• 0 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: October 24th, 2023

help-circle


  • Compared to fossil fuels I tend to prefer nuclear as well, because even though mining uranium has quite some ecological impact including emitting carbon emissions, running a nuclear power plant doesn’t have carbon emissions and that’s important.
    What worries me is that there are nuclear power plants around the world and despite the first nuclear power plant having been built 70 years ago, not a single ultimate disposal place for the radioactive waste has been found/created.
    Having “cheap” electric energy for 3-4 generations and putting a burden on the next 40,000 generations just does sound like a bad deal to me.
    Until we have more wind and hydro, keeping nuclear running might be a price we have to pay.
    Not being able to dispose of some more (thousands of) tons of radioactive waste is making the problem only quantitatively worse and not qualitatively.









  • Your understanding is correct.
    Relativistic mass increases the faster the moving object gets. That in turn means more energy is required to accelerate an object the closer it gets to the speed of light.

    Fun fact: the speed of light is not as absolute as it might seem when looking at relativistic effects. In media with a refraction index above 1 (only perfect vacuum has a refractiom index of 1), the speed of light equals 1/(refraction index).
    For light moving in water that results in a speed of light of around 3/4 the speed of light in vacuum.