Time Isn't Money

Sunday, October 20, 2019

General 2:50:00 PM

This Is An Alkaline Food You Need To Know

All foods can be categorized as foods that are acidic, alkaline or neutral. Food pH is measured by the residue left in the body after food has been metabolized.

The PH Level in the foods that we eat determines its nature of acidic, alkaline or neutral. Alkaline foods carry a wonderful host of health benefits for your body which not only cleans, but also repairs as well as regenerates new cells in your body, hence strengthening your immune system
Certain foods that help prevent blood in the body from becoming too acidic and improve health in the alkaline diet.

Among other things, the body has a difficult time producing energy in an acidic internal environment, because an acidic state leaves less oxygen available in the body's cells for energy production.

The most alkaline foods are plant foods, which makes it an excellent food choice when eaten for energy. Therefore, eating alkaline foods that are energy means eating more fruits and vegetables.

PRAL categorizes foods as acidic or basic foods. It measures the exact amount of acidity or alkalinity of a food, after which it is metabolized. Every food on the PRAL scale is negative, neutral or positive. Any foods that have a negative value are foods or bases that are alkaline while foods with positive values are acidic.

if you want to try the latest recipes for food above you can visit
https://8e9dfvocz-531w91yikxzbqoes.hop.clickbank.net/

Miyoshi Seikai 0

Saturday, October 19, 2019

General 11:30:00 AM

Is It Possible To Decompose CO2 Into C And O2? Here's The Explanation

As you can see, you can use photosynthesis of plants. Plants use solar energy to break down CO2 into C and O2.

I think there is no other way to decompose CO2 than photosynthesis (I don't know). But energy is needed. It is absolutely necessary as a providence of this world. The combination of C and O2 is called oxidation, and it means "burning", so you can see that heat energy is extracted. Decomposition is called reduction in the reverse process, and energy must be input to it. What if you got that energy from thermal power? It will be said that.

By the way, "I need energy to do it"-remember that it will be an exam in various places, so you will be on the exam. There are many people who do not understand and are danced.

For example, an electric scooter that runs on water. Are you stupid, "Wow!" Water is not a source of energy because it is a chemically stable molecule, that is, it has a low chemical potential. The energy source is (usually) the high chemical potential of magnesium metal in magnesium batteries.

Magnesium is an almost inexhaustible element in seawater, so some people think that this solves the energy problem! Magnesium in seawater is produced as a compound with low chemical potential, such as magnesium chloride, so it is not that the seawater is full of energy. Energy is required to refine the magnesium compound into metallic magnesium, which means that the electric power obtained from thermal power generation is usually used, and the electric scooter is moved by the energy input there.

Therefore, the magnesium metal in the magnesium battery that has generated electricity has been changed to magnesium hydroxide with a low chemical potential. In order to reduce this to metallic magnesium again, energy is needed, and if it is obtained from thermal power generation, what are you doing from the perspective of solving energy problems and global warming problems! It will be said that.

If magnesium hydroxide is heated to a high temperature in a solar furnace, it can be reduced to metallic magnesium, and those who are studying it are those who are seriously studying the use of natural energy. The person who is listening to "it is an electric scooter that moves when water is supplied" is a scammer.

Miyoshi Seikai 0

General 11:19:00 AM

The Development Of Global Warming Until Now

There is a lot of discussion about whether global warming is progressing or a lie, but in the 150 years since the end of the Edo period when CO2 began to be observed, the CO2 concentration increased by about 100 ppm, but the temperature of the earth was 1 ℃ Only a weak rise.

The history of global warming issues is shown below.
In the first half of the 1980s, NASA ’s Hansen supported Hawaii ’s meteorological observatory CO2 ’s CO2 observation records at the end of the Edo period. American science lined up with British nature as a paper that might cause “global warming” like Venus because CO2 “greenhouse gas” is increasing rapidly from the atmosphere of Venus near 100%. After submitting a paper to the magazine “Science”, the issue of global warming started to fuss.

Hansen just said that the Earth might be warmed from the rise in CO2 concentration and the warmed Venus atmosphere. So I abandoned the honor of being named “greenhouse gas” and “global warming” and withdrew from the global warming issue.

The Global Warming Prevention Convention was concluded in the 1992s, and its research organization, IPCC, advocated the theory of global warming, calculated a global environment simulator program with a supercomputer, and simulated CO2 concentration and global warming. Announced the calculation results that the earth would warm if the atmospheric CO2 concentration increased to 450ppm, 2 ℃, and if it increased to 1000ppm, the Earth would warm.

And since the temperature of the earth began to rise in the second half of the 20th century, IPCC made a fuss about the warming, and the curve of the temperature rise resembles hockey sticks, and IPCC prospered the report. In addition, the IPCC data suspicion problem has highlighted the conflict with global warming skeptics.

However, since the temperature of the earth has fallen since the beginning of the 21st century, the IPCC resets the relationship between CO2 concentration and the temperature of the earth as if there were no previous reports, and a new warming called RCP scenario. I brought a scenario.

And while the Earth's temperature is falling, the Earth's temperature is falling, but the ocean's temperature is rising, so when the Earth is warming, it has become a painful excuse. .

The above is summarized as follows.

There are various discussions about global warming, whether it is a lie, etc., but the CO2 concentration is increasing monotonously, but the temperature is rising or falling, so the CO2 concentration and warming have a low correlation It is considered.

From the end of the Edo period when CO2 began to be observed to the present in the 21st century, the CO2 concentration has increased by about 100 ppm, but the temperature of the earth has risen by just under 1 ° C.

While it is the global warming trend (it is true that there is a warming trend in the short term), it is promising whether it is progressing to the extent that it cannot return in an irreversible direction called global warming.

It is difficult to think that fluctuations will occur at once in a few years when seen on a large scale of the earth, and it seems that it is still unknown even if `` warming '' is correct if you do not see it in a little longer span .

Miyoshi Seikai 0

General 11:11:00 AM

Mechanism Of Global Warming

Is global warming really due to carbon dioxide?

There are various reasons why the Earth has warmed up in history. Changes in crustal movements, changes in ocean currents, changes in solar activity, and the rise of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere caused by large-scale magma eruptions…

But to avoid confusion, looking at the current Quaternary glaciation (glacial period) (Quaternary glaciation-Wikipedia), it has been repeated alternately at a cycle of about 100,000 years for the past 2.58 million years. The main cause of the glacial (cold) and interglacial (warm) seasons is a change in the Earth's distance from the sun, called the Milankovitch cycle (Wikipedia). As the Earth's revolution approached the sun, the temperature rose, the ice on the land and the sea melted, the reflection of sunlight decreased, and the warmed ocean released carbon dioxide at the same time, promoting warming. In the past warming, the trigger was the change in the distance from the earth's sun, and the increase in carbon dioxide occurred as a result. I know it was a thing.

However, this past mechanism of global warming does not apply to current global warming at all.

The present Earth is in the interglacial period, the last glacial period ended about 12,000 years ago. Although the current warming up to the interglacial period is thought to be due to the natural cycle, we have released a large amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere mainly by the combustion of fossil fuels since human beings were industrialized. It was. In other words, it has created a new and most powerful cause of global warming that has never existed in nature. The carbon dioxide concentration in the earth's atmosphere, which had been changing between 180ppm and 280ppm so far, exceeded 400ppm in 2018. There is consensus among current meteorologists that this anthropogenic and record carbon dioxide concentration is what further accelerates the warming of the current interglacial period. Moreover, the speed is calculated as 170 times the natural warming so far. Since the carbon dioxide concentration has become an unprecedented number, if human beings can not reduce this, it is very likely that global warming will be at an unprecedented level .

Many lives on the Earth today are born on Earth during the Quaternary Ice Age that began 2.58 million years ago, so they (we) are experiencing an unprecedented warm earth. . As a result, the extinction of millions of species is expected.

At the end of this century, the world is trying to work together to reduce the temperature to within 1.5 ° C compared to the pre-industrial temperature. To achieve this, until 2030 It is necessary to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 45% and by 2050 it must be reduced by 100%. This is a figure that can only be achieved when the whole world is united. Although Fifty Fifty and scientists anticipate that even if this 1.5 ° C can be achieved, the Earth can avoid chain reaction that accelerates global warming beyond its tipping point, it is still worth the effort There is. Because it is insignificant compared to the difficulties that humankind face when not achieving this target.

From a logical point of view, I think there is a causal relationship.

However, it has not been proved and I think it is difficult to conclude by observation. Carbon dioxide and temperature observations are roughly correlated, but not causal. Whether carbon dioxide in seawater is released into the atmosphere due to changes in temperature or whether the concentration of carbon dioxide in seawater increases due to an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is unknown.

At present, it seems that only a large-scale simulation result by a computer is said.

However, the mechanism of global warming is that a large amount of heat is poured from the sun to the earth, and most of it is released again from the earth to the universe. There is also an effect of increasing indirectly). It seems that the model is extremely complex and requires a large amount of relational expressions, physical properties, and current data, but in order to calculate subtle changes in global temperature, an ultra-high-precision model expression and numerical values are used. It is impossible to imagine that accurate model formulas and numerical values for such calculations have been obtained with the required accuracy.

Therefore, only the calculation results when global warming is obtained as a result may be published.

It is the intergovernmental panel on IPCC climate change that is being promoted and discussed in global warming research, but this is not a so-called academic society. It is a United Nations organization that assumes global warming. Therefore, here, in principle, we cannot give a research presentation that criticizes or denies global warming. Therefore, although the scientific method may be used for the announcement here, I don't think it is a general scientific conclusion.

More than that, political, corporate management, and political relations between developed and underdeveloped countries seem strong. For example, the nuclear power companies and the promotion government have been strongly supported and willing to use them, and recently developed countries are being used to reduce energy consumption in the developing countries.

Of course, because there is a risk of global warming, it is thought that beta is to promote the suppression of carbon dioxide generation. Reducing the use of natural energy resources is also an extremely important matter for reconsideration and conversion of modern civilization based on mass energy consumption.

(Additional notes below)

It is not well known whether global warming is immediately "bad".氷 Glaciers and ice caps melt and sea level rises. A big city is submerged! On the other hand, the desert has been greened, the tundra ice has melted, and livestock and agricultural products have been increased (the effect of carbon dioxide).

Will the typhoon become stronger? This seems to be just an imagination. The theory is so, but is it difficult to evaluate quantitatively?

Is the sea level rise so scary? Already in the big city along the sea in Japan, the ground has subsided about 1m at the beginning of postwar high growth. Osaka city is sinking up to 3m. Most of the cause is pumping up groundwater and liquefaction due to some earthquakes. Still protected by a seawall.

In short, what is important is to apply a negative effect and a positive effect to the balance. I don't think it's done.

Miyoshi Seikai 0

Technology 10:23:00 AM

This Is The Comparison Of The Advancement Of Science And Technology Between China And Japan

After reading the questions, I felt that “science and technology are evolving”.

For example, in China, we agree that some technologies, such as demonstration experiments, will appear in the community sooner than in Japan. I haven't read the contents of the patent individually, but I think the number of Huawei patent applications and their presence in 5G are extraordinary.

Japan, on the other hand, has a certain presence in the smarter field of science and technology, despite development that is easily understood in China. For example, see the nationality of recent Nobel Prize winners. Furthermore, Huawei mentioned in the previous example seems to have increased from Japan to 4% of Japan's trade with China.

Therefore, at the present time, I cannot say that “Science and technology in China is developing faster than Japan”. Japan has strengths in basic research and basic technology. However, China, which is ranked second in the world nominal GDP ranking (third in Japan), is actively investing in research and development. In the future, there seems to be a world where China's science and technology is developing faster than Japan.

But other facts also suggest that China has abundant investment funding, ease of proof-of-concept testing, and excellent engineers and researchers with the world's largest population.

China's investment in science and technology is growing rapidly, with much more venture investment than in Japan. There are almost no restrictions on the demonstration experiment due to regulations such as residents and Japan. For development, experiments in the gray area can also cause cancer. China's population is 7.8 times that of Japan, and investment in education is intensifying. The elite staff who were in a very competitive society are very good.
However, Chinese science until the 20th century was already quite late, so taking the derivative of the curve representing the level of progress would be very large. In other words, the speed of development is faster. Also, in a fairly large area about 10 years later, there is a possibility of overtaking Japan.

Miyoshi Seikai 0