Leaderboard

Ah, so that’s the strawman you’re “dismantling”

I pray for your success

No. Gravity 'creates' weight, not mass. Mass is an intrinsic property of the system; equivalent to its 'internal' energy. This is not the only energy a system can possess; there are also 'external' sources, such as momentum and stresses/strains, which, all taken together, modify space-time to produce the geodesic paths we attribute to gravity.

Hi and thanks. Yes, I may have posted a contraption of 1200W solar panels heating a 20 litres water container indoors to boiling! temperature and releasing its heat also after sunset. (lasts to about midnight). I use it only in winter. Posted also a spiral length of black PVC pipe on the roof feeding the standard electric water heater inlet with pre-heated water for a much less energy consumption in summer. And a photovoltaic roof solar system heats and supplies all the house all year from the surplus grid-tied generated. My electrical bill has been $0.0 the last 37 months and the system paid for itself last month.

Never seen any images before. Just looked. Yes, they didn't mess about, did they?

In cold weather it will be more a case of cold air going in and colder air going out at the air source side of the system - the air doesn't have to be warm or hot in human terms - with the difference in heat content between cold and colder air delivered (in water heaters) to the water in the tank. If you install one inside in a heated space your HPHW will warm water quicker by parasitising the warmth in the air and cooling it, ie you will lose out on the space heating side. Better to put them outside or only in ventilated, unheated inside spaces. With systems suited to those temperatures. We have one (outside) and it does work very well for (is built for) Australian conditions - we rarely get below zero temperatures where we live and it only gets that cold overnight and early morning with daytime temperatures higher. We set ours to run on a timer from about mid-morning to mid-afternoon to take advantage of solar pv on our roof as well as warmer air temperatures; it is a rare day where that draws any power from the solar batteries and rarer still that we draw power from the grid because the batteries as well as PV are too low. Small household using a smaller unit that draws about 500W for 2-3 hrs a day in warm seasons and 4-5 hours in winter. But I'm not entirely convinced it will be better value for money compared to having enough more PV on the roof and running a regular resistance heater - the HPHW is a lot more expensive to buy and a lot depends on how long it lasts. (Still cheaper than "passive" solar hot water systems, the sort it replaced though). New solar installs tend to be signficantly larger than our older system - at less cost - and the panels can be expected to last beyond 30 years, where the HPHW probably do well to last more than 10 years. Upgrading the PV isn't as simple as adding more panels; wiring and inverter upgrades would be involved. Externet, I seem to recall a thread from you about use of stored hot water to supplement home heating (?) . Probably not what you had in mind - this is more about combining hot water and house heating using heat pump hot water that makes significantly higher temperatures and time shifting the heating load within each 24 hr period to take best advantage of when electricity prices are lowest. Also can do summer cooling. Taking advantage of heat pumps being more efficient during daytime is one of the parameters the system works with. I came across it here https://www.volts.wtf/p/heat-pumps-with-thermal-batteries (an interview - a bit of reading to get to the grit) The company's site - https://www.harvest-thermal.com/product#tank This isn't for off-grid although elements of it probably could be. For interseasonal heat storage it seems to me that borehole type ground source heat pumps offer the best option, but need costs to come down, especially the drilling costs.

First of all. I know I take the risk of sounding like just another newbie here using these conjectures. I know but let's just tell you what's what. I'm not unsure, this isn't subject to change as I have in the past. I have the layout of my understanding of the world. This conjecture hasn't been handled without delicacy even though the words you're about to see would certainly make you believe so. The last part of this conjecture was stumbled upon with MATH and not an intentionally or "intuited" inference like the (x+1)^2 being how Isaac Newton postulated the power rule of integral and differential calc (which is a correct inference but the right answer for any stance on the Copenhagen Interpretation should be decidedly non-intuitive; which it was, keep in mind the last part is about reactionless propulsion without inertial drag as opposed to fusion). Oh, I understand having calculations, measurements, and statistical probability of being within plausibility range for the blueprinted specifications and design parameters. First of all, it's been said in this thread, "Oh, I hear such claims all the time". This is not that. If I'm "soapboxing", this is not "soapboxing", there is no ability to use your usual run-of-the-mill lingo with me, sir. No "moved to trash-bin", shouldn't be in speculations, no-blocking, banning from a falsely perceived rule-break. Because I am no run-of-the-mill member. I have what sites like these are scanned for by their administration, I am an autodidact. This isn't a "word-salad" this isn't a "pet theory". At the heart of it all, is renormalizing from higher energy states in the electron and reflection. Energy can be gaining indefinitely because of the simple photoelectric effect and it can be completely put to work immediately, with a fraction of a fraction of this gain escaping a system. To even make it to ascertain the resources for experimentation you'd need substantial convincing, all that I've listed in the first sentence of the post. Before any of that I'd have to lay everything I know out there and just doing that is difficult enough. I need someone I could, in-person, dictate all these on-paper visuals into actual schematics. You know, someone I could slowly explain to so I can start working toward substantial information. I don't think you understand how important this is. This isn't just universal computerized automation and sustained fusion until there's no material left to fuse. This is magnetic compression of the plasma until the proverbial ST fabric indentation grows deeper and narrower at the same rate it takes to stretch the ST curtain mid-vessel to equal or surpass 1G with some enormous number of reflections going on rear-craft to negate said rebounding G-fields in the vessels wake as it rises over the ground. To explain that last part, if you're talking about particle pair production, you have light hitting a particle and light coming back out of it. Well what if when that light hits it turns off a G-field. Light is released, that's reflection. But at the same time light hits that same G-field from a different angle, light that did the same thing to another G-field in a particle moments earlier. They are linked events to the object looking at those dots in the interference pattern. What if you could turn off a G-field, this sphere, that shares the exact same center with another separate G-field that is the artifact of fusion that had occurred in the same place moments earlier? Before we'd continue I'd need assurance that "you" have some authoritative and financial leeway. Of course

Automobile racing is a stupid, unnecessary sport. Bicycle racing is much better for health. Military aviation could use biofuels. Perhaps biofuels use could be extended to military ground vehicles and field power equipment. Ships can still be nuclear or sailing. I would say use biofuels wherever electricity, batteries, green hydrogen or nuclear power is not possible, cost-effective, feasible and/or practical. The military and the motorsports industry is not going to have fossil fuels available to piss away forever also. The military could also go back to the cavalry and fight on horseback. Man's discovery and use of petroleum has made militaries so much more destructive worldwide than ever before in human history. Man's military fighting power was quite limited when he relied upon horses, not motor vehicles, observation hot air balloons, not airplanes and helicopters, coal or wood-burning steam locomotives for rail transport and sailing ships for sea power.

The answer to the thread title is "Yes". But for the wrong reasons. It needn't be this way, if I'd had a companion... As it stands, you wouldn't see me mentioning or applying anything I've ever learned. Here or anywhere else. There are other things I can do for the bare necessities and I'm one of the few who can go mute and carry muteness till the bitter end. The coming months will test that statement.

Yes because we're killing petty white collar criminals like Nixon accused of literally nothing tangible. If you drive to fast on the wrong side of the road Biden will have you, MSC, kilt.