[removed]

You're correct for the most part. Turbulence mixing can create localized areas of high velocity, but the free surface (more specifically, just below the free surface) is the highest average flow due to lack of friction.

Normally if you're seeing large current, the top will be reflective of that, with chops, waves, or dune/anti-dune shape.

And stream characterization does play a role, however very difficult to define accurately. My comment above was more related to sediment characteristics, but very much a braided gravel bed is going to be different than a braided river delta than a singular sand bed.

As far as braided being lower, that depends a lot on topography. You may see those with lower depth but higher velocity. Those braids exist partially from the large tractive forces cutting paths through the floodplain. They typically have larger sediment (gravel, cobble, boulders) that may also add friction. Sand braided rivers typically have fewer paths because the braids can cut deeper more easily, creating a greater cross sectional area to balance the increase in flow.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the distance from the bed increases velocity due to lack of friction. As such a flooding river should expect higher velocity at the thalweg?

Im envisioning a lazy looking river with serious undertow.

Stream charecterization plays a role, I have always envisioned water finding the easiest path. Perhaps in a braided environment velocity could theoretically be decreased as the flow hops channels?

Thanks so much for the explanation!

> > > > > Water is a actually a very good coolant because it has a very high specific heat capacity of 4.2 J/(K g). This is typically twice as large as organic solvents and at least 4-5 times, sometimes more than 10 times larger than most solids (relative to mass). Since the thermal energy or heat is conserved during the transfer, this means that water can reduce the temperature of the material to be cooled by a certain degree, while its own temperature is increasing only by a fraction of that (considering somewhat similar mass).

Alternatively, you can rely on the very high enthalpy of vaporization of water, by using some form of evaporative cooling. Some animals rely on sweating for thermoregulation, while a lot of computer hardware relies on evaporative cooling in the form of heatpipes or vapor chambers.

Aside from the other answers better than I could say, it's cheap abd plentiful!

MRI used liquid helium for supercooling. It's very expensive. Some helium loss is natural and replacement is an ongoing expense.

Likewise if you need to turn thr magnet off you need to dump the helium (MRI magnet is always on), and replacement is $15-25,000.

If water works, it's basically or nearly free! This is a very non trivial concern for.most uses. Obviously for super cooling you need something more.

[removed]

Maybe it's a heat transmission thing? Dropping the cube in hot water will continually melt the outer later as it's exposed. Luke warm water, has a slower transition which may allow water below the cube surface to liquefy, creating stress?

[removed]

There was a 1990s theory that the centre of the Earth's core was natural uranium nuclear reactor that provided a some of Earth's internal heat, possibly helped drive the Earth's magnetic field. This extraordinary theory was proposed by J. Marvin Herndon who published a fantastical paper in 1993 claiming that he inner core was was composed of natural uranium and it was a natural fission reactor, a georeactor.

The idea was supported by plausible, at the time, geochemistry, that appeared to suggest that uranium could differentiate from iron-nickel and form an inner uranium core at the center of the Earth. However, most at the time disagreed, said the uranium content wasn't high enough to form a uranium core and/or the chemistry at high pressures prevent the separation of uranium from other metals.

Also, futher, advances in geoneutrino detection, that's neutrinos emited by radioactive decay and hypothetical inner core fission, ruled out a fission reactor well below the energy output proposed by J. Marvin Herndon.

Didn't stop him promoting the idea however, of a weaker fission reactor, or one that was more active in the past when there was more fissionable 235U.

Also, there's other scientists, who proposes variations on the Core Fission Hypothesis. A recent claim proposed a uranium oxide fission reactor at the inner/outer core boundary. This was published in a reputable journal. They proposed a 30 TeraWatt georeactor. That's insane.

I must look into this more, at it seems some scientists seriously think this is possible.

Refs.:

Herndon, J.M., 1993. Feasibility of a nuclear fission reactor at the center of the Earth as the energy source for the geomagnetic field. Journal of geomagnetism and geoelectricity, 45(5), pp.423-437.

Rusov, V.D., Pavlovich, V.N., Vaschenko, V.N., Tarasov, V.A., Zelentsova, T.N., Bolshakov, V.N., Litvinov, D.A., Kosenko, S.I. and Byegunova, O.A., 2007. Geoantineutrino spectrum and slow nuclear burning on the boundary of the liquid and solid phases of the Earth's core. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 112(B9).

[removed]

water doesn't have to conduct heat. It is very fluid so it will convect, and it has a great specific heat so it can get rid of a lot of energy without a huge temperature rise. Also it is liquid at all room temperatures. If necessary it can evaporate and take advantage of the kind of specific enthalpy that made steam engines possible. Water is a great cooler

Plus water has a very favorable (for this purpose) enthalpy of evaporation.

Since water is a liquid, the thermal conductivity is not limiting the efficiency as coolant. Instead of relying on internal heat conduction away from the surface to be cooled into the water bulk, water is a fluid, thus the heat will be transferred by convection (natural flow due to temperature gradients) or forced flow of water by a pump, for example. If the water flow is strong enough, the limiting factor is the actual transfer of heat over the phase boundary between the solid to be cooled and the liquid.

Water is a actually a very good coolant because it has a very high specific heat capacity of 4.2 J/(K g). This is typically twice as large as organic solvents and at least 4-5 times, sometimes more than 10 times larger than most solids (relative to mass). Since the thermal energy or heat is conserved during the transfer, this means that water can reduce the temperature of the material to be cooled by a certain degree, while its own temperature is increasing only by a fraction of that (considering somewhat similar mass).

The very large heat capacity in combination with the ability to transport the warm water quickly away by forced flow makes water such a good coolant, which is furthermore easy to obtain and very cheap. One of its downsides is the relatively large corrosivity and its tendency to expand when (accidentally) freezing.

To expand a bit on the difference between heat conductivity and heat capacity: Metals are very good conductors of heat, but have poor heat capacity. This makes them feel cold, because they can quickly transport the heat away from your skin, but will also quickly warm up.

[removed]

This is incredibly fascinating and well written. Thank you

[removed]

That's exactly what I intend to do hehe

[removed]

Overall, it's difficult to predict exactly how a shock wave from an astronomical event would affect the Earth and its inhabitants, as it would depend on a variety of factors such as the source, the strength of the wave, and the distance from the wave's origin.

[removed]

Dont forget…. While the campaigns and stories you tell now tell their own stories…. Introduce obscure lore that hints at the final story arch that wont be realized until a multitude of campaigns have played out.

As future campaigns move forward drop more hints and clues, not to give the story at this point, but to have a trail people can follow back later, amd be surprised that it wasnt noticed already when the final arch is revealed.

That the giant space-born celestial being that was cacooned within the planet was disturbed when a large chunk of it was blasted into space, startimg a series of escalating events that culminate in the race to stop the emergence that would destroy everything in the starsystem this world exists within.

[removed]

Depends on how this satellite was created.
Like with Moon - it's more about that part of Earth crust was thrown into orbit, giving remaining plates free space to move. Normally planetary crust is more rigid and have way less activity since all plates are tightly coupled and there's there's nowhere to move. By removing one of places rest was given ability to shuffle around, moving back and forth.

Like Mars have two satellites, but since his crust is "unbroken" - nothing happening there.

[removed]