▲ 482 ▼ Have you know???. (mander.xyz) submitted 1 year ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz 61 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 67 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (24 children) Watt is not an energy unit. permalink fedilink source hideshow 24 child comments replies: [–] flandish@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago (1 child) it’s about energy transfer though. transfer of titty whats to watts to my mind. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] HumanoidTyphoon 13 points 1 year ago That’s just science permalink fedilink source parent [–] absentbird@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (3 children) People say this, but almost every time the time interval is left off it's hours. Either way, the numbers in this meme are clearly made up. Most image generation uses fewer than 10 watt hours. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 year ago People say this, but almost every time the time interval is left off it's hours. This is new for me. Must be some engineering thing. I'm a physicist and and I feel guilty if I leave out some units just because, lol. permalink fedilink source parent [–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Maybe it's comparing the total power rating of the brain to a data center dedicated to AI Which is also a stupid comparison because the data cenrer will be processing a lot of parallel requests. That's why you want the unit to be energy rather than power in this case Or maybe it's all made up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] absentbird@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) I think it's all made up. The most power hungry data center in the world consumes 150MW of power, and that's from a massive 11 million square foot facility in China that's significantly larger than any other data center. EDIT: an hour of heavy thinking does consume approximately 12 watt hours though, so that figure seems reasonable. permalink fedilink source parent [–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 22 points 1 year ago (4 children) Its continuous to keep the image active in your mind :) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bryndos@fedia.io 6 points 1 year ago (3 children) That'd need watt hours though. Meme is only showing the instantaneous power required to conjure the image for an infinitesimal amount of time - you cant do any useful 'work' with it unless the time is accounted for. Watt seconds maybe. What makes me skeptikal of this data though is that the correct sciencing term for a billion watts is the well established 'jiggawatt'. In this context I'd have also accepted the Canadian spelling 'jigglewatt'. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Are watt seconds not joules permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] bryndos@fedia.io 2 points 1 year ago yes, which is what you'd measure to compare the energy efficiency of completing a job. permalink fedilink source parent [–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago* Yeah no. Imagine it like a computer and screen. To render an image it will momentarily consume a bit more power, but as soon as it has been rendered it will still continuosily consume a stable amount of x Watt to keep running and displaying the picture. For continuous stable operation of something with no specified time, Watt is the correct unit. permalink fedilink source parent [–] joelfromaus@aussie.zone 7 points 1 year ago Watt would you suggest? permalink fedilink source parent [–] MrSmith@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children) That's, like, your opinion, man. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt No permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] MrSmith@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago 🦗 permalink fedilink source parent [–] Steve@startrek.website 3 points 1 year ago (8 children) And the text dosnt specify a time interval, whats your point? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago That watts by themselves mean nothing with regard to energy consumption. permalink fedilink source parent [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago (6 children) Also, it literally is an energy unit used in measurements. It's meant as a continious power. Ie. Your active imagination consumes around 12 watts of power, not "rendering one image" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (5 children) That's power, not energy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago (4 children) And what is power? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (3 children) Power is energy per unit of time. Energy is power over a period of time. A lightning strike is about 1 GJ of energy. But it happens in a split second, so the power is far higher, say 100 GW. That is the output of 100 nuclear power plants. But only for 0.01 seconds. TNT is even more extreme. It can detonate in microseconds, so release its energy in a fraction of a millisecond. 1 kg contains about 4 MJ of energy, released in about 10 microseconds, a power of about 300 GW. That is about as much power as all of the USA combined needs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Power is energy per unit of time Thanks. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) You are off by a factor of ~250, it's 1.21 Gigawatts permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Ah damn you got me there... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] flandish@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago (1 child) it’s about energy transfer though. transfer of titty whats to watts to my mind. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] HumanoidTyphoon 13 points 1 year ago That’s just science permalink fedilink source parent
[–] absentbird@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (3 children) People say this, but almost every time the time interval is left off it's hours. Either way, the numbers in this meme are clearly made up. Most image generation uses fewer than 10 watt hours. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 year ago People say this, but almost every time the time interval is left off it's hours. This is new for me. Must be some engineering thing. I'm a physicist and and I feel guilty if I leave out some units just because, lol. permalink fedilink source parent [–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Maybe it's comparing the total power rating of the brain to a data center dedicated to AI Which is also a stupid comparison because the data cenrer will be processing a lot of parallel requests. That's why you want the unit to be energy rather than power in this case Or maybe it's all made up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] absentbird@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) I think it's all made up. The most power hungry data center in the world consumes 150MW of power, and that's from a massive 11 million square foot facility in China that's significantly larger than any other data center. EDIT: an hour of heavy thinking does consume approximately 12 watt hours though, so that figure seems reasonable. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 year ago People say this, but almost every time the time interval is left off it's hours. This is new for me. Must be some engineering thing. I'm a physicist and and I feel guilty if I leave out some units just because, lol. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Maybe it's comparing the total power rating of the brain to a data center dedicated to AI Which is also a stupid comparison because the data cenrer will be processing a lot of parallel requests. That's why you want the unit to be energy rather than power in this case Or maybe it's all made up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] absentbird@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) I think it's all made up. The most power hungry data center in the world consumes 150MW of power, and that's from a massive 11 million square foot facility in China that's significantly larger than any other data center. EDIT: an hour of heavy thinking does consume approximately 12 watt hours though, so that figure seems reasonable. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] absentbird@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) I think it's all made up. The most power hungry data center in the world consumes 150MW of power, and that's from a massive 11 million square foot facility in China that's significantly larger than any other data center. EDIT: an hour of heavy thinking does consume approximately 12 watt hours though, so that figure seems reasonable. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 22 points 1 year ago (4 children) Its continuous to keep the image active in your mind :) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bryndos@fedia.io 6 points 1 year ago (3 children) That'd need watt hours though. Meme is only showing the instantaneous power required to conjure the image for an infinitesimal amount of time - you cant do any useful 'work' with it unless the time is accounted for. Watt seconds maybe. What makes me skeptikal of this data though is that the correct sciencing term for a billion watts is the well established 'jiggawatt'. In this context I'd have also accepted the Canadian spelling 'jigglewatt'. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Are watt seconds not joules permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] bryndos@fedia.io 2 points 1 year ago yes, which is what you'd measure to compare the energy efficiency of completing a job. permalink fedilink source parent [–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago* Yeah no. Imagine it like a computer and screen. To render an image it will momentarily consume a bit more power, but as soon as it has been rendered it will still continuosily consume a stable amount of x Watt to keep running and displaying the picture. For continuous stable operation of something with no specified time, Watt is the correct unit. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bryndos@fedia.io 6 points 1 year ago (3 children) That'd need watt hours though. Meme is only showing the instantaneous power required to conjure the image for an infinitesimal amount of time - you cant do any useful 'work' with it unless the time is accounted for. Watt seconds maybe. What makes me skeptikal of this data though is that the correct sciencing term for a billion watts is the well established 'jiggawatt'. In this context I'd have also accepted the Canadian spelling 'jigglewatt'. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Are watt seconds not joules permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] bryndos@fedia.io 2 points 1 year ago yes, which is what you'd measure to compare the energy efficiency of completing a job. permalink fedilink source parent [–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago* Yeah no. Imagine it like a computer and screen. To render an image it will momentarily consume a bit more power, but as soon as it has been rendered it will still continuosily consume a stable amount of x Watt to keep running and displaying the picture. For continuous stable operation of something with no specified time, Watt is the correct unit. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Are watt seconds not joules permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] bryndos@fedia.io 2 points 1 year ago yes, which is what you'd measure to compare the energy efficiency of completing a job. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bryndos@fedia.io 2 points 1 year ago yes, which is what you'd measure to compare the energy efficiency of completing a job. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago* Yeah no. Imagine it like a computer and screen. To render an image it will momentarily consume a bit more power, but as soon as it has been rendered it will still continuosily consume a stable amount of x Watt to keep running and displaying the picture. For continuous stable operation of something with no specified time, Watt is the correct unit. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] joelfromaus@aussie.zone 7 points 1 year ago Watt would you suggest? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MrSmith@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children) That's, like, your opinion, man. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt No permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] MrSmith@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago 🦗 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt No permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] MrSmith@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago 🦗 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Steve@startrek.website 3 points 1 year ago (8 children) And the text dosnt specify a time interval, whats your point? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago That watts by themselves mean nothing with regard to energy consumption. permalink fedilink source parent [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago (6 children) Also, it literally is an energy unit used in measurements. It's meant as a continious power. Ie. Your active imagination consumes around 12 watts of power, not "rendering one image" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (5 children) That's power, not energy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago (4 children) And what is power? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (3 children) Power is energy per unit of time. Energy is power over a period of time. A lightning strike is about 1 GJ of energy. But it happens in a split second, so the power is far higher, say 100 GW. That is the output of 100 nuclear power plants. But only for 0.01 seconds. TNT is even more extreme. It can detonate in microseconds, so release its energy in a fraction of a millisecond. 1 kg contains about 4 MJ of energy, released in about 10 microseconds, a power of about 300 GW. That is about as much power as all of the USA combined needs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Power is energy per unit of time Thanks. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) You are off by a factor of ~250, it's 1.21 Gigawatts permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Ah damn you got me there... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago That watts by themselves mean nothing with regard to energy consumption. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago (6 children) Also, it literally is an energy unit used in measurements. It's meant as a continious power. Ie. Your active imagination consumes around 12 watts of power, not "rendering one image" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (5 children) That's power, not energy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago (4 children) And what is power? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (3 children) Power is energy per unit of time. Energy is power over a period of time. A lightning strike is about 1 GJ of energy. But it happens in a split second, so the power is far higher, say 100 GW. That is the output of 100 nuclear power plants. But only for 0.01 seconds. TNT is even more extreme. It can detonate in microseconds, so release its energy in a fraction of a millisecond. 1 kg contains about 4 MJ of energy, released in about 10 microseconds, a power of about 300 GW. That is about as much power as all of the USA combined needs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Power is energy per unit of time Thanks. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) You are off by a factor of ~250, it's 1.21 Gigawatts permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Ah damn you got me there... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (5 children) That's power, not energy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago (4 children) And what is power? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (3 children) Power is energy per unit of time. Energy is power over a period of time. A lightning strike is about 1 GJ of energy. But it happens in a split second, so the power is far higher, say 100 GW. That is the output of 100 nuclear power plants. But only for 0.01 seconds. TNT is even more extreme. It can detonate in microseconds, so release its energy in a fraction of a millisecond. 1 kg contains about 4 MJ of energy, released in about 10 microseconds, a power of about 300 GW. That is about as much power as all of the USA combined needs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Power is energy per unit of time Thanks. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) You are off by a factor of ~250, it's 1.21 Gigawatts permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Ah damn you got me there... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago (4 children) And what is power? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (3 children) Power is energy per unit of time. Energy is power over a period of time. A lightning strike is about 1 GJ of energy. But it happens in a split second, so the power is far higher, say 100 GW. That is the output of 100 nuclear power plants. But only for 0.01 seconds. TNT is even more extreme. It can detonate in microseconds, so release its energy in a fraction of a millisecond. 1 kg contains about 4 MJ of energy, released in about 10 microseconds, a power of about 300 GW. That is about as much power as all of the USA combined needs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Power is energy per unit of time Thanks. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) You are off by a factor of ~250, it's 1.21 Gigawatts permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Ah damn you got me there... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago (3 children) Power is energy per unit of time. Energy is power over a period of time. A lightning strike is about 1 GJ of energy. But it happens in a split second, so the power is far higher, say 100 GW. That is the output of 100 nuclear power plants. But only for 0.01 seconds. TNT is even more extreme. It can detonate in microseconds, so release its energy in a fraction of a millisecond. 1 kg contains about 4 MJ of energy, released in about 10 microseconds, a power of about 300 GW. That is about as much power as all of the USA combined needs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Power is energy per unit of time Thanks. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) You are off by a factor of ~250, it's 1.21 Gigawatts permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Ah damn you got me there... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 1 point 1 year ago Power is energy per unit of time Thanks. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) You are off by a factor of ~250, it's 1.21 Gigawatts permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Ah damn you got me there... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago Ah damn you got me there... permalink fedilink source parent