There's a profound irony in bitcoin enthusiasts arguing against the legitimacy of patents. If you want a level playing field in society, then at least your currency should not benefit people for simply being the first to have THE IDEA of getting involved it. Patents, at least, expire, and there are plenty of ways to cheat around them.
Each coin you hold is intellectual property that you hope will shift a larger percentage of society's wealth from others to yourself without working for it as the coin's demand/supply ratio increases.
A fixed-quantity or deflating currency has always been the dream and foundation of entrenched powers who want to stay entrenched without having to work. Every successful economic system since Persian times has had extensive debt erasure if not all-out jubilee's (Jewish cyclic society-wide debt erasure) as a key to leveling the playing field ( see http://michael-hudson.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/HudsonLostTradition.pdf ).
Printing money is a type of debt erasure. Our current problem is not excess money printing as much as it is printing mainly to enrich the rich by getting the toxic "assets" off banks balance sheets and onto taxpayers, among many other things, like social security to already wealthy grandparents (welfare for the rich).
Patents expire for the same reason debt erasure is important. Society can grow stronger in the future if the wealthy holders of patents, land, money, etc are kept on their toes by not being allowed to retain their wealth forever and for their heirs (land has really high taxes if you are not going to gainfully employ it for 2 generations).
Saturday, February 27, 2016
Sunday, February 7, 2016
answer to faster than speed of light questions
By length contraction, there is a certain way in which the speed of light can be exceeded, but nothing can go faster than any specific photon of light. In fact nothing with a rest mass can go faster than ZERO speed relative to any specific photon of light. If a physicist says "near the speed of light", then he is using an unorthodox physics terminology that would allow him to equally say "exceeding the speed of light".
Taking Carl Sagan's example from "Cosmos", if you accelerate at 1 g for 10 years and then slow down for 10 years you'll find yourself 30,000 light years away from Earth in the center of the galaxy. Dividing the distance back to Earth by your clock you will find you traveled 1500 times faster than the speed of light. Any photons that left at the same time as you will be 20 light years ahead of you, and people on Earth will think you took 30,020 years to travel that distance. Earth will be 30,020 years older while you're only 20 years older. Physicists do not use this simple division of the distance traveled by the time it took, but what's wrong with it?
Why do they not complain when someone says "near" the speed of light, when the same math that allows you to say "near" will allow you to say things can go "faster" than light?
A physicists calculates the truck driver's speed by the "mile markers on the road" and compare them to the length of "truck", thereby taking into account the fact that the galaxy got shorter in the direction of travel the faster he went, and stretched back out as he slowed down. They will freely admit the truck driver traveled forward in time, so it is strange that they won't let him say "I traveled forward in time because I traveled faster than the speed of light".
This is why their are so many questions about "traveling faster than the speed of light" on Quora. The common man can sense something is not right with what they are hearing about light. The existence of a contradiction is easy to detect but harder to specifically identify. The common man is being told things can go "near" the speed of light, but nothing can go faster. The problem is not with the common man's intuition. The problem causing this question to constantly come up is because the physics terminology they are hearing is wrong.
Now I'll get off the beaten track: I think the underlying problem is that using the concept of speed in physics makes the equations more complicated. "Speed" uses 2 units (time and length) that are not independent of each other. Speed is unitless in relativity. It is a conversion factor from seconds to meters and vice versa by meters = i*c*seconds (see Einstein's "Relativity" appendix 2). "i" is the math concept "sqrt(-1)". By using this substitution, a simpler Euclidean space can be used to satisfy Occam's razor instead of having to use Minowski space. By using meters = i*c*seconds physics equations that use speed or acceleration get simpler by making plank units simpler. This is just my personal way of doing physics to remove speed from equations. This is by no means an "accepted" practice although it give the same answers, except a minus sign or "i" factor shows up sometime. For example, it gives E= -mc^2
Taking Carl Sagan's example from "Cosmos", if you accelerate at 1 g for 10 years and then slow down for 10 years you'll find yourself 30,000 light years away from Earth in the center of the galaxy. Dividing the distance back to Earth by your clock you will find you traveled 1500 times faster than the speed of light. Any photons that left at the same time as you will be 20 light years ahead of you, and people on Earth will think you took 30,020 years to travel that distance. Earth will be 30,020 years older while you're only 20 years older. Physicists do not use this simple division of the distance traveled by the time it took, but what's wrong with it?
Why do they not complain when someone says "near" the speed of light, when the same math that allows you to say "near" will allow you to say things can go "faster" than light?
A physicists calculates the truck driver's speed by the "mile markers on the road" and compare them to the length of "truck", thereby taking into account the fact that the galaxy got shorter in the direction of travel the faster he went, and stretched back out as he slowed down. They will freely admit the truck driver traveled forward in time, so it is strange that they won't let him say "I traveled forward in time because I traveled faster than the speed of light".
This is why their are so many questions about "traveling faster than the speed of light" on Quora. The common man can sense something is not right with what they are hearing about light. The existence of a contradiction is easy to detect but harder to specifically identify. The common man is being told things can go "near" the speed of light, but nothing can go faster. The problem is not with the common man's intuition. The problem causing this question to constantly come up is because the physics terminology they are hearing is wrong.
Now I'll get off the beaten track: I think the underlying problem is that using the concept of speed in physics makes the equations more complicated. "Speed" uses 2 units (time and length) that are not independent of each other. Speed is unitless in relativity. It is a conversion factor from seconds to meters and vice versa by meters = i*c*seconds (see Einstein's "Relativity" appendix 2). "i" is the math concept "sqrt(-1)". By using this substitution, a simpler Euclidean space can be used to satisfy Occam's razor instead of having to use Minowski space. By using meters = i*c*seconds physics equations that use speed or acceleration get simpler by making plank units simpler. This is just my personal way of doing physics to remove speed from equations. This is by no means an "accepted" practice although it give the same answers, except a minus sign or "i" factor shows up sometime. For example, it gives E= -mc^2
Thursday, February 4, 2016
misc PD notes, CO2
=========
wellbutrin aka bupropion
it blocks uptake of dopamine and norepinephrine. 1 paper said it was weak on norepinephrine. seems like it is used a lot, but that it is also frequently associated with increased symptoms
downregulates BDNF possibly increasign risk of PD
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22507762
parkinsonism induced by it (no abstract in last 3)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1592841 (falling backwards)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17133932
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17534961
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19910737 (also dystonia)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8276742 (catatonia and delirium)
dopamine incerases creativity, norepinephrine decrease, but they think bupropion may maintain creativity
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21443820
decreases panic attack and compulsive behavior
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21412840
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21412840
want to use it for as 1st choice in PD depression
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20708340
Helps in PD
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6431314
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11086491
rasagiline and anti-depressants are not supposed to be combined, but this paper says they got good results with wellbutrin:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23346517
lack of desire improved in PD rats
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23621954
combination with rasagiline's cousin made more wellbutrin available
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22936314
========
HSP104 dis-aggregates a-Syn, but usually needs to collaborate with the Hsp110, Hsp70, Hsp40, and HSP26 chaperone system
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26747608 (full)
tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) converts tyrosine to L-DOPA that creates dopamine that creates norepiniphrine and enpinephrine (noradrenaline and adrenaline). Neuron-restrictive silencer factor (NRSF) blocks the expression of many neuronal genes. Trichostatin A (TSA) increases NSRF ability to upregulate TH and BDNF. TSA undoes epigentic methylation that can cause anxiety and depression in later life as a result of inadequate motherly touching in mice.
PD-only patients had more akinetic-rigid type Parkinsonism (p = 0.016), and their levodopa response was better than that of ET-PD patients (p = 0.017). Patients with ET-PD obtained significantly lower scores than those with pure ET on several cognitive tests, suggesting a prominent frontal-type cognitive dysfunction. In conclusion ET-PD patients differed from PD patients, showing more frequent familial tremor histories and lower levodopa responsiveness. This patient population also demonstrated more severe cognitive impairments than pure-ET patients. This result suggests that ET-PD patients are a subset of ET patients with more widespread neurodegeneration, which may indicate the presence of a syndrome that includes overlap between ET and PD.
Numerous drugs can aggravate ET, and alcohol consumption may alleviate it. Its etiology is unknown. Proven drug treatments are currently limited to propranolol and primidone
The two first-line agents in drug therapy for essential tremor are the nonselective beta-blocker propranolol (Inderal) and the antiepileptic primidone (Mysoline).
ET clinical picture does not appear to be me::
http://www.ccjm.org/index.php?id=107953&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=365121&cHash=1fb12024fc4b9b01f20537890f478004
Carotid artery stenosis has 2.4x PD risk
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22700356
Carotid stenosis in diabetic patients is associated with low levels of exercise.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26714500
Here's the idea: CO2 tank and mask at night to increase respiration. It appears 3% could be used indefinitely for the 7 hours of sleep and it moderately increases breathing. Unlike Hyperbaric oxygen that helped in 1 PD study, CO2 also dilates blood vessels in the brain, and maybe another reason exercise helps. I would first try 1% and 2%. Dependency and accidental death could result. Also, too much could cause my body to shift too much at night, seeking a better air supply.
closet that is 90"x100"x24"/39.4^3 = 3.88 m^3. 2% CO2 = 77 liters CO2 needed.
24.5 L/mole / 44 g CO2/mole CO2 = 0.57 L/g CO2
24.5 l/mole/ 28 g/mole CO = 0.875 l/g CO
24.5 l/mole/ 32 g/mole O2 = 0.77 l/g O2
24.5 l/mole / 16 g/mole methane = 1.53 l/g liquid methane.
77/0.57 = 136 g CO2 for 2% CO2
136 g CO2 / 2.6 g CO2 / g kerosene = 52 g light oil fuel (kerosene) (and fat lost during the night)
52 g *11.7 Whr/g kerosene and gasoline = 610 W for 1 hour
Methane, butane, and propane are 15 Whr/g liquid.
==========
Altitude verses tents: living in at 15000 ft is like 12% oxygen. 7000 feet is like 16%. OSHA require 19.5%, only 1.4% below normal because workers may be active and not acclimated and need to think clearly.
=====
5/8 wick burns 322 watts (1 ounce/hour, not 1/2). 7/8" burns 410 W.
Coleman lantern uses 157 g kerosene per hour, burning the brightest (low CO). Best idea might be to use its exhaust. Coleman dual fuel type is gasoline but it might have harmful chemicals coming off. Kerosene heater is designed to put off least CO.
Methane (natural gas), propane, and butane in home produce 1/3 the CO, 220 g/liter as liquid fuel instead of 630 g/liter distillate fuel in home, but they require one O2 for each CO2 produced. Methane CH4 exhausts O2 as 50% CO2, 50% H2O. Kerosene and gasoline produce 1/2 O2 for each CO2 (more C/H in it, 6 instead of 3). Kerosene: 52 g*0.630 mg CO/g * 0.875 L CO/g CO / 3880 L/closet = 7 ppm CO. 8 hrs of 50 ppm is max for no symptoms. Gasoline (as in coleman lantern) should be similar, but more CO (not blue flame), more flammable, and more toxicity(?). Coleman stove with gasoline or Coleman white gas produced 350 ppm in 5 minutes whereas kerosene was 1000 ppm in 4 minutes (0.4 m^3 box has 84 L of O2, 110 grams). They appear to be 10,000 BTU, about 21 g in 5 minutes (1.1 pints in 2 hours, confirmed also by BTUs and lamp comparison). 21 g requires 30 g O2, 28% of total. 400 ppm * 0.4/3.88 * 52/21= 101 ppm, cutting it close.But without a pot gave 10x less. Propane versions should have 1/3 as much. So coleman stove with gasoline or coleman fuel for 12 minuute is an option. NOx for kerosene can also exceed standards when heating unventilated rooms.
Butane and propane stoves seem safest, cheapest, and the used oxygen may improve red blood cell count. Butane and propane require a lot less in oxygen than methane, nearly as good as gasoline and kerosene. They say the stoves are 10,000 BTU/hr. 10,000 BTU/hr*1055 J/BTU / 3600 J/Whr / 610 Whr needed = 4.8 1/hr = 12.5 minutes for 3.88 m^3. Butane: 2% CO2 at a cost of 3.5% O2. PRopane: 2% CO2 at a cost of 3.33% O2 (like mile-high altitude). 52*11.7/15 = 40 grams
=======
100 W person for 7 hours uses about 260g CO2/kWh*0.7 kWh = 186 grams fuel
186 about 50% > 136 => After 7 hours breathing, CO2 3% higher while O2 is 3% lower.
=======
290 mL CO2/g baking soda. 77/0.290 = 260 g baking soda.
=======
250 ml O2/min at rest, 200 ml/min CO2
350 ml/min exercise, 400 ml/min CO2
==========
Need propane or natural gas heater: propane is 1/3 the cost of kerosene. Kerosene at lowes is 2x more than electricity. Cost appeared about the same: $0.035 per kWh.
After a day of work, I've identified a propane camping stove in a closet as the best thing for what I want to try. In my 3.88 m^3 closet, I need to use up 40 grams of propane to raise CO2 2% which will reduce O2 by 3.3%. It will take 25 minutes at the half power setting to minimize CO (5000 BTU/hr) which will be pretty warm. I'll watch it drop 40 grams on a small scale. 3.3% lower O2 is like training at 1 mile altitude, which is not my goal and against my purposes, but if it increases red blood cell count over time, all the better. I've already made the bed and sealed it for last night's sleeping and used 130 grams baking soda reacted with 300 g ascorbic acid. There may have been some noteworthy benefit. 6 hours in there at 100 W body metabolism will reduce O2 and raise CO2 by another 2% each, minus leakage. If I just used inflatables to occupy 2/3 of the closet, I might get the desired result (higher breathing rate in the last hours of sleep) from my own metabolic combustion. The lower O2 (at least if I'm acclimated) should not be a problem. Propane is best because it is 1/3 the CO poisoning compared to kerosene or gasoline. It has to be done without a pot or pan because they cool the flame off which produces 10x more CO. Supposedly, I would be exposed to only about 3 ppm CO where headache or nausea might start at 50 ppm in some people. I have a CO monitor. Exhausting into the closet could prevent the lower O2 problem, but I can't turn off the stove after I'm sealed in the closet.
A propane torch seems to burn pretty clean and I can get 10 days off 1 tank. A strong setting can do it in 20 minutes. It will not be as low in CO because the air source is not as good. People spend big bucks on altitude tents, so it's interesting and funny they may already have what's needed in their house.
=====
electrolysis did not work out too good:
2Na+ + 2HCO3- + H2O + 2e + -2e => CO2 anode + H2 cathode + 2OH- + Na2CO3 (washing soda)
2 e/CO2 * 136 g CO2/2% in closet * 1/44 moles/g * 6e23 CO2/mole * 1/6e18 A*s/e- * 1/3600 hr/s = 172 Amps for 1 hour.
=====
Baking soda heated to less than boiling drives off CO2 with washing soda as the residue, which is more alkaline. Only 1/2 moles of baking soda are converted to CO2 moles:
2NaHCO3=>Na2CO3 + H2O + CO2, so 145 cc CO2 per 1 gram baking soda.
In my test, heating it did not seem to drive off much, and it still required 2.5x more vitamin C. Also, the propane heater produced massive amounts of CO as evidence by all-yellow flame when I added the vitamin C.
=========
electrolysis to produce hydrogen gas.
answer to amazon kerosene heater question about ventilation
As long as the flame stay mostly blue, the carbon monoxide will not get harmfully high. It's not completely safe to have even low levels of carbon monoxide for 24 hr all winter, but before you feel a headache from carbon monoxide and before the carbon monoxide monitor goes off, the flame will start to turn yellow due to increased CO2 and decreased oxygen levels. About that time, your breathing will get heavier from the excess CO2 that causes your body to think it needs to breath more, and it will need to breath heavier because the oxygen will drop 2% or 3% while the CO2 rises to 2% which is the result of burning 1/4 gallon of kerosene in a 10'x10' bedroom that is completely sealed (like 1500 W electrical heater for 3 hours). So you'll feel the room is too stuffy and that your breathing is labored if the room is sealed too tightly. This high CO2 and low oxygen will simulate high-altitude training tents that are used for athletes to increase body's ability to carry oxygen. But natural gas should be used for this later purpose because it has 10x less carbon monoxide.
wellbutrin aka bupropion
it blocks uptake of dopamine and norepinephrine. 1 paper said it was weak on norepinephrine. seems like it is used a lot, but that it is also frequently associated with increased symptoms
downregulates BDNF possibly increasign risk of PD
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22507762
parkinsonism induced by it (no abstract in last 3)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1592841 (falling backwards)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17133932
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17534961
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19910737 (also dystonia)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8276742 (catatonia and delirium)
dopamine incerases creativity, norepinephrine decrease, but they think bupropion may maintain creativity
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21443820
decreases panic attack and compulsive behavior
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21412840
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21412840
want to use it for as 1st choice in PD depression
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20708340
Helps in PD
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6431314
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11086491
rasagiline and anti-depressants are not supposed to be combined, but this paper says they got good results with wellbutrin:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23346517
lack of desire improved in PD rats
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23621954
combination with rasagiline's cousin made more wellbutrin available
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22936314
========
HSP104 dis-aggregates a-Syn, but usually needs to collaborate with the Hsp110, Hsp70, Hsp40, and HSP26 chaperone system
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26747608 (full)
tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) converts tyrosine to L-DOPA that creates dopamine that creates norepiniphrine and enpinephrine (noradrenaline and adrenaline). Neuron-restrictive silencer factor (NRSF) blocks the expression of many neuronal genes. Trichostatin A (TSA) increases NSRF ability to upregulate TH and BDNF. TSA undoes epigentic methylation that can cause anxiety and depression in later life as a result of inadequate motherly touching in mice.
PD-only patients had more akinetic-rigid type Parkinsonism (p = 0.016), and their levodopa response was better than that of ET-PD patients (p = 0.017). Patients with ET-PD obtained significantly lower scores than those with pure ET on several cognitive tests, suggesting a prominent frontal-type cognitive dysfunction. In conclusion ET-PD patients differed from PD patients, showing more frequent familial tremor histories and lower levodopa responsiveness. This patient population also demonstrated more severe cognitive impairments than pure-ET patients. This result suggests that ET-PD patients are a subset of ET patients with more widespread neurodegeneration, which may indicate the presence of a syndrome that includes overlap between ET and PD.
Numerous drugs can aggravate ET, and alcohol consumption may alleviate it. Its etiology is unknown. Proven drug treatments are currently limited to propranolol and primidone
The two first-line agents in drug therapy for essential tremor are the nonselective beta-blocker propranolol (Inderal) and the antiepileptic primidone (Mysoline).
ET clinical picture does not appear to be me::
http://www.ccjm.org/index.php?id=107953&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=365121&cHash=1fb12024fc4b9b01f20537890f478004
Carotid artery stenosis has 2.4x PD risk
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22700356
Carotid stenosis in diabetic patients is associated with low levels of exercise.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26714500
Here's the idea: CO2 tank and mask at night to increase respiration. It appears 3% could be used indefinitely for the 7 hours of sleep and it moderately increases breathing. Unlike Hyperbaric oxygen that helped in 1 PD study, CO2 also dilates blood vessels in the brain, and maybe another reason exercise helps. I would first try 1% and 2%. Dependency and accidental death could result. Also, too much could cause my body to shift too much at night, seeking a better air supply.
closet that is 90"x100"x24"/39.4^3 = 3.88 m^3. 2% CO2 = 77 liters CO2 needed.
24.5 L/mole / 44 g CO2/mole CO2 = 0.57 L/g CO2
24.5 l/mole/ 28 g/mole CO = 0.875 l/g CO
24.5 l/mole/ 32 g/mole O2 = 0.77 l/g O2
24.5 l/mole / 16 g/mole methane = 1.53 l/g liquid methane.
77/0.57 = 136 g CO2 for 2% CO2
136 g CO2 / 2.6 g CO2 / g kerosene = 52 g light oil fuel (kerosene) (and fat lost during the night)
52 g *11.7 Whr/g kerosene and gasoline = 610 W for 1 hour
Methane, butane, and propane are 15 Whr/g liquid.
==========
Altitude verses tents: living in at 15000 ft is like 12% oxygen. 7000 feet is like 16%. OSHA require 19.5%, only 1.4% below normal because workers may be active and not acclimated and need to think clearly.
=====
5/8 wick burns 322 watts (1 ounce/hour, not 1/2). 7/8" burns 410 W.
Coleman lantern uses 157 g kerosene per hour, burning the brightest (low CO). Best idea might be to use its exhaust. Coleman dual fuel type is gasoline but it might have harmful chemicals coming off. Kerosene heater is designed to put off least CO.
Methane (natural gas), propane, and butane in home produce 1/3 the CO, 220 g/liter as liquid fuel instead of 630 g/liter distillate fuel in home, but they require one O2 for each CO2 produced. Methane CH4 exhausts O2 as 50% CO2, 50% H2O. Kerosene and gasoline produce 1/2 O2 for each CO2 (more C/H in it, 6 instead of 3). Kerosene: 52 g*0.630 mg CO/g * 0.875 L CO/g CO / 3880 L/closet = 7 ppm CO. 8 hrs of 50 ppm is max for no symptoms. Gasoline (as in coleman lantern) should be similar, but more CO (not blue flame), more flammable, and more toxicity(?). Coleman stove with gasoline or Coleman white gas produced 350 ppm in 5 minutes whereas kerosene was 1000 ppm in 4 minutes (0.4 m^3 box has 84 L of O2, 110 grams). They appear to be 10,000 BTU, about 21 g in 5 minutes (1.1 pints in 2 hours, confirmed also by BTUs and lamp comparison). 21 g requires 30 g O2, 28% of total. 400 ppm * 0.4/3.88 * 52/21= 101 ppm, cutting it close.But without a pot gave 10x less. Propane versions should have 1/3 as much. So coleman stove with gasoline or coleman fuel for 12 minuute is an option. NOx for kerosene can also exceed standards when heating unventilated rooms.
Butane and propane stoves seem safest, cheapest, and the used oxygen may improve red blood cell count. Butane and propane require a lot less in oxygen than methane, nearly as good as gasoline and kerosene. They say the stoves are 10,000 BTU/hr. 10,000 BTU/hr*1055 J/BTU / 3600 J/Whr / 610 Whr needed = 4.8 1/hr = 12.5 minutes for 3.88 m^3. Butane: 2% CO2 at a cost of 3.5% O2. PRopane: 2% CO2 at a cost of 3.33% O2 (like mile-high altitude). 52*11.7/15 = 40 grams
=======
100 W person for 7 hours uses about 260g CO2/kWh*0.7 kWh = 186 grams fuel
186 about 50% > 136 => After 7 hours breathing, CO2 3% higher while O2 is 3% lower.
=======
290 mL CO2/g baking soda. 77/0.290 = 260 g baking soda.
=======
250 ml O2/min at rest, 200 ml/min CO2
350 ml/min exercise, 400 ml/min CO2
==========
Need propane or natural gas heater: propane is 1/3 the cost of kerosene. Kerosene at lowes is 2x more than electricity. Cost appeared about the same: $0.035 per kWh.
After a day of work, I've identified a propane camping stove in a closet as the best thing for what I want to try. In my 3.88 m^3 closet, I need to use up 40 grams of propane to raise CO2 2% which will reduce O2 by 3.3%. It will take 25 minutes at the half power setting to minimize CO (5000 BTU/hr) which will be pretty warm. I'll watch it drop 40 grams on a small scale. 3.3% lower O2 is like training at 1 mile altitude, which is not my goal and against my purposes, but if it increases red blood cell count over time, all the better. I've already made the bed and sealed it for last night's sleeping and used 130 grams baking soda reacted with 300 g ascorbic acid. There may have been some noteworthy benefit. 6 hours in there at 100 W body metabolism will reduce O2 and raise CO2 by another 2% each, minus leakage. If I just used inflatables to occupy 2/3 of the closet, I might get the desired result (higher breathing rate in the last hours of sleep) from my own metabolic combustion. The lower O2 (at least if I'm acclimated) should not be a problem. Propane is best because it is 1/3 the CO poisoning compared to kerosene or gasoline. It has to be done without a pot or pan because they cool the flame off which produces 10x more CO. Supposedly, I would be exposed to only about 3 ppm CO where headache or nausea might start at 50 ppm in some people. I have a CO monitor. Exhausting into the closet could prevent the lower O2 problem, but I can't turn off the stove after I'm sealed in the closet.
A propane torch seems to burn pretty clean and I can get 10 days off 1 tank. A strong setting can do it in 20 minutes. It will not be as low in CO because the air source is not as good. People spend big bucks on altitude tents, so it's interesting and funny they may already have what's needed in their house.
=====
electrolysis did not work out too good:
2Na+ + 2HCO3- + H2O + 2e + -2e => CO2 anode + H2 cathode + 2OH- + Na2CO3 (washing soda)
2 e/CO2 * 136 g CO2/2% in closet * 1/44 moles/g * 6e23 CO2/mole * 1/6e18 A*s/e- * 1/3600 hr/s = 172 Amps for 1 hour.
=====
Baking soda heated to less than boiling drives off CO2 with washing soda as the residue, which is more alkaline. Only 1/2 moles of baking soda are converted to CO2 moles:
2NaHCO3=>Na2CO3 + H2O + CO2, so 145 cc CO2 per 1 gram baking soda.
In my test, heating it did not seem to drive off much, and it still required 2.5x more vitamin C. Also, the propane heater produced massive amounts of CO as evidence by all-yellow flame when I added the vitamin C.
=========
electrolysis to produce hydrogen gas.
For 1 gram baking soda and 0.7 gram salt: 0.29 liters at negative side of CO2 for baking soda or Cl2 for salt. Also 0.29 liters H2 at cathode (if all of is reacted). This requires 0.66 amps for 1 hour. The end product in the water for baking soda is washing soda which is a lot more alkaline and not safe.
Use a microwave transformer like the DIY spot welders to get high current and low voltage, with a 100 amp diode (or a full rectifier using 4 of them) to convert the AC to DC. So 120V*10amps coming into the transformer (1200 Watts) and 100 amps at 12 Volts on the output should get a lot done, about 100 grams of salt per hour producing 142 liters of H2 gas fo about $0.15*1.2 kWhr = .$0.20 of electricity and $50,000 medical bill for messing up.
-=====answer to amazon kerosene heater question about ventilation
As long as the flame stay mostly blue, the carbon monoxide will not get harmfully high. It's not completely safe to have even low levels of carbon monoxide for 24 hr all winter, but before you feel a headache from carbon monoxide and before the carbon monoxide monitor goes off, the flame will start to turn yellow due to increased CO2 and decreased oxygen levels. About that time, your breathing will get heavier from the excess CO2 that causes your body to think it needs to breath more, and it will need to breath heavier because the oxygen will drop 2% or 3% while the CO2 rises to 2% which is the result of burning 1/4 gallon of kerosene in a 10'x10' bedroom that is completely sealed (like 1500 W electrical heater for 3 hours). So you'll feel the room is too stuffy and that your breathing is labored if the room is sealed too tightly. This high CO2 and low oxygen will simulate high-altitude training tents that are used for athletes to increase body's ability to carry oxygen. But natural gas should be used for this later purpose because it has 10x less carbon monoxide.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)