studiot

So if we go to 5 watts each, and stick with the 500 that is 2.5 kwatts continuous. That is certainly not enough to heat my home in winter. The BBC article also said that the heat is transferred by an oil.

Here am I wondering if you actually read what i wrote ?

Well I see 1) A sereies capacitor 2) A series motor 3) The system is grounded.

A few thoughts/reservations as the quoted figures sound too good to be true. 500 'computer chips'. I don't know what chips or how much power they draw, but looking at current processor chips say they draw between 0.05 and 0.1 kw each. That is a draw of 25 to 50 kw. So where does this come from ? The average house supply in the UK is 55kw. The average gas boiler puts out between 15kw and 25 kw. But that is intermittent. Presumably these chips are on all the time. And what happens in the summer when home heating is not required ?

Data centre in the shed reduces energy bills to £40 Terrence Bridges says he "can't fault the heating system", which captures heat from more than 500 mini-computers processing data ByBen Schofield BBC East, political correspondent Published 16 November 2025, 03:10 GMT Updated 7 hours ago An Essex couple have become the first people in the country to trial a scheme that sees them heat their home using a data centre in their garden shed. Terrence and Lesley Bridges have seen their energy bills drop dramatically, from £375 a month down to as low as £40, since they swapped their gas boiler for a HeatHub – a small data centre containing more than 500 computers. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0rpy7envr5o Interesting approach.

Softly Softly please. I am hoping that Tonia is a real human being and that "dear colleagues" is only an excruciation of a translator. I stand firmly by my bridge example. I could have chosen all sorts of examples say a garden or a stand that the Chelsea Flower Show. Or I could have quoted Brouwer "All architects should actually be designing a chair".

Welcome Tonia and thank you for an interesting topic. Not sure which side of this divide you are coming from but the subject fits nicely into my observation that our consideration processes can be divided into two camps (though there is obviouly overlap as well as each can be used to support the other). I call these Analysis and Synthesis. Analysis is the study of something that is already there. This may involve measurement, observation, comparison, description, recording. Synthesis is the production of something that is not already there. I hold that synthesis is actually the more difficult of the two. For instance it is one thing to take photographs, measurements and so on of a bridge across a valley, and analyse how strong it is. It is quite a different matter to look at an empty valley and buiild a bridge across it, that can carry say a railway train. The Romans built multi-tier multi-arch viaducts. It is instructive to find out how they knew where to start the base of the arches so that when the got to the top and the edges it would all end up in the right place and fit together. Take care how you respond in your first 24 hours as you only have 5 posts available. After that you can post at will.

I have a Dell with that problem but it has Windows 10. M$ said it could not be upgraded to Windows 11, when that came out despite their blandishments to the contrary. ~W10 and 11 are also a pain in the arse for other devices M$ would like to forget, like scanners and so on.

Not sure why time crystals imply other types of mass ? Examples of what I was thinking of are Stokes' bubbles, electron and hole mobilities in ordinary crystals, the anomalous Hall effect.

What about negative mass and effective mass ?

Yes you do need a mathematician. I can see at least 2 changes. Can you spot a third ?

I said others knew more about this than I do. +1 to @MigL

Indeed I haven't but then I didn't set out to prove this. There definitely was a time when human custom and practice was more like that of other animals. I am just trying to consider the differences, bearing in mind the adaptability of humans has led to them doing different things at differnt times in different places and different circumstances.

I have no idea of the answer to this or even if anyone can answer it. However I think it is a really well thought out question, worthy of a good answer so well done. +1

Hello again @Bcook Since I see you are back I thought perhaps you might like an answer to this question. The pictures @joigus drew for you show the lines around a steady unidirectional current (D C) The actual lines around an ac source are too complicated for a still diagram, since the currenet polarity (or direction) is always changing as it build up to a maximum, then declined to zero and then builds up to a maximum the other way, then declines to zero again, repetitively. As a consequence the arcs traced out will be circular but not complete circles, depending upon the frequency and distance from the current wire. To complicate matters further such a change constitutes a disturbance that propagates at the speed of light outwardly from the wire so if you go far enough the effect of the current change will not have had time to reach that larger circle path. The animation, due to NASA give the idea Of course at the distance involved with your equipment we don't need to worry about this.

If I take as my base set the set of all hydrocarbon molecules but restict it to three subsets I can show all I need to show/deduce. For this I do not need a coordinate system Nor do I need a metric Nevertheless using (relational) geometry without these I can deduce two different relations for these subsets, rather as you say you can do for GR and your proposal. So yes I agree there is more than one approach and that it is especially pleasing when they end up with the same result. So considering my three subsets as the alkanes, the alkenes and tha alkynes I observe that The alkanes have a formula CnH2n+2 The alkenes have a formula CnH2n The alkynes have a formula CnH2n-2 This is one relation deducible from geometry Another relation is deducible from the Chemistry. The alkanes have a only single bonds The alkenes have a double bond The alkynes have a triple bond Various relational diagrams may be drawn to show these facts. Now I said I don't need a metric for this. This is actually slightly disingenuous since I really should say there is a metric but I am not using it. It is in fact quite difficult to create a structure without a metric, whether you use that metric or not. In this case there exists (in the mathematical sense of that statement) a metric that may be described as a modified Hamming metric on the set of hydrocarbons in general and my subsets in particular. What's more you can even draw circles and define radii with this metric. It is a very simple metric the modulus of the difference of the number of carbon atoms between two molecules in a subset. This simple formula | Ca - Cb | where C is the number of carbon atoms and a, b are molecules in the set, satisfy the three metric axioms. This is exactly what I think you are trying to do when you post a diagram with a coordinate grid and circles. By doing this you have acknowledged that your schema (I use that word since you have something against sets) contains an implied metric.

Thank you for noticing my typo. Try as I might they always seem to creep in. As to 3 meals or any other number. The explanatory text did say (or was meant to say) simply 'regular meals' without specifying a number of meals. The 3 was just a common expression. I am also aware that some people also have deliberate fast days. But the point I was trying to make is 'regular' As opposed to 3 meals Monday, 2 Tuesday, 3 Wednesday, 1 Thursday and so on. Many also have only 2 on a Sunday on account of a large Sunday Lunch. But the Daily and Weekly pattern repeats.

Hello and welcome. Can I suggest to private message a moderator and see if this would be better in the engineering section. Anyway, wherever it is it is a good topic. To partially answer your question about efficiency, You cannot divorce cost from efficiency. But there are engineering considerations. Analysis of waste both from the point of view of resources, materials etc required to successfully produce an item to the fraction of failures in the production of that item. Also look at the number of operations needed to produce a component and the distance it has to travel from one operation to another. For example a potter making various pots, firing them, letting them cool, opening and unloading the kiln with minimal breakages. Look at the question of resources standing idle whilst something else is happening. What is the 'opportunity cost' of this ? Example a builder has scaffolding erected and ready before he has lined up (scheduled) the materials to place on the scaffold for erection. Then there are the company wide considerations such as the location of the plant in relation to the market for transport, distance and so on. Hope these pointers are a helpful start.

No, since I as I have already discovered we are working from different definitions. No. what would I use it for ? Just as you have ignored my repeated exhortations to start at the beginning not in the middle. So I will make a start, in good faith, and see where it leads us. Let us start with the simplest most general concept, a non empty set. Call it M. The only relation possessed by members of such a set is that they belong to the set. It is worth noting that this relation is an equivalence relation since if m,n , p ∈ M then m ~ m (reflexive) m ~ n ⇢ n ~ m (symmetric) m ~ n and n ~ p ⇢ m ~ p (transitive) I asked you and you didn't answer, what you think a relation is. Mathematically a relation is defined as a set of pairs of elements. So another way of defining the euqivalence realtion is to specify (list ) ll possible pairs and put them into another set (the realtion set). Although this does not get us very far it does display that there is often more than one way of approaching/defining/specifying. It also demonstrates the idea of a collection of sets, each with its own special purpose. Such a collection put together in another set leads to the idea of a space (including spacetime). Our simple set of course is too simple to be a 'space'. A space is a set containing a set of elements, a set of rules and posasibly a set of supporting objects. Alternatively we are imposing some rules on our simple set which give it a required 'structure. For example a vector space comprise a set of vectors, a set of rules for manipulating these and a set of coefficients (usually forming a Field). Each of these sets will be more complicated than our basic simple set and bring with them some structure of their own, implicit in their definitions. For example the Field set reminds us that a Field in mathematics is a very different object from a field in Physics. So you want to study relativity from the point of view of relational geometry. So I propose to do exactly that, starting at the beginning, for a much simpler example in Chemistry. The example will demonstrate what is necessary to make a proper fist of the job and bring out the 'wrinkles' that need to be ironed out.

Obviously it does since various patterns pertain throught the globe. But please, we should accept the premise that it is possible for humans to have various eating patterns and discuss the op questions about how that affects our evolution and development - both the positive and the negative.

ÎÎ

Perhaps that's what POTUS needs ? 😄

We can't all live in paradise. Conditions were particularly harsh for the first leavers of Africa , especially during an ice age. Even early man built 'cities'. But cities are not self sustaining by themselves. they require substantial agricultural infrastructure, and social specialisation We are still continuing this process today.

Well, as I see it, it allowed us time to do other things than scrabble for food. It also must have played a part in the development of a stratified society

So far as I know Man is the only animal that goes in forregular 'meals'. Other species eat opportunistically or more or less continuously. Whilst some store food, they do not 'plan' regular meals ahead, human style. So what is the evolution and development of this trait and what is the relationship with our overall evolution and development ? Has it helped or hindered us ?