Strange

Fields do not “take energy from space”

! Moderator Note It's pseudoscience so, by definition, there is no "factual evidence". Thread closed.

Yeah, but what does he know about it? Also, reminds me of this XKCD:

! Moderator Note I have moved this to Homework Help (and I have deleted the duplicate thread you created)

The article is written by someone who can't write and who knows nothing about science. Why would they? Edit: I have made my comment more polite as it is obvious you are the author.

You would need to find some way of moving the conductor through the magnetic field. Silvestri shows one example. Not exactly an economical way of generating power. But if a satellite is already using a tether for some other purpose, you could get a bit of extra power from it. Otherwise you could use some source of energy (hydroelectric, steam turbine) to rotate a wire or coil. But the Earth's magnetic field is very weak, so a generator like that would be much more efficient if you put a large magnet in it! But, no, you can't "suck in the magnetic field".

Just checking if you display any other symptoms of being a psychopath

In this case, it is two large masses (black holes or neutron stars) orbiting one another.

Maybe I will start a new thread about how I have just discovered I can close one eye. It's a bit like blinking but different. Maybe I'll call it "winking". I wonder if anyone else can do it!!! Or how I can scratch my left ear with my right hand. I wonder if anyone else can do that!!1!

Do you mean Newton's laws of motion? http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~blackman/ast104/newton3laws16.html

Except, you are not focussing on it. That is why it is blurry. I'm sure everyone can do it with practice. Everybody?

Correct. And special relativity explains why they are the same thing.

We can observe gravity.

You need to produce a replacement to Newton’s Law that includes the factors you think are responsible for gravity. Then show that this correctly predicts the orbits of moons, planets, comets, etc. One problem with your previous demonstration was that you had a tube with an open end. You need to put your spinning wheel inside a completely sealed container (or, at least, place a solid barrier between the wheel and the test mass). The other problem is that you were waving a piece of paper in your hand and claiming the movement was gravity and not you or air movement. So, for a test mass, use a large piece of lead hanging by a long thin wire. This should be well away from the opening of the tube (if you insist on keeping that). You can then measure the movement of this weight when you run your motor. This would be an improvement over your original crap experiment, but still not definitive. There are all sorts of other factors you would need to eliminate: vibration, magnetic fields from the wiring, air currents, electrostatic charge, ...

You are quite right. I should have said “... by a moving charge [such as an electric current]”

No, it isn't. From what I remember you had vague claims about gravity being caused by rotation. It isn't. The video is about gravitational waves, not gravity. No they aren't. They are distortions in spacetime. The rest of your post seems to be the same incoherent muddle as all your previous posts Creating waves. Not creating gravity (that is just created by the presence of mass, not rotation). Your vacuum cleaner does not generate gravity, it sucks air.

There are frequent and regular campaigns to hep people in countries where women (or other groups) are discriminated against. Often these only get in the news when a particular individual makes the headlines (e.g. Samar Badawi, Asia Bibi, Malala Yousafzai, Rahaf al-Qunun, etc.) but that doesn't mean people aren't always working for their cause. But I think the idea you should ignore the everyday sexism that women have to put up with in the West because it is worse elsewhere is ridiculous.

If such a mechanism has evolved, does it imply that there is something intrinsically wrong or bad about inheriting mitochondria from the father? Could it be that they are only intended to power the sperm and not really adequate (in some way) to be reproduced and used more widely?

Evidence?

I was going to ask how this can happen, then found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternal_mtDNA_transmission Sounds like it is still somewhat controversial - whether it happens at all or if it is significant.

Falling into a smallish (stellar mass) black hole. (Or being hung! )

True in principle. But you would only feel that in very extreme conditions.

(Ignoring the inappropriate word "prove" ...) That sounds like the way science always works: gather some data, build a model, produce some predictions based on the model, test them, hope for unexpected results so new hypotheses can be developed, etc. I don't know what the connection is with spirituality or belief.

Which is why I asked where you got that info. It looks like the source was mistaken (or maybe just confusing). As black holes lose energy (and therefore mass) through Hawking radiation, they get smaller. The temperature is inversely proportional to the mass, so it goes up as the black hole shrinks. (Which means that the black hole shrinks even faster.) But this is only significant for very small black holes. Any realistic black hole is going to gain mass faster than it can radiate it away. It is not an assumption, it is a calculation based on an approximation of QM in curved space. There is still a lot of theoretical work going on regarding black holes, in particular concerning possible quantum effects (which is where Hawking radiation comes from). One hypothesis is that the event horizon could be porous, when quantum effects are taken into account. There are a few models where black holes or event horizons don't form at all, but they are generally pretty speculative. The black hole "firewall" (where an observer falling into a black hole would see an extremely high temperature flux of particles at the event horizon) is another consequence of trying to apply quantum theory. Most people assume that this just indicates our lack of understanding of the physics of black holes. That seems to be about theoretical analogs of black holes in a particular type of two dimensional fluid. Other fluid models of black holes have demonstrated the existence of the equivalents of event horizons and even Hawking radiation For example: https://www.nature.com/news/hawking-radiation-mimicked-in-the-lab-1.16131.

Interesting article on science (mainly space science) in 2019. https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/top-10-highlights-of-what-2019-will-hold-for-science-469db3315e2f It includes this great composite picture to show the relative size of the Moon and the shadow of the Earth: