Best energy production books according to redditors

We found 434 Reddit comments discussing the best energy production books. We ranked the 136 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Subcategories:

Nuclear engineering books
Drilling procedure books
Mining books
Power systems books
Electric energy books
Alternative & renewable energy books
Fossil fuels books

Top Reddit comments about Energy Production & Extraction:

u/nastylittleman · 152 pointsr/pics

I read about a guy who committed suicide by carrying a bit of radioactive material in his pocket for a while. Slow and painful death.

think it was in this book.

u/DavideAndrea · 115 pointsr/askscience

There are two answers, one chemical, and one electronic.

  • Chemical: laptop batteries are happiest at 50 % charge. If kept at 100 % charge they lose calendar life (they die sooner). If kept at 0 %, they risk getting over-discharged by their BMS (Battery Management System). But, 50 % is totally impractical for a laptop. Your teacher is right that overcharging or over-discharging Li-ion cells would be bad, but the BMS in the battery prevents you from doing that.

  • Electronic: laptop batteries include a BMS (Battery Management System) that needs to check the capacity of the cells, and the only way to do that is to go through a full charge-discharge cycle. This is purely for the convenience of the user: knowing how much juice you have left. EDIT See jimbo21's excellent explanation, below)

    So: no, it is not true that its good for laptop batteries themselves to die once a month; yes, it's good for the user to let laptop batteries to die once a month.

    Qualifications: I am the author of a book on the subject.
u/Tangurena · 48 pointsr/science

The reactor designs in use in the US all require enriched Uranium. According to the author of The Curve of Binding Energy, nuclear reactors in the US were intended to produce plutonium for sale to the US Government, with a price around $1,000,000 per KG of plu. When the US stopped buying privately produced plutonium, the bottom fell out of the market for nuclear power plants. This happened at about the same time that the movie China Syndrome came out, and Three Mile Island happened. It is far more convenient to blame treehuggers than cold hard economics.

Last time I looked up the stats, the US military owned about 100 tons of plutonium, about half in nuclear weapons. There were about 1700 tons of privately produced plutonium sitting around in casks scattered around the world.

Thorium as well as CANDU reactor designs would be far more useful as neither of them can produce plutonium. However the thorium designs have never gotten far, and CANDU comes from Canada and doesn't enrich large US corporations, so we'll never promote that either.

u/1Davide · 27 pointsr/writing
u/stickmanDave · 16 pointsr/todayilearned

Such material can be stolen. Read The Curve of Binding Energy to see just how poorly guarded this stuff was when Philips (the princeton student) designed his bomb.
In that book McPhee describes finding one storage location where he could have cut through a chain link fence a couple of hundred yards from
a couple of sleepy guards, pried open a window with a faulty alarm, and found himself in a room filled with crates of enriched uranium. Shit was crazy.

u/jacobolus · 11 pointsr/math

Your post has too little context/content for anyone to give you particularly relevant or specific advice. You should list what you know already and what you’re trying to learn. I find it’s easiest to research a new subject when I have a concrete problem I’m trying to solve.

But anyway, I’m going to assume you studied up through single variable calculus and are reasonably motivated to put some effort in with your reading. Here are some books which you might enjoy, depending on your interests. All should be reasonably accessible (to, say, a sharp and motivated undergraduate), but they’ll all take some work:

(in no particular order)
Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid (wikipedia)
To Mock a Mockingbird (wikipedia)
Structure in Nature is a Strategy for Design
Geometry and the Imagination
Visual Group Theory (website)
The Little Schemer (website)
Visual Complex Analysis (website)
Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos (website)
Music, a Mathematical Offering (website)
QED
Mathematics and its History
The Nature and Growth of Modern Mathematics
Proofs from THE BOOK (wikipedia)
Concrete Mathematics (website, wikipedia)
The Symmetries of Things
Quantum Computing Since Democritus (website)
Solid Shape
On Numbers and Games (wikipedia)
Street-Fighting Mathematics (website)

But also, you’ll probably get more useful response somewhere else, e.g. /r/learnmath. (On /r/math you’re likely to attract downvotes with a question like this.)

You might enjoy:
https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/2mkmk0/a_compilation_of_useful_free_online_math_resources/
https://www.reddit.com/r/mathbooks/top/?sort=top&t=all

u/MrYiff · 11 pointsr/politics

I was reading about these while on holiday (this is one of a series of 3 books that are quite interesting and look at the history of nuclear power, various accidents over the course of developing it and what the future might hold: https://www.amazon.com/Atomic-Awakening-History-Future-Nuclear/dp/1605981273 ), and the US spent billions developing nuclear powered planes in 60's and they were wild. Basically take a regular nuclear reactor and remove all the thick and heavy concrete and lead shielding around (which is crazy heavy!), and you have a flying nuke that irradiates pretty much everything around it (better hope you don't live near an airfield one of these takes off from!). They even built a dedicated testing facility out in Georgia so they could figure out what affect radiation would have on various plane parts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Nuclear_Aircraft_Laboratory), which it turns out lots of plane parts didn't like massive doses of radiation, rubber in the tyres would turn solid, hydraulic fluid would turn to jelly, oh and the pilots were recommended to be older men who already had kids since even with a special 12 tonne shield between the reactor and the pilots they would still get some exposure.

u/espresso__patronum · 10 pointsr/bestof

OOD115

>I've railed against Thorium reactors for years on here, so much so that I'm so fucking tired of talking about it. I worked on nuclear plants as an engineer for a decade, but am no longer involved.

>Thorium reactors don't even solve any proliferation concerns. I see so many people saying it should be exported to third world countries because they can't use it to make a bomb. This is fucking false. Th-232 is fertile and can create U-233 after neutron capture, which is fissile. This can be chemically separated out to form weapons-grade U-233.

>It solves fucking nothing. It's propaganda from "Gen IV" universities looking for funding for projects that will never get built. And it's being pushed by India because they have enormous Thorium reserves, but no Uranium resources.

-------------------

LFTRs produce Uranium 233 which is indeed a weapons grade material, however it is poisoned with Uranium 232 which is a proliferation prophylactic.

LFTRs are also non appreciable breeders meaning if you divert the Uranium 233 they generate to try and use it for weapons, the reactor cannot sustain itself and shuts down.

----------------------------


Robert Hargraves teaches energy policy at Dartmouth an Ivy League school.

Robert Hargraves graduated from Brown University (PhD Physics 1967)

http://www.thoriumenergyalliance.com/downloads/American_Scientist_Hargraves.pdf

"The uranium-233 produced from thorium-232 is necessarily accompanied by uranium-232, a proliferation prophylactic. Uranium-232 has a relatively short half-life of 73.6 years, burning itself out by producing decay products that include strong emitters of high-energy gamma radiation. The gamma emissions are easily detectable and highly destructive to ordnance components, circuitry and especially personnel. Uranium-232 is chemically identical to and essentially inseparable from uranium-233."

...

"Only a determined, well-funded effort on the scale of a national program could overcome the obstacles to illicit use of uranium-232/233 produced in a LFTR reactor. Such an effort would certainly find that it was less problematic to pursue the enrichment of natural uranium or the generation of plutonium."

"the proportion of U-232 would be about 0.13% for a commercial power reactor. A year after separation, a weapons worker one meter from a subcritical 5 kg sphere of such U-233 would receive a radiation dose of 43 mSv/hr, compared to 0.003 mSv/hr from plutonium, even less from U-235. Death becomes probable after 72 hours exposure. After ten years this radiation triples.

A resulting weapons would be highly radioactive and therefore dangerous to military workers nearby. The penetrating 2.6 MeV gamma radiation is an easily detected marker revealing the presence of such U-233, possibly even from a satellite.

For personnel safety, any U-233 material operations must be accomplished by remote handling equipment within a radioactively shielded hot cell. This can be designed to make it very hard for any insiders or outsiders to remove material from the hot cell."

-----------

LFTRs are not designed to be appreciable breeders, they will produce only as much U233 as is required to continue their operation and no more, removing U233 from the equation means the reactor will eventually shut down.

"However, taking into account the overall fission rate per capture, capture by other nuclei and so on, a well-designed LFTR reactor should be able to direct about 1.08 neutrons per fission to thorium transmutation. This delicate poise doesn't create excess, just enough to generate fuel indefinitely. If meaningful quantities of uranium-233 are misdirected for nonpeaceful purposes, the reactor will report the diversion by winding down because of insufficient fissile product produced in the blanket."

---------------




Thorium Energy Cheaper Than Coal - Robert Hargraves

https://www.amazon.com/THORIUM-energy-cheaper-than-coal/dp/1478161299


--------------------

Ultimately any fission reactor's neutron flux can convert U238 to Pu239 or Th232 to U233, but the best designs make that incredibly difficult and expensive.

There is no way to prevent a determined government from building a weapons program from a modified power plant. This is why they are inspected by IAEA. IAEA monitoring (or refusal thereof) makes this public knowledge.

Any government that has the resources would opt to go the proven route of U235 or Pu239, rather than have to deal with potential U232 contamination.



u/OilfieldHippie · 9 pointsr/oilandgasworkers

Being an FE doesn't suck and not everyone hates it. There are certainly bad things about it - the schedule is the main one people complain about, but there are bad parts to every job.

As far as what you should study, it will be better off for you to read and understand then training materials you will be given rather than re-hashing Thermo. You aren't going to ever hear the word Enthalpy again, at least if you stay close to the wellhead.

You'll learn more in the field by asking questions than by reading a book. However, you need to understand the big picture of what all is going on, and this is the best book for you to read now.

Ask plenty of questions, learn how to run and maintain every piece of equipment you encounter, and don't be a dick head. If you can do that, you'll be just fine out there. Be safe.

u/Limulus · 7 pointsr/technology

"I'm pretty sure the core of the people pushing thorium are just trying to rebrand good old nuclear power."

Have a look at the "SuperFuel" book that came out recently: http://books.google.com/books?id=lQm_BMnHNd0C&printsec=frontcover

Thorium is only half the story; the other is the reactor to use it, which uses molten salt both as a coolant and fuel.

You might also find http://www.amazon.com/THORIUM-energy-cheaper-than-coal/dp/1478161299 interesting.

u/EssKelly · 7 pointsr/oilandgasworkers

A Primer of Oilwell Drilling


Oil & Gas Production in Nontechnical Language

The first one is available online, for free, I’ve found.

Read up on the industry so you can ask your uncle informed questions.

Not sure how old you are, or your fitness level, but in past years, a good “entry level” role was working as a rig hand... tough work, but it gave you firsthand experience with a lot of the tools.

u/tasteofsteam · 7 pointsr/alberta

https://www.amazon.ca/Nontechnical-Petroleum-Exploration-Drilling-Production/dp/1593702698

Search for pdfs of this title. It's not specific to Alberta but you'll gain a general understanding of the oil and gas industry.

u/AeroAkvoTeroFajro · 6 pointsr/aerospace

I'm not sure if this is the book /u/IC_Pandemonium was referring to, but it might be:

The Jet Engine by Rolls-Royce

I haven't had a chance to read it yet but I have heard it is very helpful.

Some other suggestions:

Gas Turbine Theory by Saravanamuttoo

Elements of Gas Turbine Propulsion by Jack Mattingly

Jet Propulsion: A Simple Guide to the Aerodynamic and Thermodynamic Design and Performance of Jet Engines by N.A. Cumpsty
(I think this may be the book /u/IC_Pandemonium was referring to actually. The previous book I have not had a chance to go through but I believe it is supposed to be written very accessibly as well.)

Compressor Aerodynamics by Cumpsty

The Design of High-Efficiency Turbomachinery and Gas Turbines by D.G. Wilson

Hopefully one or a few of these help!

u/uerb · 6 pointsr/programming

Explaining anything quantum is always frustrating, because the logic behind it is completely alien to our brains, and you have to use a complex mathematical framework to explain it ... unless your name is Richard Feynman and you have God-like explaining powers.

Here's a book with transcripts of seminars that he gave explaining one of his theories named "quantum electrodynamics" - theory for which he was awarded a Nobel prize. The seminars were geared towards people who do not have a mathematics background, but are curious and still want to understand a bit more about quantum mechanics. And he nails it. I think that he uses only a single equation during all the seminars, and still he manages to pass the ideas behind his theory very well.

I'll try to explain the advantage of quantum computers without entering into the ... well ... quantum details. First thing, forget anything from the video that talks about "parallelization" and stuff like this. It's not technically incorrect, but it's not a good way to describe the advantages of a quantum computer.

Let us take the classical example of finding the prime factors of a number (which she talks about a bit at the end of the video). This problem has a series of mathematical properties which we can exploit to solve it. The thing is, the ways that we can use these exploits are limited by the tools that we have at hand - in this case, which operations a computer can do.

In the case of this factorization, the toolset of classical computers is not good enough to do this efficiently - there's a key component (named Fourier transform) of this exploit that's reeeeally expensive to be done using a classical computer's toolset.

BUT, quantum computers have a different, more general toolset than classical computers ... including a "built-in" and fast form of Fourier transform. That's why a quantum computer can solve certain problems faster than a classical one: not because it's faster or more powerful (a quantum computer will never run Crysis ...), but because it has a more appropriate toolset to deal with the problem.

For a comparison in terms of real-world computers: take an old Pentium 4 and a modern Core i7. Their clocks are not so different, maxing around 3.8 ~ 4GHz. Still, there is no question that the i7 is a lot more faster than the P4. Why? Because it has a more efficient architecture and instruction set - a better toolset - and can do more at this same frequency. A similar thing happens with quantum computers, but on steroids.

Here's a blog post that explains all this quite well, and in relatively simple terms.. He also explains what is this "Fourier transform" operation in the context of quantum computers.

u/Mackilroy · 6 pointsr/space

Take a look at Gerard O'Neill's books The High Frontier and 2081. I think you might be pleasantly surprised about what space can mean to our civilization.

u/ItsAConspiracy · 5 pointsr/energy

Others include Robert Hargraves, who has a physics Ph.D. and just published a book on thorium reactors, and Ralph Moir, who published ten papers on them including one coauthored with Edward Teller. Here's an article the two published in Physics and Society, and another in American Scientist.

Another is David LeBlanc, a nuclear scientist at Carleton University. Here's his Google tech talk. And here's one by Joe Bonometti, who was a nuclear specialist at NASA.

Some others here.

u/Earthfall10 · 5 pointsr/space
u/BanskiAchtar · 5 pointsr/math

For an elementary account, there is a book by Weintraub called Differential Forms, which is very accessible. It is explicitly written as a "complement to vector calculus".

For a more advanced treatment take a look at Arnold's Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics. There is a standalone chapter on differential forms which is extremely well-written and well-motivated (as is the rest of the book, for that matter).

u/tesfts · 5 pointsr/TrueAtheism

>Self as illusion is a central view in Buddhism, for example. I know Sam Harris has studied Eastern religions, so why not just admit that some religions, at least, have something to offer?

Here is an old essay by him on the subject of Buddhism having things to offer: Killing The Buddha - Sam Harris, Shambhala Sun

Also, speaking on the matter of the self being an illusion, Thomas Metzinger's Self-model theory is pretty interesting. There are several lectures on youtube... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFjY1fAcESs






u/tek9 · 5 pointsr/oilandgasworkers

I work as a MWD field engineer on land alongside Directional Drillers everyday. Both jobs don't have a set schedule at all. We work a job from when we're called there until the finish. This can be anywhere from a week to 6 or more weeks, working 12 hours a day/7 days a week. Usually we get maybe a week in between jobs, but when it gets busy you'll get sent straight to another job without a break. Every now and then there will be rigs where they like the crew on location and have multiple wells to drill, so a rotation is set up for 20 on 10 off. Most of these rotations i've seen last maybe a few months, until work gets busy enough to where they have to pull one of the guys off rotation for another job, so it really all depends on luck.

Personally, I don't regret the field but for me its more of a means to an end. There's great training and lots to learn, and working as a field engineer is the perfect opportunity to get your foot in the door for better positions later on in your career. Of course many stay in the field for the money which is amazing, but social/family life is non existent.

Most companies i've seen rarely hire Directional Drillers straight from school, they usually require someone with 2-3 years experience as a MWD, or a Driller who worked their way up from roughneck. This is mainly due to how much knowledge and how important the Directional Driller's job is, so before applying I would do my research on everything rig related and learn the equipment/techniques used to drill. A good intro book I used was A Primer of Oilwell Drilling, which I know many companies use in training their new engineers. Best of luck!

u/JSURATA · 4 pointsr/math

This was the book I used when I took Advanced Calculus II:

http://www.amazon.com/Differential-Forms-Complement-Vector-Calculus/dp/0127425101

It was really really straight-forward and really funny at times. I think it's a good book and has decent enough explanations with a good amount of exercises.

u/webnrrd2k · 4 pointsr/science

There's a book about exactly this theory called The Deep Hot Biosphere by Gold. I've read it and it's very thought provoking, and well worth reading.

u/Taome · 4 pointsr/neurophilosophy

The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self. Thomas Metzinger.

Who's in Charge?: Free Will and the Brain. Michael Gazzaniga (neuroscientist)

Neuroexistentialism: Meaning, Morals, and Purpose in the Age of Neuroscience. Gregg Caruso and Owen Flanagan, Eds. (Part 3: Free Will, Moral Responsibility, and Meaning in Life has 6 essays by Derk Pereboom, Caruso, Gazzaniga, and others, and other essays scattered throughout the book are also pertinent)

u/InternetFree · 4 pointsr/television

Read "The Ego Tunnel" by Thomas Metzinger.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Ego-Tunnel-Science-Mind/dp/0465020690

Then read "Being No One" by Thomas Metzinger.
http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/being-no-one

The Ego Tunnel is a pretty easy to digest book on the subject matter, Being No One is a pretty heavy book (literally) with lots of complicated formulations that might be very difficult to comprehend without at least some education about the concepts discussed, in it he discusses the self-model theory of subjectivity. Being No One is standard reading for any student of philosophy of the mind.

Study cognitive science.

Metzinger is a German philosopher of the mind and pretty much the leading export on these issues.

Just found a .pdf of Being No One:
http://skepdic.ru/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/BeingNoOne-SelfModelTheoryOfSubjectivity-Metzinger.pdf

u/keltor2243 · 4 pointsr/Blacksmith

My wedding cost a lot more than $400. :D

If you HAVE welding equipment or could borrow it, it would greatly expand your forge possibilities.

  • Hammer: A Nordic Forge Rounding Hammer in 1.5# is about $30
  • Tongs: A GS Tongs Bent Knee tong (for square 3/8" stock probably) is $37
  • Anvil: A 4"x4" stake anvil will run you about $125 from Old World Anvils
  • Forge: The forge is the part you'll need to DIY for the $200 you have left.

    For building the forge, there's TONS of instructions on the internet, though a lot of them are REALLY small OR for the coal ones, fairly hard to use in practice. I like the forge you build in the book Gas Burners For Forges, Furnaces & Kilns.
u/kwitcherbichen · 3 pointsr/Blacksmith

Read Ron Reil's pages on gas forges. Read a copy of Gas Burners for Forges, Furnaces, and Kilns by Michael Porter. Browse the old threads on http://www.iforgeiron.com/ and http://knifedogs.com/. It's not difficult to get a burner working with a few hours reading and a couple trips to a good plumbing supply house (or ordered from Grainger, etc.).

u/stepman · 3 pointsr/AskElectronics

I too am fine with users who are active in the sub linking to their own on topic stuff. Going on the unique spelling of the username, I think it's this:

http://www.amazon.com/Battery-Management-Systems-Large-Lithium/dp/1608071049

Looks like it's for bigger systems than RC batteries.

/u/1davide I'll delete if you want to stay anonymous, but your username I suspect you aren't trying to :-)

u/DiKetian · 3 pointsr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

This. It's both expensive and looks boring, but I'm saving up to get it because of reasons.

Or this, unless the giver is both insanely generous and a massive Whovian.

u/IAmNotANumber37 · 3 pointsr/Blacksmith

> The efficiency of one of these burners compared to a hand made black iron burner should be well worth the extra cost.

I don't make any friends when I start this argument, but:

The efficiency claim is a myth.

Most people judge efficiency by the propane pressure dial, probably because that's what they have. Even Larry's charts do that, and that's not the right way to look at it.

Efficiency is about mass-flow rate of your combustion fuel, not the input psi. It doesn't matter if you are feeding 0.5lb/hr of propane in at 10psi or feeding 0.5lbs/hr of propane in at 5 psi - you're still using 0.5lbs of propane an hour, and should still expect to get something around 10k BTU of energy from that fuel.

However well constructed, Larry's burners cannot get more BTU energy out of propane than propane contains.

Basically: A well tuned burner will burn (almost) all the fuel inside the forge with a slight amount of dragon's breath (to ensure the forge is not oxidizing). Any burner that does that will operate at the same efficiency measuring heat output to fuel mass input.

There are many modern burner designs that are practical for someone to make that are stable and tuneable and will produce the same flame that Larry's burners do. If you get the same flame, you get the same efficiency (measured the way it matters - heat/fuel-input)

What Larry's burners might give you is easy tuning and operational stability. And good looks I suppose.

I say "might" because I've not actually used them and thus can't endorse them - by all reports people who own them love them though.

If you want to try and build a similar burner, you could use Michel Porter's book: https://www.amazon.ca/Gas-Burners-Forges-Furnaces-Kilns/dp/1879535203

...he actively tells people to go and steal it off the internet (pdfs are available) - I'm not sure how serious he is, and I don't think that's very fair given his investment researching and testing burners over the years. I've talked burners with him now quite a lot. From what I understand Larry worked with him for a long while. Larry then created the Z burners, while Michel further refined the design into what's in the book. Michel considers the Z burner to be several generations behind what's in the book (aka the "MikeyBurner"). I've never used one of Michael's burners either, so I can't comment on that, but I take anything Michael says very seriously.

u/DanaEn803 · 3 pointsr/Space_Colonization

What type of Space Station O'Neill Cylinder (i.e. Babylon 5), or a ring station, or a 0g space station? O'Neill Cylinders could handle just about anything, a Island 3 Type O'Neill Cylinder is as wide as B5 was supposed to be long 20 Miles by 5 Miles. 0g limits the types of foods you can grow but it is still possible. If you can't guess I recommend O'Neill Cylinders.

The Round Table - Gerard K. O'Neill, Issac Asimov.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DM88sUBTTRM

The High Frontier: Human Colonies In Space by Gerard O'Neill
https://www.amazon.com/High-Frontier-Human-Colonies-Space-ebook/dp/B00CB3SIAI

u/gatowman · 3 pointsr/Skookum

It did go critical, but it did not power the plane. The reactor was placed on a plane with conventional propulsion and followed by two planes. One was filled with detection equipment and the other was full of airborne Marines to set up a containment zone around a possible crash site. Source

There were at least two test reactiors that went critical to test the entire propulaion system, but neither went airborne. A third naked reactor was built outside of Dawsonville, GA to blast various aircraft parts with high levels of radiation to make sure they could hold up over time. Source

Edit: sources. Second source is lacking, but I had read three books that have touched on what happened at the lab. Atomic Awakening and Atomic Adventures are really good reads. Apparently there was a 1000' circle of land around the naked reactor that absolutely no life existed during the site's operation.

u/elagarde90 · 3 pointsr/gis

It depends what type of work you would be doing. If you are knowledgeable in GIS and new to natural gas, I would recommend learning about the characteristics of the pipes and regulations via Youtube Videos, [books] (https://www.amazon.com/Oil-Gas-Pipelines-Nontechnical-Language/dp/159370058X), etc. You would need to be more specific as to what you are looking to accomplish.

u/KuroReanimation · 3 pointsr/Blacksmith

1: you can make burners fairly cheaply and easily. Just search "how to make a forge burner" on youtube and you'll find plenty of vids.

2: if you're going to build a gas forge, it depends on the size of the billet/stock you'll be using the most. If you're going for knives, tongs, hand tools, etc. Then I dont imagine you'd be using stock larger than 1". If you plan on making things like axes, hammers, decorative pieces, or (if you feel like going this route when making them) swords that you'd draw out from a chunk of steel, the max size of stock/billet I feel you'd use is 4ish". If you plan on making long pieces, you can just leave both sides open so it's more of a tunnel rather than an open box. The number of burners is more quality of life rather than necessity. More burners equals more heat and more heat means faster heating. Do you /need/ multiple burners? Probably not. The only time multiple burners are necessary is when you need to heat a large length (such as heat treating a sword or bending a length of metal) one thing to keep in mind is the internal size of the forge. If you make a forge with a 10"×10" chamber (this is hyperbole, while I know they exist--atleast 10" tall chambers--I highly doubt you will ever make anything requiring that) and only one burner, that single burner has will try to heat up that entire chamber (because that's how heat works) and you'll wind up using fuel a heck of a lot faster. Using 2 or more burners will distribute heat in more than one place, thus lowering the fuel usage close to less than half of the single burner. So, when I say that it heavily depends on what you're going to be making, I mean it. To give you some rough internal dimensions, I'd say something like 5"-6" tall, 5"-6" wide and 9" long.

I suggest reading this book before you make one, though. It tells you all the do's and don'ts as well as the whys and why nots.

https://www.amazon.com/Gas-Burners-Forges-Furnaces-Kilns/dp/1879535203

To put it simply, though, one burner is more than sufficient.

3: I suggest the latter option to the former. The fiberglass lining is simply to prolong the life of whatever refractory material is below it (not to mention it's easier to replace) I'd stray away from firebrick if possible, as it wears much more quickly than other alternatives. I reccomend using a high alumina kiln shelf.
https://www.sheffield-pottery.com/High-Alumina-Cone-11-Kiln-Shelves-s/317.htm
You can simply cut it to match the size you need. (Also, you should read the instructions on the page)

4: well, if saving money is the goal, you can go as cheaply as putting a sledgehammer head in some cement. There are so many forums and pages that talk about what can be used as a cheap but efficient anvil that I dont even really need to link one to you. All you have to do is google "anvil alternatives" and you'll get all the information you need.
I'll summarize what you'd read though; broken forklift tines, rr track, drop steel from a machinist/steel supplier, a block of steel, a stump with a rail track tie plate fastened to it, but dear lord dont use cast iron anvils.

If you don't really mind $300, then that is honestly the anvil you should buy. In fact, if it's even an option, i'd reccomend that to anything else.

5: preffered metal cutting tools are a hot cut hardy hole tool, chisels and punches.

6: for necessity items, I highly reccomend a 4"x72" belt sander (you can find how to make those in excess on youtube), files, a ///post/// vice, and decent files meant for removing metal. Also, not much of a necessity, but I like sharpening my knives on a full spectrum of whetstones (full spectrum meaning I'd start at around 320 grit and end at 10,000 grit) but that's expensive in itself. I also suggest getting a bench grinder with a buffing wheel, some black and green metal polish that you can pick up from harbor freight, and a leather strop.

That's all I can think of in regards to main points but if you want detail on anything related to blacksmithing or have any more questions, I recommend going to sites like iforgeiron and blacksmithforums.com

u/hydrocarbon23 · 3 pointsr/oilandgasworkers

Look into nontechnical guides that will give you a broad look into the industry and help you understand it without going into the finer details that can be difficult to grasp. Check your school's library as well, often times they will have them available.

Something like this: https://www.amazon.com/Nontechnical-Petroleum-Exploration-Drilling-Production/dp/1593702698

or this: https://www.amazon.com/Oil-Gas-Industry-Nontechnical-Guide/dp/159370254X

u/OatLids · 3 pointsr/rocketry

I would start with fundamentals

Hill and Peterson is pretty good for broad thermodynamics for propulsion systems:
https://www.amazon.com/Mechanics-Thermodynamics-Propulsion-Philip-Hill/dp/0201146592

Gas turbine theory is pretty good start for turbomachinery:
https://www.amazon.com/Gas-Turbine-Theory-H-I-H-Saravanamuttoo/dp/0132224372

You can build a turbopump without looking to power a rocket. (Pump water with steam or something) and in the endeavour I can guarantee you will learn so much.

u/cyclops1771 · 3 pointsr/facepalm

There was a book called The Deep Hot Biosphere by Thomas Gold that goes WAY in depth on this subject. There was a book called 9 Crazy Ideas in Science That Might Be True by Robert Ehrlichhat summarized the ideas behind it, including Gold's (as well as 8 other weird science things.) It's a bit dated (probably from early 2000's.)

u/Brunopolis · 3 pointsr/CanadaPolitics

There's a very convincing hypotheses out there which proposes that oil, methane, and the like are formed by inorganic means rather than by the decomposition of organisms. It's called the Abiogenic Petroleum origin Theory.

Thomas Gold wrote a great book about it called The Deep Hot Biosphere. I highly recommend it.

u/MeatballsMothman · 3 pointsr/suggestmeabook

The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self by Thomas Metzinger

https://www.amazon.com/Ego-Tunnel-Science-Mind-Myth/dp/0465020690

u/facefork · 3 pointsr/videos

There's actually a strain of philosophy of mind and neuroscience dealing with this question right now:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Ego-Tunnel-Science-Mind/dp/0465020690

is a good example. While you might feel like "yourself" has a unifying central intelligence, and it is most certainly true from a subjective personal standpoint, analysis of the actual neural substrates and cognitive processes that generate of that sense of selfhood shows that it might actually be a very powerful illusion.

u/tvcgrid · 3 pointsr/TrueDetective

Good summary.

I'd add one more point, related to this quote. I've encountered this in another piece of fiction, and the author actually credited this in part to Metzinger's book called The Ego Tunnel. I'm guessing there's other works that touch on this too. Anyway, the gist is that the conscious self is the content of a model created by our brain—an internal image, but one we cannot experience as an image. Everything we experience is "a virtual self in a virtual reality." But this isn't philosophy not informed by science; Metzinger draws on a whole lot of studies and experiments into human cognition. Worth checking out, although it's a big honking work.

u/1point618 · 3 pointsr/printSF

Currently reading, and would like to finish:

  1. Interaction Ritual Chains by Randal Collins

    Started in 2014, put down, would like to finish in 2015:

  2. Aztecs by Inga Clendinnen

  3. The Ego Tunnel by Thomas Metzinger

    Would like to re-read in 2015:

  4. Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace

  5. White Noise by Don DeLillo

  6. Anathem by Neal Stephenson

    Would like to read in 2015:

  7. The Power Broker by Robert A. Caro

  8. A couple of books for /r/SF_Book_Club

  9. Blindsight and Echopraxia by Peter Watts, back-to-back

  10. At least one or two books on Buddhist philosophy / practice

  11. At least one or two books on philosophy, either philo of mind or more cultural studies / anthro / sociology type stuff.
u/dnew · 3 pointsr/scifi

Personally, I love learning about quantum mechanics and relativity.

Stuff like this: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7_gcs09iThXybpVgjHZ_7g if you want to watch cool animated explanations of advanced science.

* Almost forgot Fermilab: https://www.youtube.com/user/fermilab

Stuff like this if you want to read laymen textbooks to wrap your head around QM and relativity: (Altho get the paper versions, because they have diagrams and illustrations and stuff illegible on the ebooks):

https://www.amazon.com/Six-Not-So-Easy-Pieces-Einstein-s-Relativity/dp/0465025269/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0

https://www.amazon.com/QED-Strange-Princeton-Science-Library/dp/0691164096/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0

https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Universe-Anything-That-Happen/dp/0306821443/ref=sr_1_1_twi_pap_1

https://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-mc2-Should-Care/dp/0306818760/ref=sr_1_1_twi_pap_2

All of those are mind-bogglingly cool, as well as being actual real science!

u/Shiner_Black · 3 pointsr/oilandgasworkers

I work in drilling. My location has copies of A Primer of Oilwell Drilling for new hire engineers to study. It gives a good overview of the drilling process and has a lot of pictures.

Good luck with the job search, but be sure to have a backup plan.

u/eyefish4fun · 3 pointsr/energy

Depends on which nuclear power you are talking about. There is a case to be made for Energy cheaper than coal

u/Papaslice · 2 pointsr/engineering

I don't think you'll have a problem as MechE. I suspect a knowledge of the complexities of full engine design wouldn't be necessary for OEM but if you want to know more Gas Turbine Theory is beautifully written and has everything you could want to know. If you can get it from your library I would definitely recommend it. I suggest an understanding of the relationships between total and static pressure/temperature before reading it though.

u/RatoUnit · 2 pointsr/AskEngineers

If you mean turbine engines, Gas Turbine Theory by HIH Saravanamuttoo is an excellent text. I had the privilege of taking a course from the author during my undergrad and he is a walking repository of aircraft propulsion information. I believe he still delivers a lecture at Cranfeild once a year, I would definitely attend if you have the opportunity.

http://www.amazon.com/Gas-Turbine-Theory-6th-Edition/dp/0132224372

u/joejance · 2 pointsr/askscience

If you are interested in weird nuclear weapons you should read John McPhee's book The Curve of Binding Energy. He interviews a number of people that worked in the US weapons program. He spends a lot of time talking with Ted Taylor, who built some unique designs for small and large non-fusion weapons.

u/[deleted] · 2 pointsr/atheism

Even worse, some of these nutjobs argue that fossil fuels are being replenished today because of tectonic activity.

Mental illness is a helluva drug.

u/wolfie12345 · 2 pointsr/philosophy

We. Me. I.

What is an I? Where is the "thing" that is the stuff of a separate entity somewhere under your skin, behind your eyes?

The reality is that there is no center to one's experience. No separate long-lasting "me" that experiences. Only experience itself. The ego arises out of thought, and a "me" is just a concept that the thinking mind conjures up. No agent means no agency. No chooser.

While on first glance this may sounds either incredibly stupid, confusing or woo-woo. But take a look and see.

I suggest you check out this video by Sam Harris that explores the concept of "illusion of self."
https://vimeo.com/ondemand/wakingup

Or a book by Bruce Hood that scientifically explains this illusion:
http://www.amazon.com/Self-Illusion-Social-Creates-Identity/dp/0199988781

Or others:

http://www.amazon.com/Ego-Tunnel-Science-Mind-Myth/dp/0465020690/ref=pd_sim_14_1?ie=UTF8&dpID=61R1WPTGL%2BL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL320_SR216%2C320_&refRID=0DKBDNE0ZCT2P7423FK2

http://www.amazon.com/Ego-Trick-Julian-Baggini/dp/1847082734/ref=pd_sim_14_5?ie=UTF8&dpID=41AJedx6m9L&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR101%2C160_&refRID=1A6QPVE3CNXPPJFX84Z9

Once you break the spell of "self-identity", unity arises.

u/ProblemBesucher · 2 pointsr/suggestmeabook

there is no self there ! Aaaaaaaah !

u/funkyjesusparty · 2 pointsr/askphilosophy
u/erinboy · 2 pointsr/Buddhism

Two contemporary books, by western scientists, pretty much confirm the position about "self" found in Buddhist philosophy.

The Self Illusion by Bruce Hood (https://www.amazon.com/Self-Illusion-Social-Creates-Identity/dp/0199988781)

The Ego Tunnel by Thomas Metzinger (https://www.amazon.com/Ego-Tunnel-Science-Mind-Myth/dp/0465020690)

u/mhornberger · 2 pointsr/DebateAnAtheist

> Or are you saying that it must be the case that anything which can do these tasks must have a first person experience?

Closer to this, but I'm not saying that it would have to be to the level of an "experience," much less that it would necessarily entail the capacity to reflect on it or slice and dice its meaning. Even a Roomba needs some sense or internal modeling of a first-person perspective, emphasis on "some." The unit has to know where it is in relation to a ledge, for example. But even at this rudimentary level there is still the kernel of a self, because something has to be differentiated from the other somethings around which the first something must navigate.

> But why not 'we'?

Because it doesn't mean the same thing. If I lock you in a cell and don't bring you food, you'll starve. "We" (the royal we) could be well-fed and comfortable, but one of us will starve to death. This doesn't hinge on verbiage. You can use other labels if you like, but the underlying facts remain the same. A sandwich being eaten and you getting to eat the sandwich are not the same things. Only one nourishes you.

>Or perhaps there are many different experiences occuring that provide a perception as if there is one entity doing all of it and experiencing all of it.

Perhaps I'm just a Boltzmann brain and I'm imagining all of this. Perhaps this, perhaps that. I focus on how I and others actually engage the world. There is a vast sea of possibilities that we can't prove false. But I want to know how people actually think the world is, and why they think so.

>It's not clear to me what you mean when you refer to yourself.

When you cross the road, do you take care to avoid getting hit by cars? Do you pause in the middle of a busy street to parse what the "I" is you're trying to preserve from being hit by a car?

If you call the police and say someone is trying to kill you, would it make sense for them to say that it's not clear to them what you mean when you refer to yourself? I'm not asking merely if it would be appropriate in that emergency situation, rather I'm saying it would look like a silly and facile question. The question does not seem deep to me. Are you arguing for something, or trying to coax me towards an idea?

Sure, our sense of self can be looked at more closely. I particularly enjoyed Metzinger's The Ego Tunnel, and I've read a number of other books on the neuroscience underlying our sense of self. And there are indeed interesting philosophical conundrums, like the teletransportation problem for one example. But in everyday life we know what "I" and "you" mean. When we ask the waiter to bring us a salad, they know to whom we're referring. I'm using these terms in that colloquial, dictionary sense.

u/Cojones893 · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

http://www.amazon.com/Sun-Bottle-Strange-History-Thinking/dp/0670020338

Is a good book to start with. The general idea is that we always think we are close. That a bit more money would solve any current problems. Bigger reactors tend to just have bigger problems.

That being said we may actually be close for the first time in history. DEMO seems like it will be the first reactor to work and it's slated to start running in 2033.

u/robertsteinhaus · 2 pointsr/Physics

Fun/informative books:


[A Piece of the Sun: The Quest for Fusion Energy: By Daniel Clery] (https://www.amazon.com/Piece-Sun-Quest-Fusion-Energy/dp/1468308890)

[Sun in a Bottle: The Strange History of Fusion and the Science of Wishful Thinking by Charles Seife] (https://www.amazon.com/Sun-Bottle-Strange-History-Thinking/dp/0670020338)

[An Indispensable Truth - How Fusion Power Can Save the Planet, by F.F. Chen] (http://www.springer.com/us/book/9781441978196)

[A Green Sun by Charles Gray] (https://www.amazon.com/Green-Sun-The-Fusion-Book-ebook/dp/B005GBPEAE)
-------------
Technical books:

[Physics of Fully Ionized Gases by Lyman Spitzer Jr.] (https://www.amazon.com/Physics-Fully-Ionized-Gases-Revised/dp/0486449823)

[The Physics of Inertial Fusion: Beam Plasma Interaction, Stefano Atzeni] (https://www.amazon.com/Physics-Inertial-Fusion-Hydrodynamics-International/dp/0199568014)

[Tokamaks by Wesson] (https://books.google.com/books/about/Tokamaks.html?id=BH9vx-iDI74C)

[The Release of Thermonuclear Energy by Inertial Confinement: Ways Towards Ignition by Friedwardt Winterberg] (https://www.amazon.com/Release-Thermonuclear-Energy-Inertial-Confinement/dp/9814295906/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1473696256&sr=1-1&keywords=winterberg+inertial+confinement)
Note: This last book by F. Winterberg contains some of the most difficult mathematics (perhaps something that a Junior in Math might not mind) but contains an extraordinary wealth of new fusion ideas - something that old guard fusioneers would like to see in the hands of the young.
---------
Mathematics is the portal to advanced skills in fusion physics and nuclear engineering. It is not really possible to find a professional first position in the fusion field without a high level of mathematics competency.

For those that have already had two years of college calculus I would recommend the following book if you are interested in a career in fusion.

[Higher Math for Beginners by Y.B. Zeldovich] (https://www.amazon.com/Higher-Mathematics-Beginners-application-physics/dp/B000IW9YSO/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1473696949&sr=1-2&keywords=Higher+for+Beginners+Zeldovich)
----------
Student Internship at the Nation’s National Labs
You get paid while you learn lots of terrific fusion related stuff and there is an avenue leading to a first job in the field of your choice (something everyone needs).
http://see.orau.org/ProgramDescription.aspx?Program=10055
https://internships.llnl.gov/
http://www.lanl.gov/education/undergrad/internships.shtml
http://science.energy.gov/wdts/suli/
-------
NIF Laser Fusion in Fulldome -true out of this world new technology
(note: this high-rez image is interactive - click on picture and drag with your mouse to see additional views of the NIF target chamber)
http://www.xrez.com/case-studies/nif-laser-fusion-in-fulldome/
------
Fusion is a lot closer than most of the main stream analysts currently believe.
Fusion from the engineering side perhaps does not get as much publicity, but many fusion jobs in funded projects have a lot of engineering content. It may actually be easier to get your first position if you have a math or engineering focus (only so many physics professionals get hired, even in really large fusion programs).


u/Capn_Underpants · 2 pointsr/collapse

> Fusion - how long has that been five or ten years away for now?

This is a great read on the histry and bullshit of fusion

That is not to say we shouldn't research but it is not a savior.

u/charlysotelo · 2 pointsr/Physics

I'm no physicist. My degree is in computer science, but I'm in a somewhat similar boat. I read all these pop-science books that got me pumped (same ones you've read), so I decided to actually dive into the math.

​

Luckily I already had training in electromagnetics and calculus, differential equations, and linear algebra so I was not going in totally blind, though tbh i had forgotten most of it by the time I had this itch.

​

I've been at it for about a year now and I'm still nowhere close to where I want to be, but I'll share the books I've read and recommend them:

  • First and foremost, read Feynman's Lectures on Physics and do not skip a lecture. You can find them free on the link there, but they also sell the 3 volumes on amazon. I love annotating so I got myself physical copies. These are the most comprehensible lectures on anything I've ever read. Feynman does an excellent job on teaching you pretty much all of physics + math (especially electromagnetics) up until basics of Quantum Mechanics and some Quantum Field Theory assuming little mathematics background.
  • Feyman lectures on Quantum Electrodynamics (The first Quantum Field Theory). This is pop-sciency and not math heavy at all, but it provides a good intuition in preparation for the bullet points below
  • You're going to need Calculus. So if you're not familiar comfortable with integral concepts like integration by parts, Quantum Mechanics will be very difficult.
  • I watched MIT's opencourseware online lectures on Quantum Mechanics and I did all the assignments. This gave me what I believe is a solid mathematical understanding on Quantum Mechanics
  • I'm currently reading and performing exercises from this Introduction to Classical Field Theory. . This is just Lagrangian Field Theory, which is the classical analog of QFT. I'm doing this in preparation for the next bullet-point:
  • Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell. Very math heavy - but thats what we're after isnt it? I havent started on this yet since it relies on the previous PDF, but it was recommended in Feynmans QED book.
  • I've had training on Linear Algebra during my CS education. You're going to need it as well. I recommend watching this linear algebra playlist by 3Blue1Brown. It's almost substitute for the rigorous math. My life would've been a lot easier if that playlist existed before i took my linear algebra course, which was taught through this book.
  • Linear Algebra Part 2 - Tensor analysis! You need this for General Relativity. This is the pdf im currently reading and doing all the exercises. This pdf is preparing me for...
  • Gravity. This 1000+ page behemoth comes highly recommended by pretty much all physicist I talk to and I can't wait for it.
  • Concurrently I'm also reading this book which introduces you to the Standard Model.

    ​

    I'm available if you want to PM me directly. I love talking to others about this stuff.
u/jstrad · 2 pointsr/energy

http://www.amazon.com/Nontechnical-Petroleum-Exploration-Drilling-Production/dp/087814823X

I was in the same boat as you and purchased this book. It is great and I highly recommend a copy to reference throughout your career if you stick with Oil and Gas.

If you are in the Houston area you can borrow my copy for a couple months (I recommend taking notes as you read). PM me if interested.

u/Mefanol · 2 pointsr/engineering

Two books that should help, depending on what exactly you want to do -

1: A Primer of Oilwell Drilling (This is a UTexas book that is super-expensive if you buy from the publisher, but there should be cheap used copies floating around).


2: Nontechnical Guide to Petroleum Geology, Exploration, Drilling, and Production - This is also expensive from the publisher, but honestly feels more like a textbook on the petroleum industry (whereas the first one feels more like a big pamphlet).

edit- Amazon links

u/YieldinglyLow · 2 pointsr/oil

I'm in finance too, so similarly biased - when I first started looking at this space I leaned pretty heavily on "X in Nontechnical Language". Oil & Gas Pipelines for example: https://www.amazon.com/Oil-Gas-Pipelines-Nontechnical-Language/dp/159370058X/. I'm sure you'll graduate to something more technical, but it's a good starting point

u/achillesrhyme · 2 pointsr/consulting

There so many specialized books out there about the O&G life-cycle. Oil 101 is definitely a place to start. Aside from that, understand the step of the O&G life-cycle that your project will focus on and do a deep dive as needed. Ex: Is it exploration, appraisal, development, production, abandonment, etc.?

Few books I would recommend besides Oil 101,

  1. Nontechnical Guide to Petroleum Geology, Exploration, Drilling & Production - https://www.amazon.com/Nontechnical-Petroleum-Exploration-Drilling-Production/dp/1593702698/
  2. Deepwater Petroleum Exploration & Production: A Nontechnical Guide - https://www.amazon.com/Deepwater-Petroleum-Exploration-Production-Nontechnical/dp/1593702531/
  3. The Global Oil & Gas Industry: Management, Strategy and Finance - https://www.amazon.com/Global-Oil-Gas-Industry-Management/dp/1593702396/
u/DoktorOmni · 1 pointr/space

Old but good: The High Frontier, with the studies for orbital colonies from the 70s.

There's also the recent "update" The High Frontier: An Easier Way.

u/gaia88 · 1 pointr/AskHistorians

Atomic Accidents by James Mahaffey has a chapter on them. It's only a chapter, but it goes into the scientific details of what happened to their bodies without getting too complex for a layman reader. The book overall is wonderful and I highly recommend reading the whole thing. It's free to read on Kindle Unlimited if you have Prime. I also recommend his first book, Atomic Awakening, for a general history of nuclear power.

Atomic Accidents: A History of Nuclear Meltdowns and Disasters: From the Ozark Mountains to Fukushima https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HVPI1IA/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_IcZpDbEYHGPZN

u/Amazon_Recommends · 1 pointr/science
u/Torrfell · 1 pointr/suggestmeabook

So for Space colonization you really cannot go wrong with:

u/Triabolical_ · 1 pointr/space

Unfortunately, operating reactors tend to irradiate everything around them, so even if everything works great and you core stays intact, you end up with a highly radioactive spaceship.

I recently read "Atomic Accidents: A History of Nuclear Meltdowns and Disasters: From the Ozark Mountains to Fukushima"; which talks about a bunch of "experiments" that led to issues. It was very enlightening.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00HVPI1IA

u/r_z_n · 1 pointr/worldnews

" Specifically, the new evidence – based on modelling of air mass movements around the time of the accident – indicates Russia's Mayak nuclear complex in the southern Urals "should be considered as a likely candidate for the release", the researchers conclude. "


No surprise there. I've been reading "Atomic Accidents: A History of Nuclear Meltdowns and Disasters: From the Ozark Mountains to Fukushima" and the stuff Russia has let happen at Mayak makes even the US during the 50s and 60s look good.

u/Prejejuice · 1 pointr/knives

Good work on the burner so far. You will need to flare the end to establish the correct burn, but so far so good. After having built a few forges I would suggest that you start by building a firebrick forge like this one here, it's orders of magnitude easier to get firebricks and build them like Lego into what you want. Grinding away at a propane tank to make a forge is honestly a pain in the ass. Also you might want to check out this book for future projects. Running two burners is a really good way to burn through propane. Take the time to build a really good adjustable burner and you will find that you only need to run one burner for the majority of the projects you work on if it's burning really well. Spend the money to insulate and coat your forge and you will save a considerable amount of time and energy (literal energy too) in the end.

u/Willskydive4food · 1 pointr/engineering

I found both of these books very helpful for someone who had little knowledge of the oil industry at first. They give a general overview in layman's terms. These are the amazon links, I haven't been able to find online pdf's or .mobi's for free unfortunately.

http://www.amazon.com/Oil-Gas-Production-Nontechnical-Language/dp/1593700520/ref=sr_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1396195787&sr=1-7&keywords=petroleum+nontechnical

http://www.amazon.com/Petroleum-Refining-Nontechnical-Language-Fourth/dp/1593701586/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1396195758&sr=1-1&keywords=refining+nontechnical

u/johnybutts · 1 pointr/careerguidance

As far as courses - I have used some of the online freeware courses. Coursera had the Wharton Corporate Finance course online which I completed (I think you even get a little certificate). MIT Open courseware, Stanford has everything online. But none of those offer any O&G options. For O&G I can recommend this book

Good job with the networking, keep it up!

If you head to Houston, check into O&G temp agencies and O&G recruiters. There should be plenty if you're googling. Also, we have something like $120 billion of industrial project starts happening in 2014. Everything from ethylene crackers to power plants to pipelines to LNG export terminals. All these would require many many mechanical engineers. Start researching the big construction firms and start cold-calling them to see what's going on. If HR doesn't respond, move on to calling managers, etc.

u/APIglue · 1 pointr/Petroleum

My favorite intro book is Nontechnical Guide to Petroleum Geology, Exploration, Drilling and Production by Hyne. Someone with a geology background should be able to go through the ~600 pages pretty quickly.

Your university's bookstore probably has a list of the textbooks that were required for those courses in semesters past. Try calling if the bookstore has a poor website. If that doesn't work you can email professors or look at the website of another university's bookstore.

iTunes has a section called iTunes U which offers downloads of video lectures of undergrad and sometimes graduate level courses online for free. There is a course on petroleum geology in there taught at Delft University in the Netherlands (in English). Delft also has a bunch of free online stuff for offshore engineering.

Also, read this.

u/RockyMcNuts · 1 pointr/SecurityAnalysis

The answer to the headline question is no, a thousand times no.

Even Citi's vice chairman Robert Rubin was blind to e.g. 'liquidity puts' on massive off-balance sheet liabilities, which drastically changed Citi's economics to put in mildly. If Citi doesn't understand their own balance sheet, what chance have you got?

Even Warren Buffett sometimes gets blindsided. For instance, Amazon's cloud is eating IBM's lunch of running corporate IT departments and data centers, commoditizing what used to be a high-ticket, high-margin service business.

Even Warren Buffett puts a lot of stuff (most stuff?) in the too hard pile. Especially Warren Buffett.

You don't have to understand how to drill an oil well (although it helps, see e.g. http://amzn.to/24hNwlw , http://amzn.to/1sIYV22 ). What you have to understand is whether we're going to keep drilling oil wells, whether the guys who own and drill wells are going to keep needing Halliburton, and whether Halliburton can keep earning, growing and making a good return on capital re-invested.

u/ladz · 1 pointr/Blacksmith

If you have a few hours and some basic metal fabrication skill, you can make your own.

https://www.amazon.com/Gas-Burners-Forges-Furnaces-Kilns/dp/1879535203/

Don't actually buy that book, but you can find PDFs online. I'm only suggesting that because the author has suggested the same thing. And it's out of print anyway.

​

u/Radioactive_Rhino · 1 pointr/rawdenim

Sun In A Bottle by Charles Seife is a really interesting read about the history of nuclear engineering and where the world is in its chase to try to get nuclear fusion as a viable form of energy. Its from 2008, so obviously a lot could have happened in six years, but its still a really cool read.

http://www.amazon.com/Sun-Bottle-Strange-History-Thinking/dp/B002BWQ5H2

u/Agrentum · 1 pointr/math

I learned from Differential Forms: A Complement to Vector Calculus and Advanced Calculus: A Differential Forms Approach. In first book many of the exercises seem tedious, but you should do them anyway.

u/Gwodmajmu · 1 pointr/math

> http://www.amazon.com/Differential-Forms-Complement-Vector-Calculus/dp/0127425101

I'm currently working through this, and enjoy it a lot!

u/DashingLeech · 1 pointr/atheism

You are using the word theory wrong. If it means what you think it does, please explain the book Gas Turbine Theory. Do you believe we just have to "guess" at how they work?

u/eleitl · 1 pointr/energy

Absolutely wrong. See http://www.amazon.com/Curve-Binding-Energy-Alarming-Theodore/dp/0374515980

If you have the fissibles, any idiot can build a nuke.

u/MegaMeatSlapper85 · 1 pointr/geology

Read The Deep Hot Biosphere by Thomas Gold. I used to subscribe to the biogenic origin theory, but I'm not so sure now. In his book Gold describes not only the formation of oil, but how a deep origin would describe a lot of other natural phenomena in our world. It's definitely worth a read whether it convinces you or not. I have a feeling as technology further develops and we can drill deeper and deeper we may find Gold wasn't that far off the mark.

u/thalience · 1 pointr/askscience

You are looking for Thomas Gold's book, "The Deep Hot Biosphere".

u/lowdown · 1 pointr/science

A good read on a related topic is The Deep Hot Biosphere by Thomas Gold

u/gnarmis · 1 pointr/science

On the subject of the self, check out the well-researched book Ego Tunnel. It proposes, convincingly, that the self is categorically not some kind of substantial, essential invariant like a spirit or homunculus, but an experiential, transient and brittle construct (it disintegrates when you sleep, for eg) within the broader process of consciousness. There's too much to explain, so check it out.

u/dinnertork · 1 pointr/biology

>whether the self has an objective basis

The self is an illusion; per Metzinger’s Ego Tunnel:
"the conscious self is the content of a model created by our brain—an internal image, but one we cannot experience as an image. Everything we experience is 'a virtual self in a virtual reality.'"

This book will help you understand the neurological foundation for the sensation of self.

>and if so, life itself would not be individual existence in itself? What is biological life and why is it created?

Life is a series of complex chemical reactions driven by the energy of the sun and the earth, existing only to maximize entropy.

u/QuasiEvil · 1 pointr/skeptic

Very nice. Its nice to see this particular school of philosophy-of-mind getting out there. If you enjoyed this, I would also recommend the fantastic Out of our Heads by Alva Noe, and The Ego Tunnel by Thomas Metzinger.

u/animistern · 1 pointr/fuckingphilosophy

Um, to be honest I haven't read much from neuroscience other than Libet's Experiment and the clinical neuropsychologist Paul Broks saying, “We have this deep intuition that there is a core… But neuroscience shows that there is no center in that brain where things do all come together.”

There are some articles and books I have in my reading list, but once you get that this can be easily confirmed in DIRECT EXPERIENCE, the other materials are just superfluous, IMO. Here, I'll share them anyway.

“Who’s There?” Is The Self A Convenient Fiction?

Ego Trick: In Search of the Self

The Self Illusion: How the Social Brain Creates Identity

What Exactly Is the Self? Insights from Neuroscience

Neuroscience of Self and Self-Regulation

The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self

Who's in Charge?: Free Will and the Science of the Brain

And check out The Ascent of Humanity for a thorough discussion of the implications of the separate self on lots of aspects of our (collective) lives. Eisenstein traces all of the converging crises of our age to a common source, which he calls Separation. It is the ideology of the discrete and separate self that has generated these crises; therefore, he argues, nothing less than a "revolution in human beingness" will be sufficient to transform our relationship to each other and the planet.

u/JayaravaRaves · 1 pointr/Buddhism

The Ego Tunnel, Thomas Metzinger.

Reading this book liberated me from the lingering doubts I had about the supernatural. It shows that even when an experience is vivid, compelling, or even hyper-real that it is not necessary to take it as confirmation of vitalism, dualism or any other variety of supernatural thinking. Supernature is superfluous.

Our explanations of such experiences are usually wrong because they are based on cultural assumptions and an inability to really think analytically. It turns out that human's are really bad at solo reasoning and, more often than not, fall into fallacies and biases. We extrapolate our private experiences into ontological conclusions and we are almost always just wrong. Liberated from the mill stone of pre-scientific thinking about experience, we can begin to pay attention to what is actually happening in experience without all the overlays from culture and tradition.

Most of us are so loaded up with half-understood doctrine that we have no possibility of having an experience without unconsciously and automatically overlaying it with interpretations drawn from our existing beliefs. Thus we never really pay attention to the qualities of the experience itself. We're always dealing at one layer of abstraction remove. Most of the Buddhism we've learned just gets in the way of experience in the end.

I spent the first 10 years of being a Buddhist reading dozens of books, and the second 10 years discovering that most of what I read was useless or wrong or both. Metzinger's book might help others take a shorter route. He's completely wrong about Buddhism, but it's still the most important book on how the mind words that I've read because of how it make me reconsider my own conclusions.

u/Vailhem · 1 pointr/energy

ok, on the power-out:power-in, I didn't realize it was even a thought that they were planning on producing more than they consume (at any point, obv not overall... it being a research project). But, even with that, I still doubt it can ever be made to be economical. The neutron buildup will always be a problem, and even if it can be solved (unlikely), it will require materials that will make the whole thing too expensive, and those material (technologies) will just as capably be applied other sectors as well... solar, nuclear (fission), as well as just efficiency and various different technologies across the board, not just energy specific.

I just don't ever see the EROEI ever being net positive... they'll have to shut the thing down too often, it has too many parts that will break and need to be replaced... its just an overly complex cluster-fuck of a design that has great scientific merit and contribution but for the intended goal of energy generation is a horrible mis-allocation of capital. I debate (as I've read others much more versed and embedded in the industry as well) that the reason for it is to tie up that capital and resources (how many great minds are working on it?) so as to not direct it towards more fruitful and more quickly deployable ventures. I am not impressed. If nothing else, they should at least focus on aneutronic materials.

I'm not pushing for (though I must argue that the technology does make a lot of sense) thorium, but it, and even solar for that matter (or geothermal or... lots of technologies) make the idea of energy scarcity a moot deal... which is one of the things fusion pretty much clears up... at least of the ITER design. There is no fuel limitation, thus, once it can be figured out from an engineering aspect, the energy (resource) scarcity issue becomes moot. But these (solar, thorium, geothermal) and other technologies render the same 'problem' moot as well.... outside of that, what fusion allows is an energy density solution but... for what application? Are these things really going to be loaded onto submarines, ships, and various other energy dense needing applications... or hoisted up into space to power some sort of fusion-based propulsion system? Is that whats really the limitation for such ventures? Nuclear seems more than capable of filling this role today, yet its not density that's holding it back but policy. Can you imagine the complexity of these things? I'm not talking a Popular Science diagram or a HowStuffWorks.com description, but the true inner workings of these things? They're so complex it doesn't even seem worth it to begin with. What are the real benefits of fusion on an end-product approach? (moving the scientific exploration argument aside ... which I'm all for scientific exploration (just look at my posting-history to see that I see a definite need for this) but there are various science 'projects' that are losing out because of the allocation of capital/resources to this one... it is almost a net-negative to progress for humanity from a scientific perspective).

Let me move to your Bussard/polywell design... I'd read a bit here and there, usually just side-comments relative to the drawbacks of the Polywell design, most notably that it had a very poor or minimal efficiency on energy returned/produced... I'm not plugging its design anymore than I am backyard windmills for example, but that it didn't scale very well was something he even talked about in his google-talk. The max they could ever be is 15m across (I believe him saying), but at that, they could just roll off an assembly line and stacked together. I mean, even windmills and coal power plants have multiple reactors/turbines and just run them in unison as opposed to making huge ones. It almost seems easier to maintenance... to a point. But the fact that they scale-down so well is almost as much a benefit as it is a problem. Could ITER or D-T based fusion be designed to be engineered mass-production style and shipped around the world in shipping containers only to be reassembled IKEA-style? Solar panels can, windmills practically can, Hyperion reactors can... etc etc.

I'm not arguing against the necessity for scientific advancement, I'm not even arguing that it may possibly work, and that in (possibly) working, it won't change the fundamental economic basis structure for the planet... unlimited clean energy will definitely change things, I'm arguing for the mis-allocation of capital, resources, and intelligence vs other ventures and investments that could produce much greater results, much sooner, and with much less. I read (and recommend for a quick crack-like read) Charles Seife's "Sun in a Bottle" in a few hours back in the early spring and he, even in his magazine-article level of depth sort of way, made a decent argument outlining the same point. If not, he did a pretty thorough job covering the history and overall industry investment behind the ITER design. (forgot where I was going with that, more just a quick-read recommendation).

Point is, quick fix, fusion, or not... it just costs way too much money, has way too much talent tied up into it, and the end result is great, but ultimately not necessarily the most efficient path to essentially the same result (vs others).

u/McFate62 · 1 pointr/OzoneOfftopic

Have you read or watched Feynman's lectures on QED? I find the book better, but either is a decent overview of the topic.

It's pretty cool how he starts out with some simple but seemingly counter-intuitive ideas, but brings in how they explain diffraction gratings, focusing lenses, etc.

u/TheNegachin · 1 pointr/EnoughMuskSpam

First of all I will say that no matter what you look at, physics is one of those things where you can never be "correct" per se without understanding the math. That goes double for QM which is math all the way down. No matter how you explain it, you will always find that "but what about this exception" can be answered to your satisfaction only by getting a mathematically rigorous treatment of the topic.

That said, for understanding quantum on a "fun" level (i.e. skipping a couple of years of calculus, linear algebra, and numerical analysis), I'd recommend Richard Feynman's QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter. A very well-known and highly respected physicist with a talent for teaching. Although "quantum electrodynamics" as covered in the book is not strictly QM as generally imagined, he does cover the core of what is at interest in quantum theory (electromagnetic interactions at a subatomic level) in a pretty interesting and decently understandable way. That sounds like about what you're looking for.

u/FallsZero · 1 pointr/leagueoflegends

Well, I'm not super well-versed in physics tbh but I use to really want to be a physcisits so I know a little stuff here and there.

I've read:

https://www.amazon.com/Surely-Feynman-Adventures-Curious-Character/dp/0393316041

https://www.amazon.com/Genius-Life-Science-Richard-Feynman-ebook/dp/B004LRPQIO/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=genius+feynman&qid=1569787475&s=books&sr=1-1

https://www.amazon.com/QED-Strange-Princeton-Science-Library/dp/0691164096/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=QED+feynman&qid=1569787491&s=books&sr=1-1

Also, Feynman is related to philosophy because quantum physics makes many epistemological and metaphysical claims and Feyman made many advances in the quantum physics field. Look up some interviews online, his thought process is really cooled and really makes you wonder about the natural world and how its works/structured

u/nobodyspecial · 1 pointr/askscience

To quote Richard Feynman
>"...there is also an amplitude for light to go faster (or slower) than the conventional speed of light. You found out in the last lecture that light doesn't go only in straight lines; now, you find out that it doesn't go only at the speed of light! It may surprise you that there is an amplitude for a photon to go at speeds faster or slower than the conventional speed, c."

When Feynman said "amplitude" he meant "the square of the probability of an event." The above quote came from a series of lectures he gave at UCLA that were subsequently published.

u/tpodr · 1 pointr/videos

If you're looking for a good lay explanation, start here: QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter. Nice short book by Feynman.

u/With_a_G · 1 pointr/askscience

I got World of Atoms and Quarks for my own kids. Richard Feynman's book QED is also really good. I don't know your age or background, but learning about symmetries and Noether's theorem are really valuable.

My background is in physics, and though for a time I wanted to do particle theory, I learned of so much other interesting stuff going on while I was in grad school that I'm more content as a generalist. I work in an EE-type job now.

u/thinkahol · 0 pointsr/philosophy

I'll have to check that book out, and highly recommend Metzinger's The Ego Tunnel in turn.

In the context of #2 I often think about Hoftadter's I Am a Strange Loop and tangled hiearchies.

It seems like awareness arises when systems that integrate internal and external processing reach a certain amount of complexity.

u/somedaveguy · -13 pointsr/todayilearned

Maybe the coal isn't really 300 million years old...

Maybe coal isn't formed from decaying plants, but rather by the condensation of carbon -rich gases pouring out from tthe earth's mantle.

Maybe the coal formed around the piece of metal. Recently.

I'm just saying....maybe.

EDIT :

Sure, it sounds crazy when I say stuff like this. But what if I told you my theory came from a renowned physicist, an indisputably brilliant scientist who has been called "one of the world's most original minds"? In the [The Deep Hot Biosphere] ( http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0387985468/ref=mw_dp_mdsc?dsc=1) , Thomas Gold sets forth truly controversial and astonishing theories about where oil and gas come from, and how they acquire their organic "signatures." The conclusions he reaches in this book might be at first difficult to believe, but they are supported by a growing body of evidence...