rlhamil

Well-known member
First Name
Richard
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
481
Reaction score
517
Location
Glen Burnie, Maryland
Vehicles
2002 Trans Am WS6, 2018 Kia Sportage, 2024 Cyberbeast FS
Occupation
retired
Country flag
Yes, you can capture methane from organic sources and pipe it around, and that will probably replace an increasing (but probably not total) percentage of natural gas obtained from e.g. phracking. (I still think a lot of green is more feelgood than benefit once you add in inefficiencies, losses, non-neutral parts of the entire delivered product etc. It's easy to talk big ideas, dang hard to make them practical and economical. Many ecofreaks are just power-crazed liberty thieves under cover of pretending to promote something good, not to say some real improvements and more responsible behavior can't become practical.)

But you still need a pipeline, and I don't think Starbase has one, at least not of capacity nearly sufficient for tank farms, and probably not pure methane either; most gas pipe suppliers supply at least partly natural gas, which is about 5% other than methane. I suppose they could (would have to) run some sort of distillation equipment to purify it. A local solar farm and local synthesis of methane might make more sense, given that they need to master that anyway. A pipeline MIGHT be an interim measure, depending on cost and speed of installation.
Sponsored

 

Cyber Man

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2023
Threads
9
Messages
927
Reaction score
1,943
Location
California
Vehicles
BMW X1, Porsche Cayenne, R1T Perf max, Cyberbeast
Country flag
lol, I’m lost on where this thread is going - are we talking about how to use poop electricity generators to charge Cybertruck, so that it can levitate and take me to office in 5 mins (with FSD of course). Sign me up. All I need is just one minor approval from my dietician to eat more kidney beans 🤣
 

rlhamil

Well-known member
First Name
Richard
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
481
Reaction score
517
Location
Glen Burnie, Maryland
Vehicles
2002 Trans Am WS6, 2018 Kia Sportage, 2024 Cyberbeast FS
Occupation
retired
Country flag
lol, I’m lost on where this thread is going - are we talking about how to use poop electricity generators to charge Cybertruck, so that it can levitate and take me to office in 5 mins (with FSD of course). Sign me up. All I need is just one minor approval from my dietician to eat more kidney beans 🤣
Flying cars are cool and there are various companies working on them (although AFAIK nothing widely for sale yet). But a Cybertruck is way too darn heavy an approach for that, thick stainless and heavy castings is about the last thing you want to build a flying car out of. Too bad, it'd be fun to land in a bulletproof upscale version of a DeLorean and blow everyone's minds.

You'll need approval not only of your dietician, but your co-workers; good luck with that, not everyone likes trumpet music esp. with olfactory accompaniment.
 

JBee

Well-known member
First Name
JB
Joined
Nov 22, 2019
Threads
18
Messages
4,904
Reaction score
6,331
Location
Australia
Vehicles
Cybertruck
Occupation
. Professional Hobbyist
Country flag
There's vast amounts of new phenomena, processes, objects, still out there to be discovered; we (yes, even me, sadly) are rather ignorant. They just do not stay secret for very long, give or take techniques that are boring except to a small scattering of people. A dramatic notion one can't prove is almost universally WRONG, except as a cover for something far more boring.

I have no problem with what can be done in a microwave oven. with the microwaves scattered and traveling in more or less all directions in the chamber. I'm not going to try it, but I accept that it can happen.

It does not therefore follow that controllable plasma balls operated by offshore vessels are flying over New Jersey, that's just nucking futz. Not unless the plasma ball is inside a microwave oven being carried and powered by a physical drone. No phased array like collection of masers on the ground (or on a ship) is going to achieve similar effects, period. The absolute least you'd need in addition to anything surface based is one or more flying microwave reflectors, and those would be very obvious...and probably not nearly accurate enough for the desired result at the target point. And I STILL don't think that would work in practice even with physical reflectors, although I can't rule it out entirely.

Always look for the least dramatic, mostly off-the-shelf explanation, unless there is incontrovertible proof that that's insufficient. Think of it as Occam's Razor vs tinfoil hat.
I can accept at face value most of what you said, but the reason a microwave has a turntable is because most microwaves has a "hotspot" above the turntable which has a higher concentration of microwaves than elsewhere. Take out the turntable, and but some butter in there and you will quickly see the hotspot. There are turntable-less microwaves that have a rotating deflector on the microwave output, but they are less common and don't work as well to make the grape plasma. (I have tried both kinds) The grape plasma requires this hotspot of microwaves to sustain itself, as it can't be done by background RF radiation alone.

But I think a part that you are missing here is that the plasma itself is the antenna receiving the signal.

It does not need to be reflected off something else to work, neither does it need any physical material to form a craft etc, it's simply a high energy state of matter that is emitting photons that are visible.

Simply: The conductive plasma ball itself is the antenna that is receiving the energy from the transmitter, and the way it dissipates the energy received is by emitting it as visible light and heat in a sphere format, as this is the most natural form to do so in the atmosphere. The trick to make it controllable is to have a phased array or similar, that can locate the plasma ball "antenna", and maintain a signal to it, and by manipulating on which side of the ball energy is displaced marginally more than another side, it can create a force imbalance that moves it in the opposite direction.

To be clear it's probable that these can't spontaneously appear "anywhere" from the transmission itself, rather that the plasma needs to be initiated at some location and then it can be moved by the above antenna mechanics within the life cycle of the artificially generated plasma before it decays. Antenna could also be space based and I assume the plasma balls operate in the kW not MW power levels.

We are dealing with a few abnormalities to what we consider "standard" flying machines that need to reconsidered in order to consider the platform accurately:

1) the "object" is nearly weightless so maintaining altitude or traveling requires very little energy in comparison to winged flight and lift - most of the energy is consumed to maintain the plasma itself
2) the object does not have it's own power source, rather because plasma is a conductor, it is itself creating an antenna to receive energy from another source through RF
3) the object lacks any physical properties due to the lack of mass, and as such is mostly just a visual phenomenon that can potentially be used as a ignition or electrical disruption source, due to the high voltage nature of plasma fields when they interact with lower energy states of matter, like gas, liquids or solids. (akin to large static discharges)

Hope this helps to convey what I mean better. Who knows, maybe it works differently, but atm I think there is some merit to the concept I described to facilitate the effect observed.
 

Cyber Man

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2023
Threads
9
Messages
927
Reaction score
1,943
Location
California
Vehicles
BMW X1, Porsche Cayenne, R1T Perf max, Cyberbeast
Country flag
I absolutely won’t doubt these experiments. As I said, anything is possible in science. To create something at a micro level in lab is one thing but to build a viable anti-gravity heavy drone that can levitate with plasma ions is completely another thing. You need to do tons and tons of experiments to understand the design and energy modulations, and you need tons of infinite energy as well. This is why we haven’t been able to create stable wormholes. Gravitational force is universal force, unlike electromagnetic force. You need something with negative mass to create the energy field to do the levitation. Not saying it’s not possible, but the experiments are infinite, and that’s why I was referencing to quantum computing and AI to run the experiments. That’s the only way to narrow down the results and the design. Decoding anti-gravity, space-time continuum, quantum-entanglement, black holes, dark matter- these are all holy grails of science breakthrough. To narrow down the results, extreme experiments are needed, and that’s what great minds in physics are constantly doing around the globe. Things were different when people believed earth is flat. A working prototype now is widely accepted, and people win Nobel prize for these type of discoveries.

If someone already knows the results, then the world would never need a scientist to do the experiments, right? To do all those experiments in an exponential rate, massive computational power is needed to know which designs are dead end and which would be successful. Building on top of a known phenomenon requires significant experiments. If you don’t agree, check out how many rockets have exploded in the space. There is a long road between plasma effect in a microwave using grapes to heavy drones levitated by plasma ions. It’s like when humanity first discovered that fire can propel things forward to the time we caught a rocket mid-air. Experiments, experiments, experiments!

Don’t forget the cost to build one! It used to cost 3 million dollars a decade ago to decode entire human genome. Now it costs $600. Why? Thanks to powerful computation with AI!

If it’s that easy to build anti-gravity drone, please someone build it asap, even if it’s a toy. I’ll be the first to buy, as long as it’s priced less than $1000 😝

Sorry, this thread has completely derailed into geeky stuff! 🤐

Back to the main thread - CT is kick ass 🥰😄
 
Last edited:


JBee

Well-known member
First Name
JB
Joined
Nov 22, 2019
Threads
18
Messages
4,904
Reaction score
6,331
Location
Australia
Vehicles
Cybertruck
Occupation
. Professional Hobbyist
Country flag
Yes, you can capture methane from organic sources and pipe it around, and that will probably replace an increasing (but probably not total) percentage of natural gas obtained from e.g. phracking. (I still think a lot of green is more feelgood than benefit once you add in inefficiencies, losses, non-neutral parts of the entire delivered product etc. It's easy to talk big ideas, dang hard to make them practical and economical. Many ecofreaks are just power-crazed liberty thieves under cover of pretending to promote something good, not to say some real improvements and more responsible behavior can't become practical.)

But you still need a pipeline, and I don't think Starbase has one, at least not of capacity nearly sufficient for tank farms, and probably not pure methane either; most gas pipe suppliers supply at least partly natural gas, which is about 5% other than methane. I suppose they could (would have to) run some sort of distillation equipment to purify it. A local solar farm and local synthesis of methane might make more sense, given that they need to master that anyway. A pipeline MIGHT be an interim measure, depending on cost and speed of installation.
Apparently Starbase had an old NG pipeline they wanted to use, but was unfit for purpose so they used it as a data conduit and are building a new pipeline there, that might power a local 250MW NG PowerStation as well as provide a local tap for Methane. There's also talk of a LNG plant going in just a few miles away, which isthe liquid fuel what they are using to fill Starship. Methane obviously needs to be chilled to a liquid before tanking.

I completely agree with the greenwashing and general denial of embodied emissions with conventional renewables, but biogas is not one of them, and in particular is dispatchable generation and can operate as baseload, because the methane can be stored locally for use in peak periods, regardless of the environmental conditions, unlike solar and wind that require expensive external storage. In fact the methane collection and destruction is some 20x more effective than it's renewable energy CO2 offset. Overall, there is no better comprehensive RE that I have found, since we first built ours in 2005, that ticks nearly all of the environmental concerns and piggy backs on the rate of human consumption, by extracting high value resources from waste.
 

65SoYoLO

Well-known member
First Name
Keith
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Threads
21
Messages
907
Reaction score
1,082
Location
Long Island NY
Vehicles
2024 CyberTruck
Occupation
Retired truck driver
Country flag
Yeah, but if he does, it’ll have a fart setting. 😑

“Set phasers to fart, Mr. Sulu.”
I have to say, my farts are stunning...
 

rlhamil

Well-known member
First Name
Richard
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
481
Reaction score
517
Location
Glen Burnie, Maryland
Vehicles
2002 Trans Am WS6, 2018 Kia Sportage, 2024 Cyberbeast FS
Occupation
retired
Country flag
Apparently Starbase had an old NG pipeline they wanted to use, but was unfit for purpose so they used it as a data conduit and are building a new pipeline there, that might power a local 250MW NG PowerStation as well as provide a local tap for Methane. There's also talk of a LNG plant going in just a few miles away, which isthe liquid fuel what they are using to fill Starship. Methane obviously needs to be chilled to a liquid before tanking.

I completely agree with the greenwashing and general denial of embodied emissions with conventional renewables, but biogas is not one of them, and in particular is dispatchable generation and can operate as baseload, because the methane can be stored locally for use in peak periods, regardless of the environmental conditions, unlike solar and wind that require expensive external storage. In fact the methane collection and destruction is some 20x more effective than it's renewable energy CO2 offset. Overall, there is no better comprehensive RE that I have found, since we first built ours in 2005, that ticks nearly all of the environmental concerns and piggy backs on the rate of human consumption, by extracting high value resources from waste.
Ok, that time you're talking sense, although I'd like to see where to find some of those details (Starbase pipeline, LNG plant, etc).

Given that LNG is 5%+ other than methane, in addition to/as part of chilling it to liquid, it might need to be purified to remove some of the other components; I don't know what they've been using up to this point, but the "ethane, propane, butane, and trace amounts of nitrogen" that make up the rest might not be ideal. If what I looked up is correct, the boiling points are:
nitrogen −196°C
methane -162°C
ethane -88.5°C
propane -42ºC
butane -1ºC
 

JBee

Well-known member
First Name
JB
Joined
Nov 22, 2019
Threads
18
Messages
4,904
Reaction score
6,331
Location
Australia
Vehicles
Cybertruck
Occupation
. Professional Hobbyist
Country flag
This thread has turned into a "troll farm" of stupid. It should be locked if nothing on point can be added.
Hey BengalBoy!

I'd like your input on what exactly in detail I said you think is stupid or uncomprehendable.

I've been around here for a while and have been posting more stuff on Cybertruck engineering than you ever will, for years now.

So although I don't seek your permission, I'm happy to discuss in detail the relevance of plasma lightning balls to this particular thread, seeing it was part of the emails of the victim/perp.

The methane side show was a result of responding to the trivialisation of the subject with bathroom humour, which in turn I tried to make informative.

Despite that, like many things, its still relative to Cybertruck in that it uses the same alloy as Starship, and CT was the best way to it mass produced in bulk for Starship etc etc etc. Fuelling it from a renewable source should be of interest on a EV forum.

If anything, people should realise by now that the scope of interdependant technologies used by EM for his "Mars mission" is huge and with it the subject matter to be discussed.

The purpose of any forum is to share information, it's up to you what you are interested in and subscribe to, but that doesn't mean other people can't talk.

As for trolling I'm quite happy under my bridge, but as for you, maybe go to university and get a engineering degree, build a bridge, and get over it. ;)
 


JBee

Well-known member
First Name
JB
Joined
Nov 22, 2019
Threads
18
Messages
4,904
Reaction score
6,331
Location
Australia
Vehicles
Cybertruck
Occupation
. Professional Hobbyist
Country flag
Ok, that time you're talking sense, although I'd like to see where to find some of those details (Starbase pipeline, LNG plant, etc).

Given that LNG is 5%+ other than methane, in addition to/as part of chilling it to liquid, it might need to be purified to remove some of the other components; I don't know what they've been using up to this point, but the "ethane, propane, butane, and trace amounts of nitrogen" that make up the rest might not be ideal. If what I looked up is correct, the boiling points are:
nitrogen −196°C
methane -162°C
ethane -88.5°C
propane -42ºC
butane -1ºC
Brave uses a AI search engine to collate answers to queries, and then shows links to sources. That's what I use atm, google etc also have versions.

Re: with NG/LNG composition, you are right that these need to be removed from a Natural Gas source that contains these elements naturally, and in fact some of these are removed in the cooling process itself.

With bio-methane its a bit different, in that there is a higher concentration of CO2and sometimes CO that needs to be removed as well as trace amounts of hydrogen sulphide etc. CO is actually combustible straight out, but it has no meaningful propane, ethane etc. Gas composition also depends on the feedstocks you anaerobically digest and in what temperature range you digest them mesophilic, thermophilic etc.

In most generator applications the CO2 is scrubbed, so you end up with nearly pure methane (CH4) for combustion, which exhaust gases burn so clean (there's only very low PPM oil lubricants in the exhaust) can be used directly for CO2 enrichment in greenhouses, that then produce more organic waste for the cycle. A solid state methane fuel cell is practically only emitting CO2 and H2O.

In Germany when they inject biomethane into the NG pipeline network, they actually have to add in Propane, ethane etc to "water down' the calorific content so it meets NG fuel specifications. But otherwise, biomethane is actually mostly just methane without the CO2, which if it could be sourced and liquidised locally, would actually be more readily convertible to the liquid methane they require for fuel in Starship as it won't need removal of the other gas components included with ground sourced NG.

As I mentioned previously, biomethane is more of a "holistic" type solution than using an industrial Sabatier process. Simplified the process converts carbohydrates (CHO chains from organics) into hydrocarbons (CH - Biomethane is it's simplest form CH4) which then goes back to CO2 and H2O (water vapour), which plant life absorbs through photosynthesis to make CHO's and the cycle repeats.

Along the way you get oxygen generation from plants growing along with plant CO2 absorption, that results in food production along with heaps of biological materials for human consumption (clothing, building etc) that then is digested to create methane fuel, which can be stored and used like normal fuel in the form of LNG/methanol etc for base load and flight, upon which conversion to biomethane provides solid fertiliser from the biomass digestion process, as well as CO2/H2O for plant growth.

Human biology and animals actually fit inside this naturally occurring process as we are essentially a "combustor", in that we take in carbohydrates CHO and convert it to CO2/H20 as well, and produce biological waste that supports the biomethane digestion. In fact biomethane reactors are not much more than a glorified, long process time, artificial cows stomach containers, filled with the same bacteria cultures. The main difference is that they are optimised for methane production.
 

JBee

Well-known member
First Name
JB
Joined
Nov 22, 2019
Threads
18
Messages
4,904
Reaction score
6,331
Location
Australia
Vehicles
Cybertruck
Occupation
. Professional Hobbyist
Country flag
I absolutely won’t doubt these experiments. As I said, anything is possible in science. To create something at a micro level in lab is one thing but to build a viable anti-gravity heavy drone that can levitate with plasma ions is completely another thing. You need to do tons and tons of experiments to understand the design and energy modulations, and you need tons of infinite energy as well. This is why we haven’t been able to create stable wormholes. Gravitational force is universal force, unlike electromagnetic force. You need something with negative mass to create the energy field to do the levitation. Not saying it’s not possible, but the experiments are infinite, and that’s why I was referencing to quantum computing and AI to run the experiments. That’s the only way to narrow down the results and the design. Decoding anti-gravity, space-time continuum, quantum-entanglement, black holes, dark matter- these are all holy grails of science breakthrough. To narrow down the results, extreme experiments are needed, and that’s what great minds in physics are constantly doing around the globe. Things were different when people believed earth is flat. A working prototype now is widely accepted, and people win Nobel prize for these type of discoveries.

If someone already knows the results, then the world would never need a scientist to do the experiments, right? To do all those experiments in an exponential rate, massive computational power is needed to know which designs are dead end and which would be successful. Building on top of a known phenomenon requires significant experiments. If you don’t agree, check out how many rockets have exploded in the space. There is a long road between plasma effect in a microwave using grapes to heavy drones levitated by plasma ions. It’s like when humanity first discovered that fire can propel things forward to the time we caught a rocket mid-air. Experiments, experiments, experiments!

Don’t forget the cost to build one! It used to cost 3 million dollars a decade ago to decode entire human genome. Now it costs $600. Why? Thanks to powerful computation with AI!

If it’s that easy, please someone built it asap, even if it’s a toy anti-gravity drone. I’ll be the first to buy, as long as it’s priced less than $1000 😝

Sorry, this thread has completely derailed into geeky stuff! 🤐

Back to the main thread - CT is kick ass 🥰😄
Hey Cyberman
Sorry didn't want to neglect the geeky convo with you. :geek:

BTW maybe you missed my response to you here:

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...admin-warning-no-politics.33596/post-30465017

And then first maybe read my recent summary of the lightning ball discussion here:

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...admin-warning-no-politics.33596/post-30465086

But a couple of things that might help correct the thought process: Describing gravity as a force might distort the actual mechanism that causes the observation:

Here for more:


Then if we bundle in some misconceptions about what time actually is or isn't, (being simply a sequence of events) we essentially end up at step one:

The only thing I know for certain, is that everything I know is not certain.

The point is that in order to make any type of accurate axiom that approximates the truth, the first requirement is to know as much as possible of the subject matter, being both how it could work, and how it shouldn't work.

There are many extrapolations of unsubstantiated theories that should not exist to begin with and are outdated. factually wrong, ignorantly accepted and mass popularised through education and media. Others are so convoluted and pompous they don't reflect the natural world at all.

I'll say again: these subjects were popular amongst "real" scientists last millennia and many discoveries were not made public to this day, and many labelled as fringe or conspiracist.
So if you want to learn something new, read the de-narratived history books.

Maybe the first step is to ditch the concept that everything is made of actual "particles" of "something", and rather that particle physics only describes the behaviour and properties of "something" so incomprehensibly small it's actually unobservable. Then throw in some field theory and you're half way there, just don't get to distracted with transverse wave propagation stuff that likes to ignore scalar waves. Enjoy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_field_theory

P.S. I haven't touched on gravitic propulsion at all in my descriptions, so please consider what I say without that notion in mind. But if we did discuss it we'd have to include all the strong and weak forces into the equation to show a meaningful result.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: REM

Cyber Man

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2023
Threads
9
Messages
927
Reaction score
1,943
Location
California
Vehicles
BMW X1, Porsche Cayenne, R1T Perf max, Cyberbeast
Country flag
Hey Cyberman
Sorry didn't want to neglect the geeky convo with you. :geek:

BTW maybe you missed my response to you here:

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...admin-warning-no-politics.33596/post-30465017

And then first maybe read my recent summary of the lightning ball discussion here:

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...admin-warning-no-politics.33596/post-30465086

But a couple of things that might help correct the thought process: Describing gravity as a force might distort the actual mechanism that causes the observation:

Here for more:


Then if we bundle in some misconceptions about what time actually is or isn't, (being simply a sequence of events) we essentially end up at step one:

The only thing I know for certain, is that everything I know is not certain.

The point is that in order to make any type of accurate axiom that approximates the truth, the first requirement is to know as much as possible of the subject matter, being both how it could work, and how it shouldn't work.

There are many extrapolations of unsubstantiated theories that should not exist to begin with and are outdated. factually wrong, ignorantly accepted and mass popularised through education and media. Others are so convoluted and pompous they don't reflect the natural world at all.

I'll say again: these subjects were popular amongst "real" scientists last millennia and many discoveries were not made public to this day, and many labelled as fringe or conspiracist.
So if you want to learn something new, read the de-narratived history books.

Maybe the first step is to ditch the concept that everything is made of actual "particles" of "something", and rather that particle physics only describes the behaviour and properties of "something" so incomprehensibly small it's actually unobservable. Then throw in some field theory and you're half way there, just don't get to distracted with transverse wave propagation stuff that likes to ignore scalar waves. Enjoy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_field_theory

P.S. I haven't touched on gravitic propulsion at all in my descriptions, so please consider what I say without that notion in mind. But if we did discuss it we'd have to include all the strong and weak forces into the equation to show a meaningful result.
Thanks! Yep, I saw the previous posts, and I love the YouTube channel you shared. Yes, gravity is technically not a force. In my above response I mentioned it as “universal” force. Probably there is a better terminology to use to highlight that it’s a universal field created by space-time continuum based on the mass of the object, and all objects experience it the same way, as evident by the moon experiment of dropping a hammer and a feather.

The whole reason plasma lightning came up is to support the hypothesis of anti-gravity drones, which was shared in the manifesto. I was implying that taking a working concept of plasma lightning in the lab to full production of anti-gravity drones is a very long road. A highly sustainable Negative mass energy field has to be created to nullify the effects of space-time continuum. Our current technology is not there to create such a sophisticated design, and we don’t have a large amount of energy to do that yet. I was just drawing that conclusion to summarize that no country is even close to doing this (again just my opinion). If someone has done it, they would have figured out how to even bend space-time fabric itself. So, I think the things disclosed in the manifesto are probably false narratives that the poor person might have believed - probably because he got convinced somehow. If it’s remotely true, then he is absolutely right - it’s going to change the entire course of humanity.

Sorry, didn’t know you weren’t implying the connection between plasma lightning and drones. If someone draws that type of connection, it’s like seeing a bird and saying I have understood all laws of physics, I can build a jet plane tomorrow. There is a huge difference between fully understanding the concepts and actually building a working model! IMO, high advancement in quantum computing and AI is needed to cross that bridge, as trillions of experiments have to be simulated to cross that bridge!

I’m absolutely not denying the technicalities of the experiments or facts in the history books. I’m trying to link these technical discussions to the manifesto to stay relevant to the thread! Otherwise, a science forum would be a great place to debate on these geeky things if we are just discussing on certain science topics not relevant to the Las Vegas incident! This thread has a high chance to get locked in, at least for folks who are not discussing anything relevant to the Las Vegas incident! I don’t want to be booted out! 😝
 
Last edited:

CyberZephyr

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 8, 2024
Threads
10
Messages
446
Reaction score
326
Location
Long Island New York
Vehicles
2021 MY, 2023 MX
Country flag
Hey BengalBoy!

I'd like your input on what exactly in detail I said you think is stupid or uncomprehendable.

I've been around here for a while and have been posting more stuff on Cybertruck engineering than you ever will, for years now.

So although I don't seek your permission, I'm happy to discuss in detail the relevance of plasma lightning balls to this particular thread, seeing it was part of the emails of the victim/perp.

The methane side show was a result of responding to the trivialisation of the subject with bathroom humour, which in turn I tried to make informative.

Despite that, like many things, its still relative to Cybertruck in that it uses the same alloy as Starship, and CT was the best way to it mass produced in bulk for Starship etc etc etc. Fuelling it from a renewable source should be of interest on a EV forum.

If anything, people should realise by now that the scope of interdependant technologies used by EM for his "Mars mission" is huge and with it the subject matter to be discussed.

The purpose of any forum is to share information, it's up to you what you are interested in and subscribe to, but that doesn't mean other people can't talk.

As for trolling I'm quite happy under my bridge, but as for you, maybe go to university and get a engineering degree, build a bridge, and get over it. ;)
are you a bot, or just use AI for your responses? did you prompt in "wittingly roast this guy," fr.
Sponsored

 
 





Top