A New Energy Possibility?

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.html

Thorium is a naturally-occurring, slightly radioactive metal discovered in 1828 by the Swedish chemist Jons Jakob Berzelius, who named it after Thor, the Norse god of thunder. It is found in small amounts in most rocks and soils, where it is about three times more abundant than uranium. Soil commonly contains an average of around 6 parts per million (ppm) of thorium.

Thorium-232 (Th-232) decays very slowly (its half-life is about three times the age of the Earth) but other thorium isotopes occur in its and in uranium's decay chains. Most of these are short-lived and hence much more radioactive than Th-232, though on a mass basis they are negligible.

Thorium, as well as uranium, can be used as a nuclear fuel. Although not fissile itself, Th-232 will absorb slow neutrons to produce uranium-233 (U-233)a, which is fissile (and long-lived). The irradiated fuel can then be unloaded from the reactor, the U-233 separated from the thorium, and fed back into another reactor as part of a closed fuel cycle.

In one significant respect U-233 is better than uranium-235 and plutonium-239, because of its higher neutron yield per neutron absorbed. Given a start with some other fissile material (U-233, U-235 or Pu-239) as a driver, a breeding cycle similar to but more efficient than that with U-238 and plutonium (in normal, slow neutron reactors) can be set up. (The driver fuels provide all the neutrons initially, but are progressively supplemented by U-233 as it forms from the thorium.) However, there are also features of the neutron economy which counter this advantage. In particular the intermediate product protactinium-233 (Pa-233)a is a neutron absorber which diminishes U-233 yield.

Over the last 40 years there has been interest in utilising thorium as a nuclear fuel since it is more abundant in the Earth's crust than uranium. Also, all of the mined thorium is potentially useable in a reactor, compared with the 0.7% of natural uranium, so some 40 times the amount of energy per unit mass might theoretically be available (without recourse to fast neutron reactors)

I think the article speaks for itself. I, for one, will be keeping my eye on this.

Ancient Faith Radio

A great source of recordings of Orthodox chants and hymns, as well as spiritual messages and teaching on Scripture and writings of church fathers.
http://ancientfaith.com/

Turnaround

For a long time I was quite apathetic politically. To me, the government was going t do what the government was going to do, and none of that affected how I was going to live my life: following Christ.

But then several things changed. As I stated in an earlier blog, a few years ago I began praying that God would make me the best husband, father, brother, friend, etc. possible. I'm most certain He's been doing that (as much as I often tend to fight it). And then another thing happened....I met Haley. The more we get to know each other, the more we love each other, and the more real the possibility of getting married and having a family becomes. Suddenly I begin thinking: what kind of place do I want my family to live in?

And then the truth hits. I don't want a world in which the government is able to come into people's lives as it pleases. And when one gets right down to it...in the United States, the people are the government (for now). Which means I'm a part of it. I have a responsibility to do what I can to ensure that my voice and my participation in the political process reflects the basic tenets that the country was founded on; each person possesses the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Gone are the days of reactionism to conservative demagoguery and personality cults. I had friends who nearly worshipped Ann Coulter (a practice, which, believe it or not, happens among liberals as well); I had a roommate who praised Rush Limbaugh for telling guests on his show with whom he disagreed to "just shut up" (because that never happens on the liberal side [1]). It's time to look past the followers and see the principles for what they really are: advocating freedom from government control to all people of the country.

I guess this may mean more political blogs (once I become more caught up with "who's who" in the political realm). I'm not really "out of things to say" insofar as the spiritual realm goes. I greatly look forward to eventually obtaining The Philokalia, The Ladder of Divine Ascent, and other spiritual books. However, most of what I've learned lately hasn't been in the mind, but in the soul, as prayer makes the mind and flesh submissive to the soul, and the soul, in turn submissive to God. We'll see what develops as this process continues.

1. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/07/obama-tells-economic-critics-way/

Dear Commander-in-Chief

You continue to laud the "brave sacrifices" of the victims of the terrorist attack (1) , as if they were willingly giving their lives for their country here. Don't get me wrong, I definitely believe they were brave men and women. But they did not "lay down their lives" for their country...because they shouldn't have had to. Our troops should never have to be concerned about being viciously attacked within America's borders, especially when there has been reason all along to have removed Mr. Hassan from military service (2).

You should continue to praise the diversity and courage of the victims, though. They'd probably prefer that you do that instead of admit that the idea that religious extremism and religion-driven terrorism does happen and is preventable, but we might have to drop our (read: not actually mine) policy of political correctness.

1. http://abcnews.go.com/m/screen?id=9030873
2. http://michellemalkin.com/2009/11/06/the-massacre-at-fort-hood-and-muslim-soldiers-with-attitude/

Liturgy And Recited Prayer (Hearing God pt 2)

The common Protestant objections: too ritualistic, no heart in it, no room for the Holy Spirit, salvation by works, is too much like Buddhism et al.

It is, I concede, completely logical to say that when Christ gave us the Lord's Prayer, it was meant as an outline, a basic guide to the things about which we should be praying. I agree with this, and have for a long time. We should have spontaneous prayers that apply to our needs and the needs of others. However, there is also something to be said for Psalm 119:97, "Oh how I love your law! It is my meditation all the day." Why does the psalmist meditate upon God's Law? Because by keeping his thoughts focused and silencing the "other self," he is able to let the totality of the Law become real in himself, and thus God's word nourishes his soul, straightening it to walk uprightly.

When emphasis is placed upon the thoughts of the believer, the believer's own feelings, emotions, then growth is stunted. Noise enters, because no one can keep his mind perfectly clear when not observing himself. It is like saying "don't think of an elephant." The first thing you think of, of course, without being in the position to diminish your thoughts by observing and dismissing them, is an elephant. Similarly, if one goes about the day thinking things like "I'm not going to lust" over and over, he has already surrendered his thoughts to this battle, instead of taking away the fight altogether, and by placing his spirit subordinate to the mind (and, inevitably, to the flesh), he has cut off his only possible communication with God and sets himself up to fail. (Damascene, Christ: The Eternal Tao).

The advantage of liturgy and recitation of prayer is as of yet unresolved. Mere recapitulation does not benefit the individual at all, of course; what is needed is the elevation of the spirit above the intellect and the flesh, and the submission of the spirit, in turn, to God. Keeping the spirit subdued prevents the man from truly communing with Christ; but once the elevation is accomplished, something needs to direct the soul where it ought to go.

Here is the advantage of such recitations. With the mind and flesh subdued, the spirit observes the thoughts and takes hold of that which it truly desires; and if one belongs to the Lord, the simple recitation of prayer and liturgy allows for one to continually redirect one's spirit toward God and the service and glorification of Him. These things do not "lose their meaning" because they are then not attached to the feelings, which fade, nor the thoughts, which become tiresome or boring. There is a completely new dimension which is ever renewed in Christ. It is no wonder that when in passing I ponder eternity I quiver in fear of thought of never ceasing. Yet my spirit rejoices to be in the Lord and wants to abide there forever.

Now, with the words, songs, etc already prescribed, there is no more need to continue to awkwardly search for the right words while praying, or to lead oneself in, as in the NIV, "babbling endlessly like the pagans." (Matthew 6:7), or as in the ESV, "heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do." One is then aware of, perhaps, how long one has been going, or what great Christian vocabulary one has used, or how easy it was to remember to pray for this or that, and pride sneaks in. There is no more need to contemplate what songs to play, what turns of phrase to use. Such care for variety is an appeal to the flesh and intellect, in any case.

Continually step outside thoughts and hear God. Step outside dependence upon thoughts and let your spirit grow and lead the mind and flesh in holiness and submission to the Lord.

The Other Me (Hearing God pt 1)

The first thing that comes to mind is Eckhart Tolle's speech on this subject, concerning the question "Who is this "myself" that I cannot live with?" I remember rejecting outright everything he said because of some of his views on Christ. However, now, a year or so later, I am starting reconsider this point. It came at a moment that was not even of terrible importance, but it opened my eyes to it nonetheless. As you may have read in earlier blogs, I have a habit of getting a large pizza at least once a week and eating the whole thing in one sitting. As I was on my way back to my apartment from a walk on Saturday, I was planning some things out. One resolution I made was (for financial as well as health reasons) not to get a pizza after church the next day, but instead to eat something I already had at home, most likely soup. Immediately I thought back to other times where I would make such resolutions, but then when the time came to enact them, I didn't want to and went against it.

Why? If I am, at this point, intending to go through with something, why is it that I am suddenly wishing something else at another time? It seems, indeed, that Mr. Tolle has a point; there seem to be multiple entities at work, and these can often be in conflict. "We are not our thoughts." In a book I am slowly getting through, Christ, The Eternal Tao, the author describes the same situation. The spirit, the mind, and the flesh are all at work, and each has its own will. It is the place of the mind and the flesh to be subservient to the spirit, and the spirit to be subservient to God. What hinders many of us from communion with God is that we don't understand how this works, or the need for it, and may be trying, as is natural to people who have grown up in a society based on the glorification of rational thought, to simply intuit our way to communion with God, to, as Winnie-the-Pooh would say, think think think our way through faith. The answer is far more complicated, and the answer is far simpler. The answer begins with self-observation, stepping back more and more often to observe one's own thoughts and emotions. By doing this we can hold on to the thoughts which are godly and destroy the thoughts that are not.

Stay tuned.

Edu-babble and Preparation for Teaching.

This week graduate students at Bowling Green State University are attending a program called "GradSTEP" (Graduate Student Enhancement Program). It is supposed to prepare us for grad school and, in the case of some including myself, to be teaching or research assistants. Today's sessions (at least, the ones attended by students from all departments) were entitled "Welcome to BGSU's Integrative Learning Community" and "Undergraduate Education in Action." Right off the bat, Eric, Steven (both fellow teaching assistants in the math department), and I figured that these would consist mostly of regurgitated edu-babble. For those unfamiliar with the term, this simply means vague and lofty words and phrases used to describe the college's "strategic planning" for the future of undergraduate education.

We were quite correct. The goals and implementation of strategies for the goals of the school still remain quite unclear after 2 hours of being stuffed down our throats. We did manage to garnish a few facts: apparently they expect us to do everything we can to make sure students don't fail (including referrals to various university agencies such as the Counseling Center) and that the school wishes to "integrate things learned outside the classroom to what is learned inside the classroom." Whatever that means. In one session we analysed two "scenarios" in which students were struggling with their studies. None of us three had any progressive solutions that these people were looking for; we were simply all for trying to contact the student about the issue but not pressing any further if the student proves illusive or averse to help. Eric did offer the suggestion of speaking to a student's advisor to see if the class is necessary for the degree, since the student obviously does not want to be there. I did agree with this idea.

During the second session part of our task was to break into groups of 3-5 and discuss how, as teaching assistants, we could enact the goals of the school in our lecture and lab times. Granted, we should have been a little more respectful to the speakers, but it was very tempting to quietly remark to one another on the more ridiculous points made before the discussion was assigned. we were therefore "proxied," where one of the leaders came and stood near us as we "discussed" our ideas for enacting the school's goals, which mostly amounted to "I will teach math." Therefore we were, of course, called on to share our ideas later on. I was considering speaking on our behalf against some of the silly hand-holding and vague strategies posited by various other groups, but Steven was first to stand and managed to BS his way through explaining how we could do as much as we could as math teaching assistants. I was impressed. We were all amused, also, at the boos that came when he first mentioned that we were a "cluster of math majors" and the dirty looks that ensued when he declared math to be "meta-knowledge" (which is, of course, true; it's very difficult to find a discipline that does not have some basis in mathematics). Apparently we're just heartless math teachers who don't care about enriching the learning experience of students; we want to give you the information and get you out of the way so we can go back to research and whatever else it is we do. My word...

After coming to a common consensus that "One major reason the undergraduate program as a whole here sucks is because it's run by naive, idealistic women and men with no spines" (my words), we went to a short demonstration in the math building (not terribly interesting but definitely preferrable to the aforementioned activities) and then got to leave. I got my office keys, finally, and checked it out. We'll have to get a refrigerator, but otherwise it's pretty nice. I'll be sharing it with Steven and another math TA named Keith. Now I'm on to preparing syllabi, first-day exercises, MyMathLab registration (an online program that will be used as homework), and the Blackboard (a tool in each student's personal web portal provided by the school) pages for my two sections of College Algebra I. It's actually a fun challenge, though time-consuming and somewhat exhausting.