Defense of Internal Combustion Engines

Introduction to this Post

This post is from a blog entry by “Laughing Eagle” comparing electric cars to existing vehicles with internal combustion engines (ICE).  Laughing Eagle argues persuasively that internal combustion is still ahead and not out of date at all.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Blog Post

From:   Laughing Eagle

Oct 2, 2018 at 7:54 pm

The fad may be electric cars but the internal combustion engine (ICE) has been reworked, because today a 4 cylinder engine is more efficient and powerful than the old 6 cylinder engines. With direct cylinder injection, 4 to 6 valves per cylinder instead of the old two, turbo-charging, multi-valve timing, combustion ratio variation, and even supercharging, the ICE has eliminated the old inefficiencies on mpg and power.

I believe it will be years until the electric cars can overtake the ICE with the new tech in the ICE. Tesla’s model S 0-60 in 2.8 seconds is behind Porsche 911GT2 at 2.7 seconds. And that Porsche engine will last beyond that electric engine. But many facets besides engine power translate to speed like the transmission and the rear end gear ratios and one cannot forget the suspension setup.

Todays big V-8’s can have over 700 hp with 500 lb-ft of torque via being normal aspirated or with a supercharger.

I know what a supercharger can do as I put one in a 1964 VW Bug which had governor on the transmission limiting you to a max of 72mph. Without the supercharger you had to be going down big hill to hit 72mph, but with the supercharger you could do 72 anytime you wanted.

Now I drive a 2015 Honda Accord 4 cylinder non turbo charged which can overtake all 4 cylinders of most cars, and it gets 40 mpg on the interstate and 30 mpg around town. Nobody builds a better small engine than Honda. I know I still have a 1987 Honda mower than runs fine and I live in Florida where you mow and mow.

If you think you can go 7500 miles between oil changes and keep that engine clean think again because even with these new synthetic oils, the engine fails, not because of oil breakdown, but because of carbon deposits caused by every combustion.

Changing oil every 5000 miles is the max unless most of your driving is on the interstate. I also use 6 months which ever comes first. Changing oil will prolong the life of engines and it is the cheapest in the long run unless you’re leasing, then let the next owner have the problems with all the computer sensors being lined with deposits making them ineffective or less sensitive. Remember the Fram commercial, pay me now or pay me later.

https://wolfstreet.com/2018/10/02/september-auto-sales-carmageddon-ford-gm/

Kavanaugh Supreme Court Nomination

President Donald Trump nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh to become an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States on July 9, 2018, filling the vacancy left by the retirement of Anthony Kennedy. When nominated, Kavanaugh was a sitting judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The Senate Judiciary Committee began Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing on September 4. During the confirmation process, Kavanaugh was accused of sexually assaulting Christine Blasey Ford thirty-six years prior, while they were both in high school in 1982. The Senate Judiciary Committee postponed its scheduled confirmation to allow both Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh to respond. In the interim, two other women (Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick) alleged separate instances of sexual assault. Kavanaugh categorically denied allegations made by Ford, Ramirez and Swetnick.

Both Kavanaugh and Blasey Ford were questioned by members of the Judiciary Committee and Arizona-based sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell on September 27. The following day, the Judiciary Committee voted 11–10 to send the nomination to the floor. Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and later the full Senate Judiciary Committee requested a week-long FBI supplemental background investigation into the sexual assault allegations.

Background

Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy (generally considered a moderate "swing" vote on the court) announced his retirement from the Supreme Court on June 27, 2018, after having served on the court for over 30 years. His resignation took effect on July 31, 2018. From 1993 to 1994, Kavanaugh served as a law clerk for Justice Kennedy.

Nomination to the Supreme Court

Kavanaugh was officially announced as the nominee for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States on July 9, 2018, selected as the Supreme Court nominee from among a list of "25 highly qualified potential nominees" considered by the Trump Administration. Reasons cited by President Trump for the nomination of Kavanaugh included his "impeccable credentials, unsurpassed qualifications, and a proven commitment to equal justice under the law" with the emphasis that "what matters is not a judge's political views, but whether they can set aside those views to do what the law and the Constitution require.”

Voting Alignment

In reference to Kavanaugh's voting alignment if confirmed, FiveThirtyEight used Lee Epstein et al.'s Judicial Common Space scores (which are not based on a judge's behavior, but rather the ideology scores of either home state senators or the appointing president) to find that Kavanaugh would likely be more conservative than Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, but less conservative than Justice Clarence Thomas, if placed on the Supreme Court. During the confirmation process, Senator Ted Cruz stated that Kavanaugh joined Judge Merrick Garland's (President Obama's Supreme Court pick) rulings on 28 out of 30 cases, and he joined his opinions in 27 out of 28 cases.

The Washington Post's statistical analysis estimated that the ideologies of most of Trump's announced candidates were "statistically indistinguishable" and placed Kavanaugh between Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito.

Senate Action on Cloture

For Kavanaugh to be confirmed, he needed to receive a majority vote in favor of confirmation from the full Senate. If the vote had been tied, Vice President Mike Pence would have cast the tie-breaking vote.

On October 5, the Senate voted 51-49 for cloture, advancing the nomination to a final floor vote on October 6. The vote was almost entirely along party lines, with the exception of Democrat Joe Manchin voting yes and Republican Lisa Murkowski voting no.

Full Senate Vote on Kavanaugh Nomination

The full Senate vote on the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh took place on October 6, 2018. Senator Steve Daines (R-MT) announced that he will not attend the vote, to be present instead at his daughter's wedding in Montana. Because of this, Lisa Murkowski agreed to pair her vote by voting "Present" on the nomination, while registering her opposition in the Congressional Record.  [Thus the nomination of Kavanaugh passed with a vote of 50 in favor and 48 opposed.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Kavanaugh_Supreme_Court_nomination

Powerball Jackpot Is Unlikely

17 things that are more likely to happen to you than winning the Powerball jackpot (which is one chance out of 292 million)

Being hit by a meteorite (one in 1.6 million)

Becoming a billionaire (one out of 409,000)

Dying in a plane crash (one in 20 million)

Being killed by hornets, wasps or bees (one in 54,093)

Being canonized as a saint (one in 20 million)

Getting your tax return audited (0.6% chance, about one in 160)

Becoming President of the United States (one in 32.6 million)

Being wrongfully convicted of a felony crime (0.027 percent)

Becoming a movie star (miserable odds but greater than winning at Powerball)

Having your identity stolen (6.64%)

Being killed by a shark (one in 3.7 million)

Becoming an astronaut trainee (less than one in 1,500)

Scoring a hole in one in golf (one in 2,500 for a pro, one in 12,500 for an amateur)

Going to the emergency room for a pogo stick related injury (one in 115,300)

Winning an Olympic Gold Medal (one in 662,000)

Dying from natural heat (one in 16,584)

Having conjoined twins (one in 200,000)

https://www.gobankingrates.com/making-money/wealth/things-more-likely-than-winning-lottery/?utm_source=zergnet.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_3355562

Computing Without a CPU

A new Brain-inspired Architecture Could Improve
how Computers Handle Data and Advance AI

From the American Institute of Physics – October 3, 2018 -- IBM researchers are developing a new computer architecture, better equipped to handle increased data loads from artificial intelligence. Their designs draw on concepts from the human brain and significantly outperform conventional computers in comparative studies. They report on their recent findings in the Journal of Applied Physics, from AIP Publishing.

Today's computers are built on the von Neumann architecture, developed in the 1940s. Von Neumann computing systems feature a central processor [CPU] that executes logic and arithmetic, a memory unit, storage, and input and output devices. Unlike the stovepipe components in conventional computers, the authors propose that brain-inspired computers could have coexisting processing and memory units.

Abu Sebastian, an author on the paper, explained that executing certain computational tasks in the computer's memory would increase the system's efficiency and save energy.

"If you look at human beings, we compute with 20 to 30 watts of power, whereas AI today is based on supercomputers which run on kilowatts or megawatts of power," Sebastian said. "In the brain, synapses are both computing and storing information. In a new architecture, going beyond von Neumann, memory has to play a more active role in computing."

The IBM team drew on three different levels of inspiration from the brain. The first level exploits a memory device's state dynamics to perform computational tasks in the memory itself, similar to how the brain's memory and processing are co-located. The second level draws on the brain's synaptic network structures as inspiration for arrays of phase change memory (PCM) devices to accelerate training for deep neural networks. Lastly, the dynamic and stochastic nature of neurons and synapses inspired the team to create a powerful computational substrate for spiking neural networks.

Phase change memory is a nanoscale memory device built from compounds of Ge [germanium], Te [tellurium,] and Sb [antimony] sandwiched between electrodes. These compounds exhibit different electrical properties depending on their atomic arrangement. For example, in a disordered phase, these materials exhibit high resistivity, whereas in a crystalline phase they show low resistivity.

By applying electrical pulses, the researchers modulated the ratio of material in the crystalline and the amorphous phases so the phase change memory devices could support a continuum of electrical resistance or conductance. This analog storage better resembles nonbinary, biological synapses and enables more information to be stored in a single nanoscale device.

Sebastian and his IBM colleagues have encountered surprising results in their comparative studies on the efficiency of these proposed systems. "We always expected these systems to be much better than conventional computing systems in some tasks, but we were surprised how much more efficient some of these approaches were."

Last year, they ran an unsupervised machine learning algorithm on a conventional computer and a prototype computational memory platform based on phase change memory devices. "We could achieve 200 times faster performance in the phase change memory computing systems as opposed to conventional computing systems." Sebastian said. "We always knew they would be efficient, but we didn't expect them to outperform by this much." The team continues to build prototype chips and systems based on brain-inspired concepts.

Story Source:

Materials provided by American Institute of Physics. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/10/181003162715.htm

Writ of Mandamus

Mandamus (Latin "we command") is a judicial remedy in the form of an order from a superior court  to any government, subordinate court, corporation, or public authority, to do (or forbear from doing) some specific act which that body is obliged under law to do (or refrain from doing), and which is in the nature of public duty, and in certain cases one of a statutory duty. It cannot be issued to compel an authority to do something against statutory provision. For example, it cannot be used to force a lower court to reject or authorize applications that have been made, but if the court refuses to rule one way or the other then a mandamus can be used to order the court to rule on the applications.

Mandamus may be a command to do an administrative action or not to take a particular action, and it is supplemented by legal rights. In the American legal system it must be a judicially enforceable and legally protected right before one suffering a grievance can ask for a mandamus. A person can be said to be aggrieved only when he or she is denied a legal right by someone who has a legal duty to do something and abstains from doing it.

Legal Requirements

The applicant pleading for the writ of mandamus to be enforced should be able to show that he or she has a legal right to compel the respondent to do or refrain from doing the specific act. The duty sought to be enforced must have two qualities: It must be a duty of public nature and the duty must be imperative and should not be discretionary. Furthermore, mandamus will typically not be granted if adequate relief can be obtained by some other means, such as appeal.

Purpose

The purpose of mandamus is to remedy defects of justice. It lies in the cases where there is a specific right but no specific legal remedy for enforcing that right. Generally, it is not available in anticipation of any injury except when the petitioner is likely to be affected by an official act in contravention of a statutory duty or where an illegal or unconstitutional order is made. The grant of mandamus is therefore an equitable remedy; a matter for the discretion of the court, the exercise of which is governed by well-settled principles.

Mandamus, being a discretionary remedy, the application for that must be made in good faith and not for indirect purposes. Acquiescence cannot, however, bar the issue of mandamus. The petitioner must, of course, satisfy the Court that he or she has the legal right to the performance of the legal duty as distinct from mere discretion of authority. A mandamus is normally issued when an officer or an authority by compulsion of statute is required to perform a duty and that duty, despite demand in writing, has not been performed. In no other case will a writ of mandamus issue unless it be to quash an illegal order.

Types of Mandamus

There are three kinds of mandamus:

1. Alternative mandamus: A mandamus issued upon the first application for relief, commanding the defendant either to perform the act demanded or to appear before the court at a specified time to show cause for not performing it.
2. Peremptory mandamus: An absolute and unqualified command to the defendant to do the act in question. It is issued when the defendant defaults on, or fails to show sufficient cause in answer to, an alternative mandamus.
3. Continuing mandamus: A mandamus issued to a lower authority in general public interest asking the officer or the authority to perform its tasks expeditiously for an unstipulated period of time for preventing miscarriage of justice.

Mandamus in the United States

In the administrative law context in the United States, the requirement that mandamus can be used only to compel a ministerial act has largely been abandoned. By statute or by judicial expansion of the writ of mandamus in most of the U.S. states, acts of administrative agencies are now subject to judicial review for abuse of discretion. Judicial review of agencies of the United States federal government, for abuse of discretion, is authorized by the U.S. Administrative Procedures Act.

Federal courts

The authority of the United States district courts (trial courts) to issue mandamus has been expressly abrogated by Rule 81(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but relief in the nature of mandamus can be had by other remedies provided for in the Rules, where provided by statute, or by use of the District Court's equitable powers.

In the context of mandamus from a United States Court of Appeals to a United States District Court, the Supreme Court has ruled that the appellate courts have discretion to issue mandamus to control an abuse of discretion by the lower court in unusual circumstances, where there is a compelling reason not to wait for an appeal from a final judgment. This discretion is exercised very sparingly. It is exercised with somewhat greater frequency, although still sparingly, in the context of discovery disputes involving privileged materials, since a district court order erroneously forcing the disclosure of privileged material may never be remediable through a later appeal. In the case In Re Electronic Privacy Information Center (2013), privacy advocates sought a writ of mandamus directly from the Supreme Court to halt the National Security Agency's bulk phone record collection program. The Supreme Court denied the petition. More recently, the Supreme Court sided with the US Government and issued a writ of mandamus related to discovery in a court case involving the rescinding of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy.

State courts

In some state court systems, mandamus has evolved into a general procedure for discretionary appeals from non-final trial court decisions. In some U.S. states, such as the courts of California, the writ is now called mandate instead of mandamus, and may be issued by any level of the state court system to any lower court or to any government official. It is still common for Californians to bring "taxpayer actions" against public officials for wasting public funds through mismanagement of a government agency, where the relief sought is a writ of mandate compelling the official to stop wasting money and fulfill his duty to protect the public fisc. The writ of mandate is also used in California for interlocutory appeals. In this context, the party seeking the writ is treated on appeal like a plaintiff, the trial court becomes the defendant, and the opponent is designated as the "real party in interest."

In Virginia, the Supreme Court has "original jurisdiction" under the state constitution for mandamus involving the Virginia courts.

Elsewhere, including the Courts of New York, have replaced mandamus (as well as the other prerogative writs) with statutory procedures. In New York, this is known as an Article 78 review after the civil procedure law provision that created the relevant procedure. In still other states, such as Illinois, the state court of last resort has original jurisdiction in mandamus actions.

In North Carolina state courts, mandamus is authorized as one of the Extraordinary Writs, under Rule 22 of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. The writ of mandamus may be issued in instances where, for instance, the lower court fails to timely issue a written order after rendition (thus precluding both the possibility of an appeal or enforcement of the rendition and leaving the litigants in limbo). The North Carolina Court of Appeals has spoken on the possible course of action in such situations, and confirmed that petitioning for a writ of mandamus is the only available route. McKyer v. McKyer, 202 N.C.App. 771 at *4 (2010) (unpublished) In McKyer, the lawyer who was unable to persuade the trial court judge to enter an order for about a year, tried to remedy the problem by asking the trial court judge to hold another hearing. Disapproving of the attempted resolution via a new hearing, the Court of Appeals, citing to the Supreme Court case In re T.H.T explained that a party seeking recourse where the trial court has not entered its orders timely should petition for writ of mandamus. Similarly, the writ may issue where the trial court fails or refuses to timely dispose with the litigants' business (for instance, if the judge refuses to hear a case). In North Carolina, as elsewhere, the writ is an action against the official, meaning that the petition must be styled "In RE Public Figure X" or "In RE Judge Y." Thus, a mandamus petition not only brings the strife of optically making the officer or judge the defendant, but also in theory requires the official / judge to respond "within ten days" "with supporting affidavits." Curiously, Rule 22(c) provides that "any party" may respond to the petition for writ. The North Carolina Court of Appeals has interpreted this to mean that where, for instance, one litigant demands that the judge enter a previously rendered order, the other litigant in the same case is free to respond instead of (or in addition to) the judge that presides over both of the litigants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandamus

Six Prerogative Writs

A prerogative writ is a writ (official order) directing the behavior of another arm of government, such as an agency, official, or other court. It was originally available only to the Crown under English law, and reflected the discretionary prerogative and extraordinary power of the monarch. The term may be considered antiquated, and the traditional six comprising writs may also be identified as an extraordinary writ or extraordinary remedy.

Six writs are traditionally classified as prerogative writs:

• certiorari, an order by a higher court directing a lower court to send the record in a given case for review;
• habeas corpus, a demand that a prisoner be taken before the court to determine whether there is lawful authority to detain the person;
• mandamus, an order issued by a higher court to compel or to direct a lower court or a government officer to perform mandatory duties correctly;
• prohibition, directing a subordinate to stop doing something the law prohibits;
• procedendo, to send a case from an appellate court to a lower court with an order to proceed to judgment;
• quo warranto, requiring a person to show by what authority they exercise a power.

Additionally, scire facias, one of the extraordinary writs, was once known as a prerogative writ.

Prerogative Writs in the United States

In the United States federal court system, the issuance of writs is authorized by U.S. Code, Title 28, Section 1651. The language of the statute was left deliberately vague in order to allow the courts flexibility in determining what writs are necessary "in aid of their jurisdiction". Use of writs at the trial court level has been greatly curtailed by the adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and its state court counterparts, which specify that there is "one form of action".

Nevertheless, the prudent litigator should familiarize himself or herself with the availability of writs in the jurisdiction in which he or she is admitted to practice.

The Supreme Court of the United States grants certiorari, while most state supreme courts grant review.

Mandamus has been replaced in the United States district courts and many state trial courts by injunction. In the federal system, it is generally available only to the federal courts of appeals, which issue writs of mandamus to lower courts and administrative hearing panels, while some state systems still allow trial courts to issue writs of mandamus or mandate directly to government officials.

Prohibition is also generally limited to appellate courts, who use it to prevent lower courts from exceeding their jurisdiction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prerogative_writ

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Footnote by the Blog Author

Tomorrow’s post will deal with writs of mandamus specifically.

Better Solar Cells

Perovskite Solar Cells Leap
Towards Commercialization

Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology – September 27, 2018 -- Solar energy has long been considered the most sustainable option for replacing our dependence on fossil fuels, but technologies for converting solar energy into electricity must be both efficient and inexpensive.

Scientists from the Energy Materials and Surface Sciences Unit at the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (OIST) believe they’ve found a winning formula in a new method to fabricate low-cost high-efficiency solar cells. Prof. Yabing Qi and his team from OIST in collaboration with Prof. Shengzhong Liu from Shaanxi Normal University, China, developed the cells using the materials and compounds that mimic the crystalline structure of the naturally occurring mineral perovskite. They describe their technique in a study published in the journal Nature Communications.

In what Prof. Qi refers to as “the golden triangle,” solar cell technologies need to fulfill three conditions to be worth commercializing: their conversion rate of sunlight into electricity must be high, they must be inexpensive to produce, and they must have a long lifespan. Today, most commercial solar cells are made from crystalline silicon, which has a relatively high efficiency of around 22%. Though silicon, the raw material for these solar cells, is abundant, processing it tends to be complex and shoots up the manufacturing costs, making the finished product expensive.

Perovskite offers a more affordable solution, Prof. Qi says. Perovskite was first used to make solar cells in 2009 by Prof. Tsutomu Miyasaka’s research team at Toin University of Yokohama, Japan, and since then it has been rapidly gaining importance. “Research on perovskite cells is very promising. In only nine years, the efficiency of these cells went from 3.8 % to 23.3%. Other technologies have taken over 30 years of research to reach the same level,” explains Prof. Qi. The fabrication method he and his research team have developed produces perovskite solar cells with an efficiency comparable to crystalline silicon cells, but it is potentially much cheaper than making silicon solar cells.

To make the new cells, the researchers coated transparent conductive substrates with perovskite films that absorb sunlight very efficiently. They used a gas-solid reaction-based technique in which the substrate is first coated with a layer of hydrogen lead triiodide incorporated with a small amount of chlorine ions and methylamine gas – allowing them to reproducibly make large uniform panels, each consisting of multiple solar cells.

In developing the method, the scientists realized that making the perovskite layer 1 micron thick increased the working life of the solar cell significantly. “The solar cells are almost unchanged after working for 800 hours,” says Dr. Zonghao Liu, a postdoctoral scholar in Prof. Qi’s research unit at OIST and the first author of the study. In addition, a thicker coating not only boosted the stability of the solar cells but also facilitated the fabrication processes, thereby lowering its production costs. “The thicker absorber layer ensures good reproducibility of solar cell fabrication, which is a key advantage for mass manufacturing in the realistic industrial-scale setting,” says Dr. Liu.

The big challenge Prof. Qi and his team now face is in increasing the size of their newly designed solar cell from the 0.1 mm2 sized prototype to large commercial-sized panels that can be several feet long. This is where the industry can help. “There exists a large gap between the findings in lab and reality, and the industry is not always ready to cover this entire gap by itself. So, the researchers need to take one more necessary step beyond their labs and meet the industry half-way,” says Prof. Qi.

To take that step, Prof. Qi and team received a generous grant from OIST’s Technology Development and Innovation Center, under their Proof-of-Concept Program. With that funding, the team has built a working model of their new perovskite solar modules consisting of multiple solar cells on 5cm × 5cm substrates, with an active area of 12 cm2- much bigger than their experimental prototype but smaller than what is required for commercial purposes. Although the process of upscaling has reduced the efficiency of the cells from 20% to 15%, the researchers are optimistic that they will be able to improve the way they work in the coming years and successfully commercialize their use.

https://www.oist.jp/news-center/news/2018/9/27/perovskite-solar-cells-leap-toward-commercialization