We shipped out our largest hydrogen purifier to date on Thursday, one designed for use in hydrogen-powered airplanes. I’m pretty happy; lots of throughput, light weight, low pressure drop, quite durable. We had a pizza party Friday to celebrate(if we didn’t invite you, sorry). I’m already working on design improvements (lessons learned) in case we get another order, or another, similar customer. I think we could do even better in our next version.
Here is our latest hydrogen purifier to date being pressure tested. Output is 650 slpm; that’s 40 m3/hr, 3.5 kg/hr. The device is tied down for burst-pressure testing behind a blast fort, just in case the thing bursts during tests. So far, no failures, no leaks. I sure hope the customer pays.
here’s our largest H2 purifier being burst-pressure tested
You may have heard that the universe is not endless, ending at a brick wall, perhaps, some 15 billion light years out. But what you may not know is that this understanding is backed by a classic proof, going back to the middle ages. What follows is that proof.
Consider an endless universe with a fairly uniform distribution of stars. In any large-enough volume of this universe we expect to find many stars, e.g. in the spherical shell between 100 and 101 trillion miles from earth. At this distance, each of these stars is close enough to see individually; the combination of them (the sum in this volumetric shell) sheds a small amount of heat on the earth. Now consider another shell, the same thickness but twice as far from us, that is between 200 and 201 trillion miles from earth. If the universe is uniform, there will be 4 times as many stars in this shell, but since these stars are twice the distance from us, each star will present us with ¼ as much heat. Now, with 4 times the stars, the total effect is to radiate as much heat to us as from the first shell.
The same argument goes for each spherical shell of this 1 trillion miles thickness: each one presents us with the same amount of heat. If the universe is infinite and uniform, we find there will be an infinite number of shells radiating this amount of heat, and therefore an infinite amount of heat bathing us. We should expect to roast from all of it. Since we have not roasted, we conclude that the universe is not an endless, uniform expanse.
Based on this proof, the universe could be uniform, but only if it’s not endless. It could end with a brick wall, as in the Hitch-hikers guide. Alternately, the universe could have an end because it’s expanding from a big bang. This latter is suggested by the observed red shift showing that stars far from us move away faster in proportion to their distance. I’d expect this to be a favored answer of creationists because a point of creation suggests a creator. Creationists hate this finding, and dismiss the data too because the observed redshift suggests creation happened 15 Billion years ago. Atheists, needless to say, hate this “Big Bang” explanation.
The mathematician Bernard B Mandelbrot noticed that much of nature has a distribution that scaled by fractional dimensional, like 2.5
Another thought, more acceptable to atheists, is that the universe is a closed, oscillating four dimensional hypersphere, where time is oscillating along with space. Einstein liked this view, but never fleshed it out, perhaps because there was no way for this expansion to bounce in, and periodically reverse time and entropy.
A fairly recent view that I like is that the universe could be fractal in distribution. (Mandelbrot). It isn’t clear how the universe got that way, or how it fits with the observed redshift, but it easily allows for a universe that isn’t endless nor possessing a clear limit, a last star as it were. It also provides a uniform/ non-uniform model of mass distribution. Besides, this matches much of nature. As it turns out to be fractal. Chaos of this sort is sort of God’s fingerprint.
For another unsolved cosmological question, consider why are there stable galactic arms, see here. Robert Buxbaum, October 22, 2012.
Me100 Hydrogen Generator
Here’s a video I made for my nieces and any other young adults on why it is that tornadoes and hurricanes lift stuff up. It’s all centrifugal forces — the same forces that generate the low pressure zone at the center of hurricanes. The explanation is from Albert Einstein, who goes on show why it is that rivers don’t run straight; before you read any more of it, I’d suggest you first watch the video here. It’s from my Facebook page, so it should be visible.
If can’t see, you may have to friend me on Facebook, but until then the video shows a glass coffee cup with some coffee grounds and water in it. Originally, the grounds are at the bottom of the cup showing that they are heavier than the water. When I swirl the water in the cup, you’ll see that the grounds are lifted up into a heap in the center with some flowing all around in a circle — to the top surface and then to the walls of the cup. This is the same path followed by light things (papers for example) in a tornado. Cows, houses and cars that are caught up in real tornadoes get sucked in and lifted up too, but they never get to the top to be thrown outward.
The explanation for the lifting is that the upper layers of liquid swirl faster than the lower layers. As a result there is a low pressure zone above the middle of the swirl. The water (or air) moves upward into this lower pressure area and drags along with it cows, cars, houses and the like (Here’s another post on the subject of where the swirl comes from). The reason the swirl is faster above the bottom of the cup is that the cup bottom adds drag to the flow (the very bottom isn’t swirling at all). The faster rotating, upper flows have a reasonable amount of centrifugal force and thus a lower pressure in the middle of the swirl, and a higher pressure further out. The non-rotating bottom has a more uniform pressure that’s relatively higher in the middle, and relatively lower on the outside. As a result there is a secondary flow where air moves down around the outside of the flow and up in the middle. You can see this secondary flow in the video by following the lighter grounds.
Robert. E. Buxbaum. Weather is not exactly climate, but in my opinion both are cyclic and chaotic. I find there is little evidence that we can stop climate change, and suspect there is no advantage to wanting the earth colder. There was a tornado drought in 2013, and a hurricane draught too. You may not have heard of either because it’s hard to report on the storms that didn’t happen.
Princeton Chemical Engineering Grad-students, late 1970s. My thesis advisor is the tall fellow at center; I’m the bearded fellow at right looking the wrong way.
Here I am in Detroit with a professional tree planter trying to beautify the city by planting trees. It’s not much but it’s something. Trees are great, and they get nicer with age. Besides, two Detroiters joined in to plant in front of their houses. Working together brings peace.
Robert E. Buxbaum and friend planting trees in Detroit. Arbor day, 2012.
I took these pictures at reunions this year 2012; the first shot is the dining room at the Princeton Grad college. They favored robes for formal dinners when I started; the fellows in white are waiters– and we had stewards to help clean up our rooms. (Mine knew Einstein). The second photo shows the courtyard looking towards two of my dorm rooms. One year I was in the second floor room at left with the bay window. One year in the second floor room at upper right (barely visible).
And here is the Grad Tower — Otherwise known as “Cleveland Tower” to honor Princeton alumnus, Grover Cleveland, and here’s the fireplace in the dining room. Reminds one of The School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, in that book by JK Rowling– Boar-scabs, I think. The motto: bonus entra, melior exi: good coming, better leaving.
Here’s my PhD class; at first glance, you would not think we belong.
Robert Buxbaum, June, 2012
A major cause of Detroit’s financial problems, it seems to me, is that Detroit has an uncommonly high minimum wage, $13.75/hr for all employees in any company that contracts with the city and does not provide free health care; or $10.50/hr for companies that provide healthcare. This minimum, called a living wage, is about double the state minimum wage of $7.40.
Although the city is financially bankrupt, the city can not hire janitors and pay less than this, nor hire accountants from a company that pays its janitors less than this. Besides the burden on Detroit’s budget, this puts a burden on its unemployment system. Many in Detroit don’t possess the education or skills to justify jobs at this wage. This high minimum wage effectively cuts them from the bottom rung of jobs at these companies — jobs at the bottom of the ladder of success. Many businesses find innovative ways around the law, using corruption and bribes to skirt enforcement, if the recent trials of the mayor are any indication, but a system of corruption is not good for the city.
As these wages are far above standard, most employed workers for the city get their jobs by corruption and connections, and most everyone knows they got their jobs this way rather than skill. As a result, workers have no incentive to improve at their job. In a corrupt system like this, there is no likelihood that a raise would come with improved performance.
The justification for the living wage is the cost to support a family of 4 or 5, but Detroit is a much cheaper place to live than most, and not all workers are supporting families of 4 or 5. It therefore makes little sense to force all potential workers to refuse entry-level employment at $8.00/hour, a wage that would allow a single, motivated individual a decent living and a chance to climb as his/her needs and skills grew. Instead of promoting hard work and merit, this ordinance fosters corruption and cronyism; it makes it expensive for the city to hire contractors, makes it hard for workers to get their first jobs, and removes the benefits that normally come with improved skills. It’s a disaster, I suspect, and a reason the city is bankrupt.
Dr. Robert E. Buxbaum is a self-employed curmudgeon who tries to speak the truth as he sees it.