Video Calling for Ultracapacitor Innovation Makes Final Cut for X PRIZE Green Video Contest
January 29th, 2009 by Jacob Rheuban
A video calling for innovation in ultracapacitor technology has made the final cut for the X PRIZE Foundation’s “Crazy Green Idea” video challenge. The X PRIZE Foundation offers large awards for the achievement of one of their defined goals, typically involving scientific and engineering innovation. They select goals with potential benefit to humanity. In October of 2004 the X PRIZE Foundation awarded $10 million to Scaled Composites for the being the first private team to build and launch a reusable manned spacecraft into space twice within two weeks. The historical flight of the Scaled Composites SpaceShipOne spaceplane attracted international attention.
The “Green Video Idea” is a call by the X PRIZE Foundation for submission of videos containing ideas for future X PRIZE goals. “The Capacitor Challenge” was submitted by Kyle Good from Irvine, California, calling for innovations in capacitor technology.
The leading cause of death in the United States is heart disease
Formula One (F1) racing appears to stand in contrast with current global trends. The fuel thirsty high performance vehicles thumb their nose at modern practical automotive trends of fuel frugality. However, Formula One racing is in transforming in a way that will make it a leader in high performance fuel efficient technology. Max Mosley, president of the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), the governing body for Formula One racing, sent a letter to the Formula One community laying out a process for Formula One race cars to become hybrids
Want to increase the security of your online accounts and sensitive data? Here are a couple of free applications that I have found useful.
Energy cannot be created or destroyed. Scientists have accepted this theory of conservation of energy for ages
A couple of days ago I posted part one of my article examining whether our method of punishing criminals leads to imprisonment based on what are seemingly random events.
On a pleasant spring day, two men go out hunting. They both have a history of heart problems and have both had a heart attack within the past year. As they are walking through the forest a loud bang from another hunter startles them and triggers another heart attack in each hunter. Their fingers involuntarily clench the triggers of their rifles. One of them fires a stray bullet into the dirt. The other fires a bullet that travels two-hundred feet to where another hunter is hiding the bushes. The stray bullet strikes this third hunter in the head. Should the hunter responsible for discharging the bullet that ultimately killed a person be punished differently from the hunter that shot the bullet into the ground? Stated differently, as a society, how do the mere consequences of a defendant’s actions bear on our punishment of his crime?
Productivity guru, David Allen, has established an almost cult like following, particularly among the younger generation. While I’m not a David Allen junky and my knowledge of David Allen’s “Gettings Things Done” method is elementary, I think his system is straight forward, simple and make sense. I also think that, at its heart, Allen’s system is largely about fostering discipline in time management and organization.