I think combined fusion/fission options are the clear choice for the future. (Also, yes, that is what the H-bomb does, and no, that is not what the sun does.)
Here's how combined fusion/fission plants would theoretically work:
A fusion reaction is used to create a large quantity of high-energy neutrons. These high-energy neutrons are then used to cause fission in an otherwise subcritical fission assembly with extremely low enrichment fuel. 'Natural' uranium (U-238) is fissionable, which means that it can undergo fission in the presence of /high energy/ neutrons.
Fusion power is actually already above break even. There are a lot more practical engineering problems with fusion power before that means anything, though. Most of these problems have to do with materials science: Plasma is incredibly difficult to contain, and it's very difficult to design a cooling system that could work sustainably. Without a cooling system, there is no way to make use of the heat generated in fusion.
Yes, there's more to it. The experiment was done with 70/30 and 30/70 ratios for different subjects. The book doesn't say whether they specified they were all males, my guess would be that they did.
a frequentist would take issue with the two sons, one born on a tuesday problem. you can actually count up the permutations.
let's say we have 10 engineers, 9 of them are male. we also have 10 lawyers, 6 of them are male. Let's say one in 10 people likes doing math on the weekend.
There are 90 out of 100 ways to have a group of male engineers, one of which who likes math, but only 60 out of 100 ways to do the same with a male lawyer. furthermore, if we add in the four kids as another 1 in 10 thing, the situation gets even worse. This isn't bayesian, this is just counting boxes on a permutation table.
> This isn't bayesian, this is just counting boxes on a permutation table.
It's the same thing. Bayes' theorem allows you to shortcut straight to the answer without having to draw out a full probability tree / permutation table. But the underlying math is the same - in each case you have a different probability of B given A, versus B given (not A).
Personally I wouldn't call it "Bayesian" so much as just "a conditional probability." The question doesn't ask what the probability is that a randomly selected participant is an engineer, it asks what the probability is that a participant is an engineer given that he has "typical" engineer-like traits.
But then yes, ideally you could use Bayes' Rule to find that probability.
I have never experienced this behavior in google, but would be very annoyed if I had.
My question is: Why haven't I ever experienced this? I use firefox with adblock (with a very limited filter - nothing on google is blocked) and noscript (nothing on google is blocked).
My other addons have no reason to alter google's search page.
noscript is the key; the HTML of the search result pages contain the direct links, and a javascript piece that is loaded later on adds the tracker URL.
But noscript says that it's not blocking anything on my search results pages. Does google detect my addons and remove the redirects if I might be blocking them?
Here's how combined fusion/fission plants would theoretically work:
A fusion reaction is used to create a large quantity of high-energy neutrons. These high-energy neutrons are then used to cause fission in an otherwise subcritical fission assembly with extremely low enrichment fuel. 'Natural' uranium (U-238) is fissionable, which means that it can undergo fission in the presence of /high energy/ neutrons.