Tesla, the Car, Takes a Step in the Right Direction

Tesla ‘superchargers’ up the ante for green technologies

Constructing green charging stations is a step in the right direction, but this is a hard problem. I think one of the problems is that we don’t appreciate the scale of the problem of refueling infrastructure. Part of this is because there’s been a century of build-out for support of internal combustion engines, and this is an attempt to hit a critical mass in a much shorter time.

The Tesla supercharger stations have a transfer capacity of 100 kW and shoot for a 30 minute turnaround, which is supposed to provide 3 hours of driving. That’s 180 MJ of energy (50 kWh). How does it compare to gasoline? Gas contains around 132 MJ per gallon, and the EPA allows gasoline pumps to transfer no more than 10 gallons per minute, which gives us a transfer rate of 22 MegaWatts, though actual pumping speeds, and thus rates, are likely somewhat smaller. Still, 10-15 MW is a lot of power, and that’s what you’re transferring when you fill your tank.

One thing that electric cars have going for them is that they are significantly more efficient than gasoline — there’s an inherently higher efficiency and technology like regenerative braking, plus the ability to just turn off rather than idling. Overall, electric cars are around 5x as efficient as gasoline-powered vehicles. Good thing, too, because otherwise we’d have close to a 1:1 charge:travel time, and nobody is going to put up with that.

So we can fill up a tank of gas in just a couple of minutes, and it takes more than an order of magnitude longer for electric, for a more limited range. Let’s look at this from another perspective: waiting for a space to clear at a gas station is annoying even when it’s a few minutes, so waiting for a fill-up that takes 30 is probably a nonstarter. Which means that you are going to need proportionally more fill-up bays at each station, relative to the number of cars on the road. Right now that capacity is not a problem, with so few cars, but it’s an obstacle to wider adoption.

If you have a station capable of charging up multiple cars, you need to be able to deliver the power. For every 10 cars at once that means a MegaWatt of electricity. Perhaps that remains constant — if you can cut the charging time in half you deliver twice the power but don’t need as many charging stations, and you won’t be operating at peak capacity, so that doesn’t mean you need 1 MW coming in — you can store electricity when you have lower demand. But you have to generate all that electricity from solar, though you at least have the advantage of staying DC to charge up a car — no inverter losses as you’d have for a home system running your 60Hz loads. But how many cars are you going to handle? 100 a day? That’s 5000 kWh, and solar might generate 5-10 kWh/m^2 each day, (or even less) depending on location and time of year. That’s a 1000 m^2 solar array for the smaller value, and you probably need more in case the weather is bad for more than a day lest you tell your customers “We’re out of sun” very often. If you’re out, they are stranded, so I imagine there will be emergency generators (running on biodiesel, presumably). The array size may not be a problem for stations away from cities. You have the space, and don’t need to have a grid connection, so you are freer to put these where you want. In more occupied space, you’d tap into the grid if you needed to, though that’s not “green” and defeats (much of) the purpose of having an electric car. But being stranded is not going to be an option.

Interfering With Art

Applied physics as art

For centuries it was thought that thin-film interference effects, such as those that cause oily pavements to reflect a rainbow of swirling colors, could not occur in opaque materials. Harvard physicists have now discovered that even very “lossy” thin films, if atomically thin, can be tailored to reflect a particular range of dramatic and vivid colors.

“… In this particular case there was almost a bias among engineers that if you’re using interference, the waves have to bounce many times, so the material had better be transparent. What Mikhail’s done—and it’s admittedly simple to calculate—is to show that if you use a light-absorbing film like germanium, much thinner than the wavelength of light, then you can still see large interference effects.”

The Beginning of Quantum Theory

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

A point of clarification: when the narrator says that the optimal temperature of a light bulb is 3200 K, where “most of the energy is emitted as visible waves”, that’s not really true, though what Planck originally calculated may have been for the peak visible emission without significant UV, which is what is implied. The range from 400 nm to 700 nm (i.e. the visible spectrum) represents only about 10% of the emitted energy of a blackbody, and for tungsten-filament bulbs (whose emissivity, or how much it acts like a blackbody) varies with wavelength, the efficiency is lower. You can get a higher efficiency at higher temperatures, but tungsten melts at just under 3700 K, so heating it up more is a problem — it gives off more UV and it melts. There’s also the desire to have the spectrum match the response of the human eye, which is more than simply emitting a lot of light in the visible range.

I Wish That Physics Guy Would Stop Telling Me What I Can't Do

Can we build a more efficient airplane? Not really, says physics.

As a plane hurtles through the air, it carves out a tube of air, much of which is deflected downwards by the wings. Throw down enough air fast enough, and you can stay afloat, just as the downwards thrust of a rocket pushes it up. The key is that you have to throw down a lot of air (like a glider or an albatross), or throw it down really fast (like a helicopter or a hummingbird).

"Women's Work"

Why the First Laptop Had Such a Hard Time Catching On (Hint: Sexism)

Interesting observation why businessmen weren’t on the laptop bandwagon early on:

Though Hawkins doesn’t quite say it. There is a distinct gendered component to this discomfort. Typing was women’s work and these business people, born in the 1930s and 1940s, didn’t scrap their way up the bureaucracy to be relegated to the very secretarial work they’d been devaluing all along.

Because — and here comes the psychological reason — they were not good at the work that their female employees had been doing. And that made them feel bad.

Interaction and the Single Photon

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

A look at the cavity quantum electrodynamics work that Serge Haroche pioneered. Dave Winelend, the other physics Nobel winner, does investigations using ion traps.

There’s a number of short videos with Wineland done by the Institute for Quantum Computing — From Atomic Clocks to Ion Traps: David Wineland at IQC

And Chad has a summary up at Uncertain Principles: What’s So Interesting About Single Quantum Systems? Physics Nobel 2012

This is Not Okay

Hey, Physics & Astronomy Professors? THIS IS NOT OKAY!

I recognized long ago that it’s important to have a full life that includes a lot more than just my scientific interests for my physical and mental health and well-being. Which is why I’m absolutely livid over this letter, circulated in a top astronomy department (which — I cannot prove — but I believe I once worked at), reproduced in its entirety, with my commentary, below.

I routinely worked >60-hour weeks in grad school, or at least I was at school for at least 60 hours a week — there was always some late-night decompression (hall golf or some game on the computer). In at 11 and leave for home after midnight was routine for the lab, with breaks for meals, and then additional time the weekends. (I did a few 80+ hour stints as a postdoc at TRIUMF, because when you have beam time, you run the experiment 24/7.) I also got the “this isn’t a 40-hour a week job” lecture once, during a rough patch when I was “only” putting in about that amount. But I also got time to myself to have a little bit of a life — limited to what you might have on a grad student stipend. This letter is over the line, unless the purpose is to drive people entirely from the field.

I'm With Stupid

Jurassic Park Impossible Because of Stupid Laws of Physics

It might be odd to think of DNA having a half-life, as it’s usually associated with radioactive material — but as it measures the time taken for half of something to decay, it makes sense to talk about old samples of DNA in the same way. For example, uranium-235, the fissile material that can be used in nuclear power plants (and nuclear weapons), has a half-life of 703.8 million years. DNA, by comparison, doesn’t fare so well — according to a study of 158 samples of moa bones between 500 and 6,000 years old, DNA appears to have a half-life of around 521 years.

Actually, anything driven by a simple probability is going to behave this way, where the rate of loss depends on how much you have. There are biological half-lives for some substances you ingest, which tells you how long it will take to metabolize or excrete that substance.