Oh No? Do you want me to pull up some of your previous posts that contradicts that? That simply isn’t true!
Monte is purposely trolling threads, so he is deserving of every ridicule he gets! When he stops the trolling then the ridicule will also stop!
Religion explains the explainable as well (in its own way).
Only to benefit those in charge, as you call them.
No. He doesn’t seek attention like you do.
Although I don’t agree with him all the time (In fact, I disagree with him most of the time) but he has good points off and on.
You agree with him because you just as much of a troll as he is and he is one the few here who is willing to give you attention! Speaking of attention, why else do you take an interest in subject matters you have no idea about if your weren’t an attention whore? The very thing you try to accuse me of is exactly what you are guilty of!
Sometimes I think you need help …
Nope! Just stating obvious facts! He is one yours right? How is the shithole these days? 
On another topic to which you eluded to earlier! A while back there was a philosopher that you quoted when we were discussing the belief of a god. I think it was a quote that had something to do with having faith and giving up the sinful life as being a safe option vs. not being a believer and living life indulging in all its pleasures. I think the context to which you used the cited source was not being sure if there was a God pertaining to Christian belief and making a choice and whether or not our choice in the after life will be adverse. Something like that!
Can you cite that source again? I had forgotten it and want to explore more of that Writers work!
Thanks
Nope, just a guest as far as I know
Quieter since you left…
It is unlike me to deliberately quote any philosopher because I have never read any of their works.
However I do recall making a reference once, quite a while back, to Pascal’s Wager.
It goes something like, "since you can’t be sure that there isn’t a God, it is better to make the necessary small adjustments to one’s life … and follow the doctrine, just in case.
An interesting reveal for a mathematician. Google will find Pascal’s Wager for you.
Thanks for your response! This was it!
Oh BTW don’t be lulled into false dichotomies of echo chambers that can be a bitch sometimes!
Hydrogen is generated in huge amounts right now. You can buy a package hydrogen plant that converts methane and water into hydrogen and CO2. Making hydrogen for fuel in this way is foolish, though - you can just burn the methane.
The only way that you generate hydrogen without generating CO2 is by electrolyzing water. That’s a known technology, it’s just got alot of problems, and if the electric current is generated, why add inefficiency by making hydrogen when you can use the electricity directly?
That water-powered engine is a 100% certain scam. The only water-powered engine that isn’t a scam runs on steam, generated in a boiler heated with a hydrocarbon. Once the question is asked “how is energy generated in this water-powered engine” the game is over, there’s no answer to that question.
First … for the Ignoratii … Hydrogen is a wonderful solution, totally ecological, producing less water than a good shower.
However … the total system cost is worse although one could argue that using wind-power to electrolyse water is also totally ecological. The fact that there is no infrastructure to handle the supply of Hydrogen to end-users (except in Japan) is an inconvenience, but never mind because the total system will extract even more money from the hapless motorist in the name of saving the planet. 
Here is a recent appraisal of Hydrogen power. 
When you mud wrestle with a pig you lose even if you win.
Don’t feed it.
Yeah, from the people that call others trolls and accuse others of derailing threads. Just ignore the adolescents here and continue your work.
Thanks for that, I knew that there were added inefficiencies in using hydrogen, but I hadn’t seen an analysis of all of them put together.
Above that, there’s other difficulties of hydrogen. At the high pressures they give in that video, over 10,000 psi, hydrogen is very dangerous. High pressure hydrogen finds leak points better than anything else, and it will explode if there’s a decent leak. Then there’s the problem of having Bubba fill his car at the station - Bubba will find every possible way to screw that up. Compressing to that high a pressure is another problem - compressors are very high failure items.
Then there’s the fuel cells - you’ve got to separate the anode and cathode with a membrane. You have oxygen (air) on the other side of the membrane from the hydrogen. Air has alot of things in it that will foul the membrane and foul the electrodes. That causes the voltage and inefficiency of the generator to go way up. Replacing those membranes and cleaning the electrodes will be very expensive.
Hydrogen fuel cells are bombs looking for a place to go off in moving vehicles.
It also takes an incredible amount of energy to compress it to the necessary levels to give a vehicle an adequate store to have a practical range.
…but it might be more efficient to chill Hydrogen to something like -150C before compressing it. Or perhaps even cooler, I don’t know how the cryo-cooling process works.
Interesting question. You can save two-thirds of the compression power for hydrogen, but you lose it right back (and then some) with a liquid nitrogen cooling system. You’d be pissing into the wind.
A good rule of thumb with cryogenic systems: unless you really need it, it’s best avoided. Better to just swallow the cost of compressing the hydrogen at normal temperatures. Even at that you need four stages of compression and cooling, lots of whirlygigs that break often, and with hydrogen at really high pressure, failures can be catastrophic.
Chilling it also requires an extremely high energy input.
Rockets are typically fueled with L H and L 02.
The problem with attempting to use those forms is that as soon as they warm back up to mean it creates tremendous pressures within the containment/storage vessel.
As the liquid hydrogen warms it expands because the molecules spread apart. As they do, pressure builds in vessel until it reaches a point of equilibrium or explosion.
That’s why for example all propane tanks have a “blow off” or “relief” valve.
Old Saying: Science doesn’t answer the really interesting questions. Think about that. I also believe there are areas of physics we are unaware of; and may always be unaware of.
Rupert Sheldrake said it best.
I also have read his book.
You know, science has always been inseparable from religion. Even to this day.
We believe in the false god of the power of human reasoning and logic, or the left brain. But the right brain knows what the left counterpart doesn’t.
Depends upon the rocket. Saturn 5 used LOX and kerosene
If the gas is contained the molecules cannot move apart. There is a possibility of a phase-change from liquid to gas and that will affect inter-molecule spacing (assuming a liquid pool with a gas-phase volume above it), but I don’t know what the liquefaction pressure is for Hydrogen at any temperature.
No doubt that pressures will go up as it all warms…