Top products from r/Lightbulb

We found 24 product mentions on r/Lightbulb. We ranked the 106 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/Lightbulb:

u/rubiksplanet · 1 pointr/Lightbulb

Part two of two!

>How can individuals produce fuel from sunlight and waste in their immediate vicinity?
>>They can't.

Moonbuggy! For one so obviously smart you disappoint me! What is photosynthesis? It's the creation of sugar from atmospheric carbon using energy from sunlight. The study of solar fuels is BIG business. There are huge efforts, commercial and academic, to develop a solar fuel methodology. If successful then it will be possible to create solar fuels pretty much anywhere, in the same way that plants can generate fuel wherever they grow.

Here's a starter for ten:

The subject of metabolic engineering and synthetic biology is a subject close to my heart and I am indeed writing a book based in part on my own professional research on the subject. In a nutshell: biology is capable of manufacturing a wide range of materials locally. By harnessing the power of bacteria/algae/fungus to perform chemistry it ought to be possible to manufacture almost any substance anywhere. Light energy is ubiquitous and as long as there is an appropriate feedstock of material (such as sewage, soil or atmosphere) then we can indeed harness biology to perform complex synthesis anywhere on Earth.

Indeed the UK has invested heavily in Synthetic biology, as has the US.

However, I admit that there are practical difficulties in scaling such technology up to the point where every domestic household is capable of manufacturing a litre of rocket fuel and passing it over to the Spacehenge Committee. But, in principle at least, it may be possible.

As you say, the main cost in the Spacehenge program would be rocket fuel.

> Why would it be carbon free? Whatever materials that are laying around in the immediate vicinity will likely have carbon in them.

I didn't say it would be carbon free! I said it would be carbon neutral. i.e. it absorbs as much CO2 from atmosphere as is eventually released. The principle source of carbon for the growth of plants is atmospheric carbon. So in fact the production of vast quantities of solar fuel could act as a sink for atmospheric carbon dioxide, if the right synthesis pathways could be found.

However, you did force me to learn something here! I looked up the principle components of rocket fuel and it seems that Carbon is not one of the main ingredients! (only in one: polybutadiene)

However, hydrogen is! So I'm envisaging something like the Krebbs cycle where a domestic site benefits from the production of a solar fuel from atmospheric carbon and a waste product of this acts as a feedstock for a rocket fuel production facility. Such an approach would sidestep some safety concerns - some of the compounds used as rocket propellants are quite nasty. However, it may be possible to figure out a synthesis route where solar chemical energy could be stored locally by domestic households and shipped as an inert substance to a local processing facility that produced something like hydrazine or hydrogen peroxide as a by product for rocket fuel, using the domestically produced intermediate as an energy source. Ultimately the energy incident on the households would end up propelling rockets into space.

I stress the word: maybe.

The only requirement here is that some expensive part of the process would have to be performed by local labour across the world as a means for people to contribute to the project. By sinking CO2 from the atmosphere in this process the entire programme could be made carbon neutral, with the carbon itself decoupled from the rocket fuel component. Some highly non-trivial metabolic engineering required to achieve all this.

>That's one of the longest stretches of logic I've ever seen used to find a point to support an argument

Thank you! :D I've been thinking about many of the background ideas for a long time!

>Backing up a highly dubious idea with magical thinking doesn't really help.

Perhaps it seems like magic to one who is less familiar with metabolism and biophysics and the principles of the circular economy as well as how things like nanotechnology, synthetic biology and additive manufacturing are going to combine in the future to form the backbone of our manufacturing capability.

Perhaps the key assumption I have made is that future human economies will be built on the principle of the circular economy in which companies are trading waste so there are zero emissions. Such an economy requires a ubiquitous level of control over chemistry that is on a par with the synthesis capabilities of biology. I merely leveraged the imagined existence of such an infrastructure so as to create a route for every human to contribute a litre of rocket fuel using their spare production capacity. (7 billion litres? is that enough to move an asteroid into orbit??)

>Honestly, your whole comment is you just making things up and then stacking layer upon layer until you have a glorious pile of nonsense.

Hopefully, I have shown that some of the layers in themselves are not entirely nonsense! Their juxtaposition may well be and so I will admit that there may be one or two holes ;P.

I will also admit that the scale of the project is inspired by reading a book called Seveneves by Neal Stephenson in which asteroids are used a lot to build orbital platforms visible from Earth.

Really the Spacehenge project is quite simple in its inception.

  1. Key idea to capture imagination and act as a focus.
  2. Discussion about principles that are common to all humans.
  3. Find a way for people to contribute materially if support emerges for building the sculptures.

  4. and 2) can be conducted without sending a single rocket into space!

  5. the project won't succeed if there isn't a way to achieve mass buy in.
    I have some questions for you:

    If an object the size of an asteroid were placed in orbit about the Earth would it be visible? Putting it into a highly inclined polar orbit would be extremely expensive. How much fuel would it take and how big would the asteroid have to be to be visible from Earth at what altitude?

    Placing a number of such asteroids in orbit, to mine them, would have tremendous commercial value. The freedom of the low gravity conditions on the asteroids might enable some interesting designs for the mines.

    A sculptor takes a large piece of rock and carves an impressive shape into it. Why not take a large piece of rock in orbit and chisel away material such that what is left is pretty to look at and represents some cultural notion that is interesting?

    Please also remember that coming up with crazy ideas and seeing where it goes and what other ideas it spawns is a hobby of mine to keep myself amused! It is a form of entertainment as much as anything.

    What do you think? In Kerbal space program I move asteroids all the time! :D
u/JacobHolmescst · 4 pointsr/Lightbulb

give this book a read.

honestly I am just starting to try it out too, so I don't know all the answers.

but yeah, a provisional sounds like a good place to start

u/mynameisalso · 6 pointsr/Lightbulb

This isn't exactly what you wanted. But is an amazing set of books on how to build your own fully functional machine shop from scrap. This guy does his own castings from scraps then builds that into a lathe, and other equipment. It's really amazing.

u/ydnab2 · 0 pointsr/Lightbulb

50 count COGO Caffeinated Hot Chocolate on Amazon

  • $30 + $12 shipping
  • ~$0.84 per 1 oz pouch, almost 100 mg of caffeine per pouch (add more chocolate or a spoon of Nutella if desired)
  • Shipping costs decrease per unit, the more you buy

    Here's an article about the CEO who likes to do exactly the thing you want to accomplish: adding caffeine to "non-traditional" foodstuffs.


    Side note: I just added this to my Amazon wish list because I intend to buy some when I have a bit of extra cash (hopefully in the next week or so). I'm like you, coffee just isn't my bag, and I'd love to have an alternative. ThinkGeek used to have an arsenal of caffeinated products, but that seems to have dwindled in the last few years. Probably due to excessive prices.
u/drMorkson · 1 pointr/Lightbulb

It's a miniseries by HBO IMDb here it based on a real story about a Rolling Stone Magazine reporter who goes with the First Reconnaissance Battalion of the US Marines while they invade Iraq.

And it is one of my favourite TV series. I hope you have fun watching it.

u/bobotwf · 4 pointsr/Lightbulb

But I think it would be cool if it softened the butter with a heater. You'd make a fortune selling the butter sticks.

u/ManOfHart · 1 pointr/Lightbulb

Hey, I did a search, and this device converts the engines power into power for a popcorn maker that can plug into your 12 volt power source.

u/romulusnr · 5 pointsr/Lightbulb

There's a difference between open source and an editing free-for-all. Good, large open source projects have maintainers and approvers. Open source doesn't mean everyone gets to fuck with it willy nilly by the minute. It means if someone doesn't like the main version, they can copy it and make their own from it.

You could of course do exactly this -- and of course, some have -- with any book older than 90 years or so.

u/MagicFritz · 1 pointr/Lightbulb

or use clapping

but investing in that is probably stupid because when you pay $10 per outlet you could just upgrade to full home automation anyway

u/auryn0151 · 2 pointsr/Lightbulb

>and therefore able to make perfect decisions) you really are not...The fact is that the world is very complicated and that is why we vote for a government and set general (but not specific) policy through our votes.

I know you said "general" but what makes all of these people without the ability to make perfect decisions (which politicians can't make either) suitable for voting for anyone? Democracy is so limited because there is no cost-benefit to the amount of time it takes for the average person to become knowledgeable on: domestic policy, foreign policy, fiscal policy, monetary policy, medicine, healthcare, education, etc...that's why there are so many single issue voters or people who just pull the lever for their party.

>There is a reason that incumbents get re-elected, they are representing their constituents.

Yeah, no one ever voted for the D because they didn't want the R. People vote for the lesser evil ALL THE TIME.

>but what do you do when each product is released untested and causes harm.

I think you'd agree that most people want the product they buy to be safe. Therefore, there is a market for testing, and therefore a business can fill that need. If you are worried about reputation or the rating companies being bought and paid for, consider how many millions of pounds of tainted meat the FDA approves for sale every year. Consider how many drugs the FDA fails to approve, and the millions of people who die as a result even though these drugs are already on the market in Europe and elsewhere. Also, expecting the world to revert to an earlier stage because you privatize some of it's roles is just silly.

>but what is the alternative?

Stop trying to get everyone to work together and agree on things! It's such a foolish notion. Institute private property and polycentric legal systems. Let people get what they want without having to pay for the things they don't. It's staggering simple and doesn't rely on the violence of government to happen. The Machinery of Freedom by David Friedman is the book you want to read.

> I'd love to see a citation.

It's in the Census data.

>If you think that government is wasting money then get involved.

You really are continuing to miss the point. I don't want there to BE POLITICS. I don't want parties, and I don't want voting. I don't want there to be any compulsory mechanism whereby I face violence and a metal cage if I don't want to monetarily support a war. If you think I should run for office to try to change this, consider how well you think me joining the mafia and trying to get them out of the prostitution and gambling business would go. Spoiler, it wouldn't.