per day though. I think others are right that it has applications in space. going with the butter example, 5 people on a year long mission is almost 11kg you don't have to bring up to space.
on an environmental perspective, if applied to everyone, its almost half a quadrillion kJ removed a year, plus supply chain logistics, waste, packaging,
I still think its probably a ridiculous pipedream, but even pipedreams are meant to be dreamt.
It's still $55k, that could be used somewhere else! Assuming the $5k/kg cost of getting something into LEO. Actual cost is even higher because more delta V is required to get off LEO.
I have this little book that I cannot find right now that is pretty explicitly that. just a little math symbol dictionary. its small enough to fit in a pocket and was invaluable all through college.
hey this might be a stupid detail in implementation, but if the poisson simulation of arrival and completion are started cold, then random assignment of events could assign a completion before an arrival, or there could be more completions than arrivals? Arrivals should always be greater or equal to completions?
Edit: I remembered by stats class. merging poisson distributions requires Independent processes. since start and completion are dependent, its not mathematically valid.
you go to school for it. Stats, applied mathematics, operations research, industrial engineering.
I went for industrial engineering. we learned the math as pure math, then the math as free language problems, then how to identify and collect data to identify their attributes, then simulate and verify those processes, then test for variations in the underlying assumptions of those processes.
They never really did teach me to code well in a language that was useful, I had to pick that one up myself.
my family has been getting into this very seriously in the last few years. There are several very serious challenges to the adoption of regenerative farming.
1. most farmers are stubborn and OLD
2. most of the industrial equipment is not meant for regenerative practices meaning many farmers simply can't afford to switch technologies
3. regenerative farming takes time & there simply isn't enough expertise out there
4. agricultural land shrinks every year. EVERY year. new farms are harder and harder to start & we really cannot afford to dip our food supply
5. Economically, the government has a very strong interest in keeping food cheap. Hungry people have a tendency to overthrow governments. farming has extremely thin margins.
6. There is a lot of funding in the form of grants and programs to encourage growth, but it means most farmers need to become grant writers. Large scale farms now have professional grant writers, smaller farms where the regenerative practices might have the most impact are having a difficult time accessing these programs.
7. Carharts are fashionable and really expensive. My dad found my first carhart on the side of the road with treadmarks across it and I got made fun of for it. Give me back my carharts.
Here are some of the things that are really helping with these problems though:
1. most farmers are really stubborn and will push through problems because its just work
2. Agritourism is bringing in a lot of renewed interested in farming & money.
3. Food chain issues (looking at you boarshead & mcdonalds) is bring a renewed interest in buying local.
4. Regenerative farming simply makes better food. Seriously, I cannot eat grocery store pork or chicken. The meat looks and tastes different.
5. Ignoring no-till techniques, there are techniques that can be started at a low cost for small scale farms. Chicken tractors, rotational grazing, soil health programs, etc. My family has been doing chicken tractors for chickens and turkey for personal consumption. Its been pretty easy for 1-2 person to raise 1500+lbs of meat with only about an hour of work a day. The only labor intensive day is harvesting and we've really gotten it streamlined. Its also eliminated the need for fertilizing or aerating the area they are run in.
6. I've noticed its really bonding family farms together and bringing in younger farmers in with a sense of ownership and purpose
Thanks for sharing all these reflections on the topic. Regarding Carhartts, I can really recommend Super Casuals, which sells Carhartt factory seconds: https://www.supercasuals.com/category.cfm/449
They're stamped "IRR" on the inside... but that's more subtle than tread marks XD I usually order several sizes of what I'm interested in and send most of them back.
> the government has a very strong interest in keeping food cheap
I'd go further. Governments and society want to overproduce food for resiliency. Markets aim for efficiency, so you need some amount of subsidies for production.
> Food chain issues (looking at you boarshead & mcdonalds) is bring a renewed interest in buying local
> for corn, circa 40% is used to feed livestock and 35% for ethanol production. there is very little human consumption.
Good luck with getting Americans to pay more for and/or eat less meat.
We’re practically addicted to eating meat in some form at every meal. Not to mention the weird group of folks that have tied eating meat to masculinity.
While a good idea, a lot more than zoning needs to be fixed.
Fire codes requiring two stairways have the unintended effect of making 4 bedroom apartments impossible to build and so in turn push anyone who wants just a little more space to single family houses. Those same fire codes have prevented a lot of deaths, and I've never seen a property study on if we can really get rid of them (everyone proposing it points to other countries without those code having lower fire deaths - but they are comparing overall rates including old buildings and lots of different construction styles - so I'm not sure if it something we can safely get rid of in the US context)
If we don't also build great mass transit traffic will get worse - sprawl is a solution to heavy traffic (not a great solution but it is one).
Most places in the US with high density are friendly to specific life styles. They have great bar scenes, theater, live music, arts (and others), but there are lots of other things they do poorly. Importantly the parts with high density are very unfriendly to families and so a lot of people who live in high density in their early 20s feel forced to move to the suburbs in their 30s as they settle down - better schools, parks and other things you want to do with a family become important (these are things that other countries do well in high density but not the US)
On the transit and lifestyle aspects - I think those actually come naturally if you allow the density. And I say that is someone who was an organizer for transit for a decade in Seattle. It would have happened on its own, and probably better, if we did the development first.
and Difficult Task + increasing audience = improved performance
which makes sense to me. 1 person is a distraction. a group of people is an audience.