can spout all you want about the merits of green energy , but solar power is a terribly inefficient use of space .
What will we do once we 've filled up space with solar panels , huh ?
It 'd be much better to just build a bunch of nuclear plants up there instead .
Sarcasm aside , nuclear plants in space might not be such a bad idea if we can actually beam the energy to earth .
Nuclear waste is no longer a problem , cooling is no longer a problem , not-in-my-backyard is no longer a problem , if we built a space elevator ( which with a budget tied to the energy market [ a multi-trillion dollar industry worldwide ] would be pretty easy ) , then upkeep would be much more reasonable .
It 's worth a thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Poppycock.
You can spout all you want about the merits of green energy, but solar power is a terribly inefficient use of space.
What will we do once we've filled up space with solar panels, huh?
It'd be much better to just build a bunch of nuclear plants up there instead.
Sarcasm aside, nuclear plants in space might not be such a bad idea if we can actually beam the energy to earth.
Nuclear waste is no longer a problem, cooling is no longer a problem, not-in-my-backyard is no longer a problem, if we built a space elevator (which with a budget tied to the energy market [a multi-trillion dollar industry worldwide] would be pretty easy), then upkeep would be much more reasonable.
It's worth a thought.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465481</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470449</id>
	<title>That reminds me...</title>
	<author>Bones3D\_mac</author>
	<datestamp>1245961020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SciFi channel is supposed to start running "Mobile Suit Gundam 00" season 2 next monday night.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SciFi channel is supposed to start running " Mobile Suit Gundam 00 " season 2 next monday night .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SciFi channel is supposed to start running "Mobile Suit Gundam 00" season 2 next monday night.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466693</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1245946380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope you misinterpreted him. Human power generation is too tiny to contribute a meaningful amount of heat to the planet (on the order of 0.02\% of solar input).</p><p>Not venting all that CO2 might help though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope you misinterpreted him .
Human power generation is too tiny to contribute a meaningful amount of heat to the planet ( on the order of 0.02 \ % of solar input ) .Not venting all that CO2 might help though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope you misinterpreted him.
Human power generation is too tiny to contribute a meaningful amount of heat to the planet (on the order of 0.02\% of solar input).Not venting all that CO2 might help though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470873</id>
	<title>Re:An idea with a lack of vision</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1245962940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Uh - actually I think that's rather the idea - to make Europe subservient to Africa for its energy needs.  It's impossible to deny that a substantial portion of the European population thinks that such a situation would be preferable.<p>Besides..."European armies?"  What the heck is that?  Do they still have those in Europe?  The ones I know about are stretched to the limit just to send a couple thousand peacekeepers overseas, to say nothing of the permanent forces that would be required to defend neo-energy-empires.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh - actually I think that 's rather the idea - to make Europe subservient to Africa for its energy needs .
It 's impossible to deny that a substantial portion of the European population thinks that such a situation would be preferable.Besides... " European armies ?
" What the heck is that ?
Do they still have those in Europe ?
The ones I know about are stretched to the limit just to send a couple thousand peacekeepers overseas , to say nothing of the permanent forces that would be required to defend neo-energy-empires .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh - actually I think that's rather the idea - to make Europe subservient to Africa for its energy needs.
It's impossible to deny that a substantial portion of the European population thinks that such a situation would be preferable.Besides..."European armies?
"  What the heck is that?
Do they still have those in Europe?
The ones I know about are stretched to the limit just to send a couple thousand peacekeepers overseas, to say nothing of the permanent forces that would be required to defend neo-energy-empires.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466187</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245943800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) you're, not your. Learn it.<br>2) We can covert microwaves into electricity with much greater efficiency than sunlight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) you 're , not your .
Learn it.2 ) We can covert microwaves into electricity with much greater efficiency than sunlight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) you're, not your.
Learn it.2) We can covert microwaves into electricity with much greater efficiency than sunlight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465801</id>
	<title>Won't someone...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245941820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... please think about the poor birds!</htmltext>
<tokenext>... please think about the poor birds !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... please think about the poor birds!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470219</id>
	<title>Re:An idea with a lack of vision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245960120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What happens when Muad'Dib frees the desert people from your norther aggression and turns the desert into paradise?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What happens when Muad'Dib frees the desert people from your norther aggression and turns the desert into paradise ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What happens when Muad'Dib frees the desert people from your norther aggression and turns the desert into paradise?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466447</id>
	<title>Re:Science/tech illiteracy</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1245945120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The satellites would also in their orbits come between the earth and the sun, blocking radiation that would have hit earth, so it may be a wash either way in terms of total energy.   Plus we can always build a giant solera sunshade if we need to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The satellites would also in their orbits come between the earth and the sun , blocking radiation that would have hit earth , so it may be a wash either way in terms of total energy .
Plus we can always build a giant solera sunshade if we need to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The satellites would also in their orbits come between the earth and the sun, blocking radiation that would have hit earth, so it may be a wash either way in terms of total energy.
Plus we can always build a giant solera sunshade if we need to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467821</id>
	<title>Re:Miss</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245951300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Satellite in geostable orbit. Receiving station on equator. Receiving station emits guiding signal to satellite, causing satellite to beam power to earth. If the guiding signal is missing, the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it's position. That's how I'd do it.</p></div><p>That's nice and all, but how about this:  If the beam goes off-target, the satellite cranks the output up to full power, obliterating whatever it happens to be pointed at.  This will create a bright column of light visible to cameras at the receiving station.  Based on which direction this shaft of annihilation is from the station, the ground station transmits instructions to the satellite of which way to adjust the beam, walking it back onto the target and creating a massive swath of destruction in the process.</p><p>That's how <i>I'd</i> do it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Satellite in geostable orbit .
Receiving station on equator .
Receiving station emits guiding signal to satellite , causing satellite to beam power to earth .
If the guiding signal is missing , the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it 's position .
That 's how I 'd do it.That 's nice and all , but how about this : If the beam goes off-target , the satellite cranks the output up to full power , obliterating whatever it happens to be pointed at .
This will create a bright column of light visible to cameras at the receiving station .
Based on which direction this shaft of annihilation is from the station , the ground station transmits instructions to the satellite of which way to adjust the beam , walking it back onto the target and creating a massive swath of destruction in the process.That 's how I 'd do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Satellite in geostable orbit.
Receiving station on equator.
Receiving station emits guiding signal to satellite, causing satellite to beam power to earth.
If the guiding signal is missing, the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it's position.
That's how I'd do it.That's nice and all, but how about this:  If the beam goes off-target, the satellite cranks the output up to full power, obliterating whatever it happens to be pointed at.
This will create a bright column of light visible to cameras at the receiving station.
Based on which direction this shaft of annihilation is from the station, the ground station transmits instructions to the satellite of which way to adjust the beam, walking it back onto the target and creating a massive swath of destruction in the process.That's how I'd do it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465765</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465825</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What is the old saying?  Quality, Time, and Cost?  I guess in this instance we get Cheap, Clean and Safe. You can only have 2.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is the old saying ?
Quality , Time , and Cost ?
I guess in this instance we get Cheap , Clean and Safe .
You can only have 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is the old saying?
Quality, Time, and Cost?
I guess in this instance we get Cheap, Clean and Safe.
You can only have 2.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470229</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245960120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem isn't launch capacity (whatever that is).  Payload capacity on the other hand is something that is getting better and we certainly have copious amounts of space available.   The problem is the funding required is prohibitively expensive therefore not many companies can afford it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is n't launch capacity ( whatever that is ) .
Payload capacity on the other hand is something that is getting better and we certainly have copious amounts of space available .
The problem is the funding required is prohibitively expensive therefore not many companies can afford it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem isn't launch capacity (whatever that is).
Payload capacity on the other hand is something that is getting better and we certainly have copious amounts of space available.
The problem is the funding required is prohibitively expensive therefore not many companies can afford it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465903</id>
	<title>Re:woot!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>2016, yea... right... I won't hold my breath.
<br> <br>
Thanks *MarketingTeamUsingBuzzWordsToSpurVentureCapital WithNoRealPlanOrTechnologyInPlace*</htmltext>
<tokenext>2016 , yea... right... I wo n't hold my breath .
Thanks * MarketingTeamUsingBuzzWordsToSpurVentureCapital WithNoRealPlanOrTechnologyInPlace *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2016, yea... right... I won't hold my breath.
Thanks *MarketingTeamUsingBuzzWordsToSpurVentureCapital WithNoRealPlanOrTechnologyInPlace*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465473</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467491</id>
	<title>Re:Science/tech illiteracy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245950040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphere</p></div><p>Fail.</p><p>Most power generation schemes are *heat engines.*  The typical efficiency is less than 40\%.  Microwave transmission starts at 50\% efficiency, and is likely to get better.  For the same amount of electric power, you're going to have less waste heat than with coal, nuclear, or natural gas power plants.</p></div><p>The issue is that we will be importing energy that is not inherently potential on Earth.  Coal, Wood, Nuclear are all potential energy on Earth.  We just harvest it.</p><p>Anyone better than me at math able to crunch this to find out if it's even worth worrying about?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphereFail.Most power generation schemes are * heat engines .
* The typical efficiency is less than 40 \ % .
Microwave transmission starts at 50 \ % efficiency , and is likely to get better .
For the same amount of electric power , you 're going to have less waste heat than with coal , nuclear , or natural gas power plants.The issue is that we will be importing energy that is not inherently potential on Earth .
Coal , Wood , Nuclear are all potential energy on Earth .
We just harvest it.Anyone better than me at math able to crunch this to find out if it 's even worth worrying about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphereFail.Most power generation schemes are *heat engines.
*  The typical efficiency is less than 40\%.
Microwave transmission starts at 50\% efficiency, and is likely to get better.
For the same amount of electric power, you're going to have less waste heat than with coal, nuclear, or natural gas power plants.The issue is that we will be importing energy that is not inherently potential on Earth.
Coal, Wood, Nuclear are all potential energy on Earth.
We just harvest it.Anyone better than me at math able to crunch this to find out if it's even worth worrying about?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466641</id>
	<title>200 measly MegaWhats? seriously?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245946080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>of a lot less upfront costs and cheaper maintenance whey cuold easily build a 200Mw Industrial solar thermal plant.<br>For the same cost, they could probably get a GW.</p><p>And once it's built, it doesn't fall out of orbit, and to maintain it you just need a guy to walk over and fix whatever is broken instead of sending up something to repair it.</p><p>Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.</p><p>Seriously, what a waste.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>of a lot less upfront costs and cheaper maintenance whey cuold easily build a 200Mw Industrial solar thermal plant.For the same cost , they could probably get a GW.And once it 's built , it does n't fall out of orbit , and to maintain it you just need a guy to walk over and fix whatever is broken instead of sending up something to repair it.Stupid .
Stupid. Stupid.Seriously , what a waste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of a lot less upfront costs and cheaper maintenance whey cuold easily build a 200Mw Industrial solar thermal plant.For the same cost, they could probably get a GW.And once it's built, it doesn't fall out of orbit, and to maintain it you just need a guy to walk over and fix whatever is broken instead of sending up something to repair it.Stupid.
Stupid. Stupid.Seriously, what a waste.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466983</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245947940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or build a ground based solution and get MORE power substantially CHEAPER and NOT heat up the atmosphere,</p><p>Like, say, Industrial Solar Thermal.<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar\_thermal\_energy" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar\_thermal\_energy</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or build a ground based solution and get MORE power substantially CHEAPER and NOT heat up the atmosphere,Like , say , Industrial Solar Thermal.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar \ _thermal \ _energy [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or build a ground based solution and get MORE power substantially CHEAPER and NOT heat up the atmosphere,Like, say, Industrial Solar Thermal.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar\_thermal\_energy [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466891</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245947460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Size of earth = O<br>Size of satalite = .</p><p>don't think the added solar energy is going to warm our globe all that bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Size of earth = OSize of satalite = .do n't think the added solar energy is going to warm our globe all that bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Size of earth = OSize of satalite = .don't think the added solar energy is going to warm our globe all that bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466665</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>jimbolauski</author>
	<datestamp>1245946260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Global warming will not happen the frequencies used would be picked for their ability to pass through the atmosphere with out absorption, yes there will be some absorption but the heat added to the environment would be less then the heat added from a nuclear plant per kilowatt.  As for interfering with radio communications this would not happen either because they would need to buy the spectrum they were using and the Tx antenna will focus the RF so little to no energy is transmitted outside the Rx antenna.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Global warming will not happen the frequencies used would be picked for their ability to pass through the atmosphere with out absorption , yes there will be some absorption but the heat added to the environment would be less then the heat added from a nuclear plant per kilowatt .
As for interfering with radio communications this would not happen either because they would need to buy the spectrum they were using and the Tx antenna will focus the RF so little to no energy is transmitted outside the Rx antenna .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Global warming will not happen the frequencies used would be picked for their ability to pass through the atmosphere with out absorption, yes there will be some absorption but the heat added to the environment would be less then the heat added from a nuclear plant per kilowatt.
As for interfering with radio communications this would not happen either because they would need to buy the spectrum they were using and the Tx antenna will focus the RF so little to no energy is transmitted outside the Rx antenna.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467431</id>
	<title>Re:An idea with a lack of vision</title>
	<author>Ambitwistor</author>
	<datestamp>1245949800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think there are some national security implications inherent in relocating all of Europe's electric power generation capacity to Africa.  I hope nobody in Africa minds European armies building bases there to guard their energy sources.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think there are some national security implications inherent in relocating all of Europe 's electric power generation capacity to Africa .
I hope nobody in Africa minds European armies building bases there to guard their energy sources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think there are some national security implications inherent in relocating all of Europe's electric power generation capacity to Africa.
I hope nobody in Africa minds European armies building bases there to guard their energy sources.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466295</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466319</id>
	<title>Re:Science/tech illiteracy</title>
	<author>daveime</author>
	<datestamp>1245944520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Put an egg in a microwave oven and see what happens.</p><p>It might be a transport method, but it has a nasty habit of exciting water molecules as it passes through them. And what it the human body 97\% made of ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Put an egg in a microwave oven and see what happens.It might be a transport method , but it has a nasty habit of exciting water molecules as it passes through them .
And what it the human body 97 \ % made of ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Put an egg in a microwave oven and see what happens.It might be a transport method, but it has a nasty habit of exciting water molecules as it passes through them.
And what it the human body 97\% made of ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465765</id>
	<title>Re:Miss</title>
	<author>ShieldW0lf</author>
	<datestamp>1245941640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Satellite in geostable orbit.  Receiving station on equator.  Receiving station emits guiding signal to satellite, causing satellite to beam power to earth.  If the guiding signal is missing, the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it's position.  That's how I'd do it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Satellite in geostable orbit .
Receiving station on equator .
Receiving station emits guiding signal to satellite , causing satellite to beam power to earth .
If the guiding signal is missing , the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it 's position .
That 's how I 'd do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Satellite in geostable orbit.
Receiving station on equator.
Receiving station emits guiding signal to satellite, causing satellite to beam power to earth.
If the guiding signal is missing, the satellite stops beaming power and starts using that power to adjust it's position.
That's how I'd do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673</id>
	<title>My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245941040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is what happens when you get your religions mixed up.</p><p>Cheap, clean, non-fossil power sources mean both low pollution (religion #1) and reduced carbon emissions to stop global warming (religion #2). But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphere and bring solar energy to the surface that would otherwise miss us entirely. This puts Green in conflict with AGW. It should be interesting to watch the sparks fly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what happens when you get your religions mixed up.Cheap , clean , non-fossil power sources mean both low pollution ( religion # 1 ) and reduced carbon emissions to stop global warming ( religion # 2 ) .
But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphere and bring solar energy to the surface that would otherwise miss us entirely .
This puts Green in conflict with AGW .
It should be interesting to watch the sparks fly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what happens when you get your religions mixed up.Cheap, clean, non-fossil power sources mean both low pollution (religion #1) and reduced carbon emissions to stop global warming (religion #2).
But this hare-brained idea will heat the atmosphere and bring solar energy to the surface that would otherwise miss us entirely.
This puts Green in conflict with AGW.
It should be interesting to watch the sparks fly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466305</id>
	<title>Dig a little more before naysaying</title>
	<author>tk\_sci</author>
	<datestamp>1245944400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wish folks would look into things before talking about "swath of destruction," and military apps.

<a href="http://www.spaceenergy.com/i/pdf/safety\_paper.pdf" title="spaceenergy.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.spaceenergy.com/i/pdf/safety\_paper.pdf</a> [spaceenergy.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish folks would look into things before talking about " swath of destruction , " and military apps .
http : //www.spaceenergy.com/i/pdf/safety \ _paper.pdf [ spaceenergy.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish folks would look into things before talking about "swath of destruction," and military apps.
http://www.spaceenergy.com/i/pdf/safety\_paper.pdf [spaceenergy.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28478765</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246049220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about we move the solar panels closer to the sun where they have an increased amount of energy per area (9100 W/m^2 at Mercury) and beam the energy back in a more coherent form? Then of course you'd likely have to place stations strategically around the sun so we can capture year round.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about we move the solar panels closer to the sun where they have an increased amount of energy per area ( 9100 W/m ^ 2 at Mercury ) and beam the energy back in a more coherent form ?
Then of course you 'd likely have to place stations strategically around the sun so we can capture year round .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about we move the solar panels closer to the sun where they have an increased amount of energy per area (9100 W/m^2 at Mercury) and beam the energy back in a more coherent form?
Then of course you'd likely have to place stations strategically around the sun so we can capture year round.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053</id>
	<title>Re:Global warming?</title>
	<author>hort\_wort</author>
	<datestamp>1245943080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I asked this question of an Environmental Physicist.  The answer is that it will *prevent* global warming.  The reasoning is this:</p><p>Right now, we primarily burn coal to produce energy.  This isn't an efficient process at all, putting out about 30\% energy and 70\% heat.  Also, there are all the waste products dumped into the atmosphere associated with burning coal.  Meanwhile, beaming the energy back to the Earth will (theoretically) be very, very efficient, as in almost all the energy beamed back will be reclaimed as electricity.  Replacing coal with this method would reduce the overall heat by 70\%.</p><p>So yes, this idea will heat the Earth, but not nearly as much as coal.  As far as causing other weather changes, health problems, and electronic problems, those are possibilities that are unknown until they try it.  The signal should be directed quite precisely to their receiver on Earth, and with any intelligence, they will have a safety system such that the beam shuts off immediately if the receiver notices a dip in power.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I asked this question of an Environmental Physicist .
The answer is that it will * prevent * global warming .
The reasoning is this : Right now , we primarily burn coal to produce energy .
This is n't an efficient process at all , putting out about 30 \ % energy and 70 \ % heat .
Also , there are all the waste products dumped into the atmosphere associated with burning coal .
Meanwhile , beaming the energy back to the Earth will ( theoretically ) be very , very efficient , as in almost all the energy beamed back will be reclaimed as electricity .
Replacing coal with this method would reduce the overall heat by 70 \ % .So yes , this idea will heat the Earth , but not nearly as much as coal .
As far as causing other weather changes , health problems , and electronic problems , those are possibilities that are unknown until they try it .
The signal should be directed quite precisely to their receiver on Earth , and with any intelligence , they will have a safety system such that the beam shuts off immediately if the receiver notices a dip in power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I asked this question of an Environmental Physicist.
The answer is that it will *prevent* global warming.
The reasoning is this:Right now, we primarily burn coal to produce energy.
This isn't an efficient process at all, putting out about 30\% energy and 70\% heat.
Also, there are all the waste products dumped into the atmosphere associated with burning coal.
Meanwhile, beaming the energy back to the Earth will (theoretically) be very, very efficient, as in almost all the energy beamed back will be reclaimed as electricity.
Replacing coal with this method would reduce the overall heat by 70\%.So yes, this idea will heat the Earth, but not nearly as much as coal.
As far as causing other weather changes, health problems, and electronic problems, those are possibilities that are unknown until they try it.
The signal should be directed quite precisely to their receiver on Earth, and with any intelligence, they will have a safety system such that the beam shuts off immediately if the receiver notices a dip in power.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465921</id>
	<title>200MW.</title>
	<author>Ralph Spoilsport</author>
	<datestamp>1245942420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=\_k\_jyq\_IiaUC&amp;pg=PA194&amp;lpg=PA194&amp;dq=world+electrical+capacity&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=N8ZNFfwgme&amp;sig=Udj\_qwpzbKBnS4aizx5QtsqeZxg&amp;hl=en&amp;ei=p4BDSsi5MpCJtgfXqJCpAQ&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=book\_result&amp;ct=result&amp;resnum=3" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">the world's electrical needs are a bit larger.</a> [google.com] And with the immanent collapse of <a href="http://www.theoildrum.com/files/Net\%20Hubbert\_6.png" title="theoildrum.com" rel="nofollow">net oil production,</a> [theoildrum.com] We're going to have to treble that capacity in the next 15 years. Per the first link, at 200MW per satellite, we'll need 82,995 satellites to MATCH <i>present</i> electrical production capacity. And treble that number to match future capacity and the downturn in watts per capita from the loss of oil, making it more like 248,985 of these things buzzing overhead to deal with future electrical needs.
<p>
So, let's say (obviously) we're not going to use energy sats for all of our electrical needs. Let's say only 10\% of our needs. That's still about 8,300 200MW satellites. What part of "not going to happen" do these people not understand?
</p><p>
Even if the WORLD cut it's electrical needs in HALF, that's still 4,140 200 MW satellites.
</p><p>
Game Over. Thanks for playing.
</p><p>
It's not all "doom and gloom". It's not the "end of the world". It's just that for the first time, we really can see it from where we stand, and it's not that far away or that hard to get to. It's going to take a boat load of work and enormous sacrifice to get humanity through the 21st century. And 200 MW energy sats are NOT the solution.
</p><p>
We're going to have to make "other arrangements" for civilisation to continue. And they don't include Xbox, SUVs, McMansions, weekend vacations Tahiti, and WalMart.
</p><p>
RS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems the world 's electrical needs are a bit larger .
[ google.com ] And with the immanent collapse of net oil production , [ theoildrum.com ] We 're going to have to treble that capacity in the next 15 years .
Per the first link , at 200MW per satellite , we 'll need 82,995 satellites to MATCH present electrical production capacity .
And treble that number to match future capacity and the downturn in watts per capita from the loss of oil , making it more like 248,985 of these things buzzing overhead to deal with future electrical needs .
So , let 's say ( obviously ) we 're not going to use energy sats for all of our electrical needs .
Let 's say only 10 \ % of our needs .
That 's still about 8,300 200MW satellites .
What part of " not going to happen " do these people not understand ?
Even if the WORLD cut it 's electrical needs in HALF , that 's still 4,140 200 MW satellites .
Game Over .
Thanks for playing .
It 's not all " doom and gloom " .
It 's not the " end of the world " .
It 's just that for the first time , we really can see it from where we stand , and it 's not that far away or that hard to get to .
It 's going to take a boat load of work and enormous sacrifice to get humanity through the 21st century .
And 200 MW energy sats are NOT the solution .
We 're going to have to make " other arrangements " for civilisation to continue .
And they do n't include Xbox , SUVs , McMansions , weekend vacations Tahiti , and WalMart .
RS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems the world's electrical needs are a bit larger.
[google.com] And with the immanent collapse of net oil production, [theoildrum.com] We're going to have to treble that capacity in the next 15 years.
Per the first link, at 200MW per satellite, we'll need 82,995 satellites to MATCH present electrical production capacity.
And treble that number to match future capacity and the downturn in watts per capita from the loss of oil, making it more like 248,985 of these things buzzing overhead to deal with future electrical needs.
So, let's say (obviously) we're not going to use energy sats for all of our electrical needs.
Let's say only 10\% of our needs.
That's still about 8,300 200MW satellites.
What part of "not going to happen" do these people not understand?
Even if the WORLD cut it's electrical needs in HALF, that's still 4,140 200 MW satellites.
Game Over.
Thanks for playing.
It's not all "doom and gloom".
It's not the "end of the world".
It's just that for the first time, we really can see it from where we stand, and it's not that far away or that hard to get to.
It's going to take a boat load of work and enormous sacrifice to get humanity through the 21st century.
And 200 MW energy sats are NOT the solution.
We're going to have to make "other arrangements" for civilisation to continue.
And they don't include Xbox, SUVs, McMansions, weekend vacations Tahiti, and WalMart.
RS</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465775</id>
	<title>Unlikely</title>
	<author>Maury Markowitz</author>
	<datestamp>1245941700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope no one accuses me of blogrolling or something, but:</p><p>http://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/06/12/space-power/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope no one accuses me of blogrolling or something , but : http : //matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/06/12/space-power/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope no one accuses me of blogrolling or something, but:http://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/06/12/space-power/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469815</id>
	<title>Go Romulus!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245958680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Power plant? Yeah right, everyone knows its the drill we'll use to drop red matter into the Vulcan home planet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Power plant ?
Yeah right , everyone knows its the drill we 'll use to drop red matter into the Vulcan home planet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Power plant?
Yeah right, everyone knows its the drill we'll use to drop red matter into the Vulcan home planet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469963</id>
	<title>Running the numbers...</title>
	<author>ozyman</author>
	<datestamp>1245959220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Geostationary orbit: 35,786km
Beam dispersal: 111 microns/m, or 0.0001\%
Beam spread: 0.017 degrees
(Compare to typical laser beam: 1000microns/m, or 0.001\%)

So the beam is an order of magnitude better-confined than a typical laser beam. We'll allow that for now, and given the divergence rate we can calculate the source power:

Power at ground: 220,000,000W
Beam area at ground: 12,566,370 m^2
Satellite size: 6m (typical)
Beam area at source: 28 m^2
Power at source: 98 Terawatts (assuming no loss)

Clearly unrealistic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Geostationary orbit : 35,786km Beam dispersal : 111 microns/m , or 0.0001 \ % Beam spread : 0.017 degrees ( Compare to typical laser beam : 1000microns/m , or 0.001 \ % ) So the beam is an order of magnitude better-confined than a typical laser beam .
We 'll allow that for now , and given the divergence rate we can calculate the source power : Power at ground : 220,000,000W Beam area at ground : 12,566,370 m ^ 2 Satellite size : 6m ( typical ) Beam area at source : 28 m ^ 2 Power at source : 98 Terawatts ( assuming no loss ) Clearly unrealistic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Geostationary orbit: 35,786km
Beam dispersal: 111 microns/m, or 0.0001\%
Beam spread: 0.017 degrees
(Compare to typical laser beam: 1000microns/m, or 0.001\%)

So the beam is an order of magnitude better-confined than a typical laser beam.
We'll allow that for now, and given the divergence rate we can calculate the source power:

Power at ground: 220,000,000W
Beam area at ground: 12,566,370 m^2
Satellite size: 6m (typical)
Beam area at source: 28 m^2
Power at source: 98 Terawatts (assuming no loss)

Clearly unrealistic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>b4upoo</author>
	<datestamp>1245942300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>          Then again perhaps we can use an albatross to lift this system into orbit as we certainly lack launch capacity for almost anything right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then again perhaps we can use an albatross to lift this system into orbit as we certainly lack launch capacity for almost anything right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>          Then again perhaps we can use an albatross to lift this system into orbit as we certainly lack launch capacity for almost anything right now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466419</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245945000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Eh... there is no "safe" radiation wavelength.  Some are more dangerous than others, but if you're upping the dosage of ANY frequency, you're upping your risk.</p><p>Wide area?  Great, that just means an even larger area to keep people out of, once they realize it's a bad idea.</p><p>Not the greatest use of a GEO slot... plenty of energy already hits the surface, and we have multiple feasible (albeit expensive) ways of exploiting them.  And when the thing dies?  More space junk, yay!  No reason to use limited space resources for problems that don't need it.</p><p>Yes, we have to get decent non organic matter based energy going in a limited amount of time, but that time isn't so limited that we need to push silly things while perfectly valid terrestrial approaches are spread.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eh... there is no " safe " radiation wavelength .
Some are more dangerous than others , but if you 're upping the dosage of ANY frequency , you 're upping your risk.Wide area ?
Great , that just means an even larger area to keep people out of , once they realize it 's a bad idea.Not the greatest use of a GEO slot... plenty of energy already hits the surface , and we have multiple feasible ( albeit expensive ) ways of exploiting them .
And when the thing dies ?
More space junk , yay !
No reason to use limited space resources for problems that do n't need it.Yes , we have to get decent non organic matter based energy going in a limited amount of time , but that time is n't so limited that we need to push silly things while perfectly valid terrestrial approaches are spread .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eh... there is no "safe" radiation wavelength.
Some are more dangerous than others, but if you're upping the dosage of ANY frequency, you're upping your risk.Wide area?
Great, that just means an even larger area to keep people out of, once they realize it's a bad idea.Not the greatest use of a GEO slot... plenty of energy already hits the surface, and we have multiple feasible (albeit expensive) ways of exploiting them.
And when the thing dies?
More space junk, yay!
No reason to use limited space resources for problems that don't need it.Yes, we have to get decent non organic matter based energy going in a limited amount of time, but that time isn't so limited that we need to push silly things while perfectly valid terrestrial approaches are spread.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245942540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Somethings seems wrong with this reasoning.</p><p>First, a "few times" noon sunlight power, I think would be pretty brutal. To take you literally, it would be like standing in the sun at noon where the sun is say three times brighter than it is. I'm not a physicist, so feel free to tell me why a three times more power sun at noon wouldn't be a problem for me.</p><p>Secondly,<br>Doesn't a "few times" noon sunlight power mean that your getting only a "few times" what you'd be getting from the sun by itself, which isn't all that much. Doesn't sound like your going to deliver the concentrations of power that cities need.</p><p>So, I'm inclined not to put too much stake in what you said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Somethings seems wrong with this reasoning.First , a " few times " noon sunlight power , I think would be pretty brutal .
To take you literally , it would be like standing in the sun at noon where the sun is say three times brighter than it is .
I 'm not a physicist , so feel free to tell me why a three times more power sun at noon would n't be a problem for me.Secondly,Does n't a " few times " noon sunlight power mean that your getting only a " few times " what you 'd be getting from the sun by itself , which is n't all that much .
Does n't sound like your going to deliver the concentrations of power that cities need.So , I 'm inclined not to put too much stake in what you said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somethings seems wrong with this reasoning.First, a "few times" noon sunlight power, I think would be pretty brutal.
To take you literally, it would be like standing in the sun at noon where the sun is say three times brighter than it is.
I'm not a physicist, so feel free to tell me why a three times more power sun at noon wouldn't be a problem for me.Secondly,Doesn't a "few times" noon sunlight power mean that your getting only a "few times" what you'd be getting from the sun by itself, which isn't all that much.
Doesn't sound like your going to deliver the concentrations of power that cities need.So, I'm inclined not to put too much stake in what you said.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466429</id>
	<title>Oh, come on... You can't have it both ways.</title>
	<author>denzacar</author>
	<datestamp>1245945000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Either a "few times noon sunlight" is a lot, or it isn't.<br>You can't bash the idea as both "dangerously hot/bright" and "too cold/dark for practical use".</p><p>Sun at noon can easily generate temperatures over 40C - if a "few times" that is 2.5 or higher, then you're over boiling point of water.<br>You can harvest that energy using 19th century means - like steam engine.<br>That WOULD be quite dangerous, though. No need to argue there.</p><p>If "few times" is lower than 1.5 - those are temperature extremes observed in nature. Granted, in places like Death Valley or Libya but still - up to 58C is natural.<br>A tad uncomfortable, but unless you plan to step into the ray naked and just stand there for prolonged periods of time - quite harmless.</p><p>If it is somewhere between 1.5 and 2.5, that is in the area of boiling eggs (and other things made out of protein, like skin).<br>Probably very uncomfortable conditions for living creatures but quite usable levels of energy.<br>Hey! If you can boil an egg, you are surely getting enough energy to do some other things. Again, you don't need to go further than 19th century - just substitute water for something that boils at lower temperature.</p><p>And besides, nobody forces you to stick to the 19th century. So, those energy levels are quite usable.<br>Even just 100\% of noon sunlight is a lot - considering that modern solar is way bellow that. And we ARE using solar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Either a " few times noon sunlight " is a lot , or it is n't.You ca n't bash the idea as both " dangerously hot/bright " and " too cold/dark for practical use " .Sun at noon can easily generate temperatures over 40C - if a " few times " that is 2.5 or higher , then you 're over boiling point of water.You can harvest that energy using 19th century means - like steam engine.That WOULD be quite dangerous , though .
No need to argue there.If " few times " is lower than 1.5 - those are temperature extremes observed in nature .
Granted , in places like Death Valley or Libya but still - up to 58C is natural.A tad uncomfortable , but unless you plan to step into the ray naked and just stand there for prolonged periods of time - quite harmless.If it is somewhere between 1.5 and 2.5 , that is in the area of boiling eggs ( and other things made out of protein , like skin ) .Probably very uncomfortable conditions for living creatures but quite usable levels of energy.Hey !
If you can boil an egg , you are surely getting enough energy to do some other things .
Again , you do n't need to go further than 19th century - just substitute water for something that boils at lower temperature.And besides , nobody forces you to stick to the 19th century .
So , those energy levels are quite usable.Even just 100 \ % of noon sunlight is a lot - considering that modern solar is way bellow that .
And we ARE using solar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Either a "few times noon sunlight" is a lot, or it isn't.You can't bash the idea as both "dangerously hot/bright" and "too cold/dark for practical use".Sun at noon can easily generate temperatures over 40C - if a "few times" that is 2.5 or higher, then you're over boiling point of water.You can harvest that energy using 19th century means - like steam engine.That WOULD be quite dangerous, though.
No need to argue there.If "few times" is lower than 1.5 - those are temperature extremes observed in nature.
Granted, in places like Death Valley or Libya but still - up to 58C is natural.A tad uncomfortable, but unless you plan to step into the ray naked and just stand there for prolonged periods of time - quite harmless.If it is somewhere between 1.5 and 2.5, that is in the area of boiling eggs (and other things made out of protein, like skin).Probably very uncomfortable conditions for living creatures but quite usable levels of energy.Hey!
If you can boil an egg, you are surely getting enough energy to do some other things.
Again, you don't need to go further than 19th century - just substitute water for something that boils at lower temperature.And besides, nobody forces you to stick to the 19th century.
So, those energy levels are quite usable.Even just 100\% of noon sunlight is a lot - considering that modern solar is way bellow that.
And we ARE using solar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466415</id>
	<title>About Frelling time!</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1245944940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Space power infrastructure can only lead to more space colonization which leads humanity to the stars!!!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Space power infrastructure can only lead to more space colonization which leads humanity to the stars ! ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Space power infrastructure can only lead to more space colonization which leads humanity to the stars!!!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468493</id>
	<title>Re:In Space</title>
	<author>ground.zero.612</author>
	<datestamp>1245953760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor!"
<br> <br>
Sorry... Every time I hear of spaced based power beaming technology I think of the Death Star.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor !
" Sorry... Every time I hear of spaced based power beaming technology I think of the Death Star .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor!
"
 
Sorry... Every time I hear of spaced based power beaming technology I think of the Death Star.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28471579</id>
	<title>Re:Assuming everything goes well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245921960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ummm. The declaration of war that would result?
The same thing that prevents oil producing nations from blowing up your coal or nuclear power stations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ummm .
The declaration of war that would result ?
The same thing that prevents oil producing nations from blowing up your coal or nuclear power stations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ummm.
The declaration of war that would result?
The same thing that prevents oil producing nations from blowing up your coal or nuclear power stations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466381</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245944820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But what is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But what is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499</id>
	<title>Funny...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245940200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why do I picture human-sized ants under a magnifying glass when the beam shifts a little.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do I picture human-sized ants under a magnifying glass when the beam shifts a little .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do I picture human-sized ants under a magnifying glass when the beam shifts a little.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467829</id>
	<title>Beam o' destruction... Not.</title>
	<author>whitroth</author>
	<datestamp>1245951300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*sigh*</p><p>Clueless.</p><p>Back in the very early eighties, I heard a speaker from, I think it was the Space Sciences Inst, who told me that the Environmental Impact Statement had been done in the late seventies for this. And that they were talking about something like 10W/m^2. And a lot of large collectors. It would take a truly stupid buzzard to get toasted in that.</p><p>Or an enTHUsiastic slashdotter, with more goshawowie than science....</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; mark</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* sigh * Clueless.Back in the very early eighties , I heard a speaker from , I think it was the Space Sciences Inst , who told me that the Environmental Impact Statement had been done in the late seventies for this .
And that they were talking about something like 10W/m ^ 2 .
And a lot of large collectors .
It would take a truly stupid buzzard to get toasted in that.Or an enTHUsiastic slashdotter , with more goshawowie than science... .             mark</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*sigh*Clueless.Back in the very early eighties, I heard a speaker from, I think it was the Space Sciences Inst, who told me that the Environmental Impact Statement had been done in the late seventies for this.
And that they were talking about something like 10W/m^2.
And a lot of large collectors.
It would take a truly stupid buzzard to get toasted in that.Or an enTHUsiastic slashdotter, with more goshawowie than science....
            mark</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466873</id>
	<title>Re:The Luddites were at least in favour of educati</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1245947280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Even the oil exploration community was convinced of global warming in the 1990s before it became a Republican vs Democrat issue. It's unfortunately become another thing for sects of lay preachers to yell about as another example of the evils of education.</p></div><p>Easily located citation provided for the doubtful: <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-02-20-global-cooling\_N.htm" title="usatoday.com">Even USA Today can figure it out</a> [usatoday.com].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even the oil exploration community was convinced of global warming in the 1990s before it became a Republican vs Democrat issue .
It 's unfortunately become another thing for sects of lay preachers to yell about as another example of the evils of education.Easily located citation provided for the doubtful : Even USA Today can figure it out [ usatoday.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even the oil exploration community was convinced of global warming in the 1990s before it became a Republican vs Democrat issue.
It's unfortunately become another thing for sects of lay preachers to yell about as another example of the evils of education.Easily located citation provided for the doubtful: Even USA Today can figure it out [usatoday.com].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466369</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465659</id>
	<title>cool but</title>
	<author>phrostie</author>
	<datestamp>1245940980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if everything works perfectly this will be awesome, but nothing ever works perfectly and just the thought of the things that can go wrong scares the hell out of me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if everything works perfectly this will be awesome , but nothing ever works perfectly and just the thought of the things that can go wrong scares the hell out of me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if everything works perfectly this will be awesome, but nothing ever works perfectly and just the thought of the things that can go wrong scares the hell out of me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466715</id>
	<title>Re:200MW.</title>
	<author>AlecC</author>
	<datestamp>1245946560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>200MW is a miniature , "proof of concept" system. Based on the capacity of the Wright Flyer, you will never fly the Atlantic. Real power stations would be multi-GW.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>200MW is a miniature , " proof of concept " system .
Based on the capacity of the Wright Flyer , you will never fly the Atlantic .
Real power stations would be multi-GW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>200MW is a miniature , "proof of concept" system.
Based on the capacity of the Wright Flyer, you will never fly the Atlantic.
Real power stations would be multi-GW.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465921</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28476867</id>
	<title>Re:Dear Canada</title>
	<author>shadowbearer</author>
	<datestamp>1245946620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; Beautiful<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>SB</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>  Beautiful : ) SB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  Beautiful :)SB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466701</id>
	<title>Re:Assuming everything goes well</title>
	<author>AlecC</author>
	<datestamp>1245946380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Blowing what up? The power source is in space, the receiver is an area of desert about 10km across covered in wire mesh. Any sane amount of explosive could only damage about 1\% of it. And further downstream, it is no more nor less vulnerable than the rest of the distribution system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blowing what up ?
The power source is in space , the receiver is an area of desert about 10km across covered in wire mesh .
Any sane amount of explosive could only damage about 1 \ % of it .
And further downstream , it is no more nor less vulnerable than the rest of the distribution system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blowing what up?
The power source is in space, the receiver is an area of desert about 10km across covered in wire mesh.
Any sane amount of explosive could only damage about 1\% of it.
And further downstream, it is no more nor less vulnerable than the rest of the distribution system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28537109</id>
	<title>Wouldn't it be cheaper if...</title>
	<author>astroengine</author>
	<datestamp>1246369860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...a company sold roof tiles with embedded solar panels, market them as 'green', get government tax breaks for anyone participating in the scheme, feed the power collected into the national grid... and *tada* we can collect more energy than a space solar satellite. It's safer, more practical, cheaper and certainly less stupid than thinking space solar is going to become a reality by 2016...</htmltext>
<tokenext>...a company sold roof tiles with embedded solar panels , market them as 'green ' , get government tax breaks for anyone participating in the scheme , feed the power collected into the national grid... and * tada * we can collect more energy than a space solar satellite .
It 's safer , more practical , cheaper and certainly less stupid than thinking space solar is going to become a reality by 2016.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...a company sold roof tiles with embedded solar panels, market them as 'green', get government tax breaks for anyone participating in the scheme, feed the power collected into the national grid... and *tada* we can collect more energy than a space solar satellite.
It's safer, more practical, cheaper and certainly less stupid than thinking space solar is going to become a reality by 2016...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477653</id>
	<title>Re:Science/tech illiteracy</title>
	<author>mdielmann</author>
	<datestamp>1245953040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Never mind that the frequencies being selected have one of the primary criteria of not being absorbed well by the atmosphere - the goal, after all, is to get the energy to the receiving station.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Never mind that the frequencies being selected have one of the primary criteria of not being absorbed well by the atmosphere - the goal , after all , is to get the energy to the receiving station .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never mind that the frequencies being selected have one of the primary criteria of not being absorbed well by the atmosphere - the goal, after all, is to get the energy to the receiving station.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465641</id>
	<title>Ouch!</title>
	<author>dzfoo</author>
	<datestamp>1245940860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the Wikipedia article linked:<br><i>"In 1964, William C. Brown demonstrated a miniature helicopter equipped with a combination antenna and rectifier device called a rectenna."</i></p><p>Heh, <i>rectenna</i> sounds like some alien probing device.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the Wikipedia article linked : " In 1964 , William C. Brown demonstrated a miniature helicopter equipped with a combination antenna and rectifier device called a rectenna .
" Heh , rectenna sounds like some alien probing device .
        -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the Wikipedia article linked:"In 1964, William C. Brown demonstrated a miniature helicopter equipped with a combination antenna and rectifier device called a rectenna.
"Heh, rectenna sounds like some alien probing device.
        -dZ.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466049</id>
	<title>Re:My religion, or yours?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245943080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Low pollution is a religion?  Sounds like common sense to me.  That's always desirable.  Zero emission/effects is an impossible ideal, but low*er* is definitely better.</p><p>And the attraction for non-fossil fuel power sources should be fricking obvious: fossil fuels are non-renewable and are therefore fundamentally unsustainable, and where the main resources remain are often politically unstable countries.  I.e. we'll have to move off them eventually, or there are good strategic reasons to do so earlier.  The thought that they'll serve us forever and we can carry on with "business as usual" is the real "religion".  It's bogus.  We have big energy challenges ahead.</p><p>You'll note that I haven't dealt with the issue of reduced carbon emissions or global warming -- because they're irrelevant.  There are ample independent reasons to move away from fossil fuels at the earliest practical convenience, even if you think global warming is "religion".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Low pollution is a religion ?
Sounds like common sense to me .
That 's always desirable .
Zero emission/effects is an impossible ideal , but low * er * is definitely better.And the attraction for non-fossil fuel power sources should be fricking obvious : fossil fuels are non-renewable and are therefore fundamentally unsustainable , and where the main resources remain are often politically unstable countries .
I.e. we 'll have to move off them eventually , or there are good strategic reasons to do so earlier .
The thought that they 'll serve us forever and we can carry on with " business as usual " is the real " religion " .
It 's bogus .
We have big energy challenges ahead.You 'll note that I have n't dealt with the issue of reduced carbon emissions or global warming -- because they 're irrelevant .
There are ample independent reasons to move away from fossil fuels at the earliest practical convenience , even if you think global warming is " religion " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Low pollution is a religion?
Sounds like common sense to me.
That's always desirable.
Zero emission/effects is an impossible ideal, but low*er* is definitely better.And the attraction for non-fossil fuel power sources should be fricking obvious: fossil fuels are non-renewable and are therefore fundamentally unsustainable, and where the main resources remain are often politically unstable countries.
I.e. we'll have to move off them eventually, or there are good strategic reasons to do so earlier.
The thought that they'll serve us forever and we can carry on with "business as usual" is the real "religion".
It's bogus.
We have big energy challenges ahead.You'll note that I haven't dealt with the issue of reduced carbon emissions or global warming -- because they're irrelevant.
There are ample independent reasons to move away from fossil fuels at the earliest practical convenience, even if you think global warming is "religion".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28474499</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1245932880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Heck, with all the radio stations transmitting around us we should be able to pluck a few dozen frequencies and power the radio itself."</p><p>You can.  In fact, we have for pretty much as long as we've had radio: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal\_radio" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal\_radio</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Heck , with all the radio stations transmitting around us we should be able to pluck a few dozen frequencies and power the radio itself .
" You can .
In fact , we have for pretty much as long as we 've had radio : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal \ _radio [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Heck, with all the radio stations transmitting around us we should be able to pluck a few dozen frequencies and power the radio itself.
"You can.
In fact, we have for pretty much as long as we've had radio: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal\_radio [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466985</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465811</id>
	<title>Look on the bright side...</title>
	<author>Mitchell314</author>
	<datestamp>1245941880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>[off topic] You can make the world's largest microwave oven... [/off topic] <br> <br>

I noticed this little tid bit: <br>
<i>200 megawatts of clean, renewable power over a 15 year period.</i> <br> <br>

How much does that compare to the energy needed for getting it up in space, getting routine maintenance &amp; repair up in space, the maintenance &amp; repair itself, and possible decommissioning?</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ off topic ] You can make the world 's largest microwave oven... [ /off topic ] I noticed this little tid bit : 200 megawatts of clean , renewable power over a 15 year period .
How much does that compare to the energy needed for getting it up in space , getting routine maintenance &amp; repair up in space , the maintenance &amp; repair itself , and possible decommissioning ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[off topic] You can make the world's largest microwave oven... [/off topic]  

I noticed this little tid bit: 
200 megawatts of clean, renewable power over a 15 year period.
How much does that compare to the energy needed for getting it up in space, getting routine maintenance &amp; repair up in space, the maintenance &amp; repair itself, and possible decommissioning?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469853</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>lysdexia</author>
	<datestamp>1245958740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can tell. You used "than" correctly three times in the preceeding paragraphs.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can tell .
You used " than " correctly three times in the preceeding paragraphs .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can tell.
You used "than" correctly three times in the preceeding paragraphs.
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467993</id>
	<title>Re:Human Size Ants</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245951840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just because it can be limited doesnt mean it will.  The minute stockholders get it in their minds that "gee, we use it for 30 minutes a day and it does this much, imagine if we kept it on for an hour-2-3-6-12-24?"</p><p>Never underestimate Greed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because it can be limited doesnt mean it will .
The minute stockholders get it in their minds that " gee , we use it for 30 minutes a day and it does this much , imagine if we kept it on for an hour-2-3-6-12-24 ?
" Never underestimate Greed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because it can be limited doesnt mean it will.
The minute stockholders get it in their minds that "gee, we use it for 30 minutes a day and it does this much, imagine if we kept it on for an hour-2-3-6-12-24?
"Never underestimate Greed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469139</id>
	<title>Re:Science/tech illiteracy</title>
	<author>CyberDragon777</author>
	<datestamp>1245955980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not all microwave radiation is 2.4 GHz.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all microwave radiation is 2.4 GHz .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all microwave radiation is 2.4 GHz.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28481827</id>
	<title>This sounds like a nice way for the US to</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246029180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bypass space weapons proliferation acts<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>Who needs nukes or lazers in space when you have a 200MW microwave beam to play with?</p><p>Even if the government isn't behind it, I'm sure that they, any other nation and any terror group has sparkless in their eyes just thinking about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bypass space weapons proliferation acts ...Who needs nukes or lazers in space when you have a 200MW microwave beam to play with ? Even if the government is n't behind it , I 'm sure that they , any other nation and any terror group has sparkless in their eyes just thinking about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bypass space weapons proliferation acts ...Who needs nukes or lazers in space when you have a 200MW microwave beam to play with?Even if the government isn't behind it, I'm sure that they, any other nation and any terror group has sparkless in their eyes just thinking about it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466123</id>
	<title>Introducing the Boeing 747 hybrid...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245943500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, why don't we make hybrid airplanes.  Just after the takeoff the plane flies over a series of ground antennas just outside the airport to recharge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , why do n't we make hybrid airplanes .
Just after the takeoff the plane flies over a series of ground antennas just outside the airport to recharge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, why don't we make hybrid airplanes.
Just after the takeoff the plane flies over a series of ground antennas just outside the airport to recharge.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470233
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466157
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28474289
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466237
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468261
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466545
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28472021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470061
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466985
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28474499
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468913
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467181
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466049
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28472941
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467821
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466277
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468927
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465843
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465481
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468407
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466987
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466475
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465569
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466089
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469067
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468061
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468779
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469495
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466249
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468563
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466123
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28476395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466891
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28471187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465473
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470873
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465843
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28478765
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465919
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466239
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469421
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468493
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465843
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28472523
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467491
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466419
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28478247
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467953
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28471579
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466279
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466369
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466873
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466821
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466693
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28474527
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467299
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466741
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467013
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28476867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466295
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466447
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28473021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466429
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467641
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467477
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468635
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28471235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469853
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466701
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465827
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477653
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465909
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28478357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466985
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28476281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467025
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470765
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_25_138207_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477067
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466157
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465519
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465923
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466475
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466053
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28478247
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466693
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468061
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466983
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467025
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470061
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467185
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465909
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466277
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465827
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28472523
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467013
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465495
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465765
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467821
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469067
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466841
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28478357
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466821
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467953
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465473
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465903
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465763
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465481
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468359
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468407
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465995
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28472021
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465569
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465937
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468297
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465673
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466239
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28471187
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466049
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465843
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466307
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466851
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28478765
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466909
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465825
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466369
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466891
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465919
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465795
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466673
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477653
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465891
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466319
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469139
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468913
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466447
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467491
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466601
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466249
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468563
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465811
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469221
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465599
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466089
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477067
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468107
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28476867
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468871
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466295
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466741
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467431
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28476395
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470219
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465499
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465767
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467993
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466419
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470765
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465931
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466187
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466237
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468261
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466201
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467023
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28474289
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467175
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467039
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467305
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467181
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468779
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469495
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28472941
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466985
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28474499
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28476281
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28471235
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466551
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28473021
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467299
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469853
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468635
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466429
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28474527
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467641
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466545
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465879
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466381
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466987
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467761
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470229
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467477
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466629
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466123
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466305
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466115
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465921
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466715
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466139
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465659
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28469421
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28467255
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465477
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28477559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28470233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468493
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28471579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28468243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466279
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28466701
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465491
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_25_138207.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_25_138207.28465849
</commentlist>
</conversation>
