What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

GrinCDXX said:
I'm no expert in railway route planning, but I would have thought that if you find yourself having to cross the world's highest mountain range, you would want to look for the lowest point...not the highest.
Click to expand...
that and I'm not exactly sure you would want a rail tunnel where it would be crossing a tectonic fault line.
 
GrinCDXX said:
I'm no expert in railway route planning, but I would have thought that if you find yourself having to cross the world's highest mountain range, you would want to look for the lowest point...not the highest.
Click to expand...

I like the timeframe. The Northeast Corridor expansion is planned for a 2050 completion. That's flat land, except the climb to Hartford.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

bigmrg74 said:
that and I'm not exactly sure you would want a rail tunnel where it would be crossing a tectonic fault line.
Click to expand...
The Mont Blanc Tunnel comes darn close to going directly under the highest point in Europe. It does go directly under one of the sub-peaks (Aiguille du Midi), which makes it the world's "deepest" tunnel.

And all mountains are pretty much by definition on fault lines, so if you want to avoid those, you'd be relegated to building tunnels in Kansas or something...
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

bigmrg74 said:
that and I'm not exactly sure you would want a rail tunnel where it would be crossing a tectonic fault line.
Click to expand...

That was my first thought. "Do these idiots understand how Everest was formed (and continues to grow every year)?"
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

Kepler said:
I really wish somebody would try to co-opt me. :mad:
Click to expand...
In terms of shills, I've found that Kevin Folta, Kavin Senapathy, Steven Novella, Credible Hulk, Science Babe, Chow Babe, and Food Hunk are definitely worth following on social media. Kind of a relief from organic herp-a-derps.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

dxmnkd316 said:
That was my first thought. "Do these idiots understand how Everest was formed (and continues to grow every year)?"
Click to expand...

Yeah, its kinda one thing to do tunnel between plates like they do in LA, were they're like most 50 feet below the surface. If an earthquake happens and breaks a tunnel, there's a ton of heavy equipment there that could dig down if a rescue was needed. Under the Himalayas, the tunnel would need to be hundreds of feet below ground in a pretty remote area. And that would have to be like that for miles. Logistics of a rescue there are kinda mind boggling. Even with rescue tunnels built into the process, it would be a hell of a feat to get survivors out. And then there's the whole repairing of the tunnel after its broken by the continental plates moving a foot.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
That was my first thought. "Do these idiots understand how Everest was formed (and continues to grow every year)?"
Click to expand...

I thought God made Mt Everest just as it is now and plate tectonics was just a scientific fairy tale like evolution and global warming.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

bigmrg74 said:
Yeah, its kinda one thing to do tunnel between plates like they do in LA, were they're like most 50 feet below the surface. If an earthquake happens and breaks a tunnel, there's a ton of heavy equipment there that could dig down if a rescue was needed. Under the Himalayas, the tunnel would need to be hundreds of feet below ground in a pretty remote area. And that would have to be like that for miles. Logistics of a rescue there are kinda mind boggling. Even with rescue tunnels built into the process, it would be a hell of a feat to get survivors out. And then there's the whole repairing of the tunnel after its broken by the continental plates moving a foot.
Click to expand...

How much movement do you think happens within a mountain on a year-to-year basis? How much movement can happen in a single fault line event (AKA: earthquake) in an area like the San Andreas Fault? Everest grows a couple inches in any given year (5cm, technically); engineers can account for that in their construction designs. Meanwhile, the 1989 earthquake that hit during the World Series was so great, moved so much land so violently at a single time, accounting for an event like that would be a much greater challenge.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

launch is scrubbed for today. Looks like they'll try again tomorrow at 4:10.
 
St. Clown said:
How much movement do you think happens within a mountain on a year-to-year basis? How much movement can happen in a single fault line event (AKA: earthquake) in an area like the San Andreas Fault? Everest grows a couple inches in any given year (5cm, technically); engineers can account for that in their construction designs. Meanwhile, the 1989 earthquake that hit during the World Series was so great, moved so much land so violently at a single time, accounting for an event like that would be a much greater challenge.
Click to expand...
It's why we don't have much in the way of tunnels and bridges in Alaska. The 64 earthquake moved massive amounts of land around.
 
Re: Dr. Clayton Forrester's Science Roundup

St. Clown said:
How much movement do you think happens within a mountain on a year-to-year basis? How much movement can happen in a single fault line event (AKA: earthquake) in an area like the San Andreas Fault? Everest grows a couple inches in any given year (5cm, technically); engineers can account for that in their construction designs. Meanwhile, the 1989 earthquake that hit during the World Series was so great, moved so much land so violently at a single time, accounting for an event like that would be a much greater challenge.
Click to expand...

The collapse of the Oakland end of the Bay Bridge happened because that area is all fill and it experienced a jello-like wave effect. Knowing how crowded that bridge is during rush hour, it's astounding many more people weren't killed.
 
burd said:
The collapse of the Oakland end of the Bay Bridge happened because that area is all fill and it experienced a jello-like wave effect. Knowing how crowded that bridge is during rush hour, it's astounding many more people weren't killed.
Click to expand...
The baseball game is actually the leading hypothesis on that. People either left work early or stayed late to watch the game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top