|> | No, I mean that it's best to build a known practical
|> | design, before attempting to create a modification
|> | to that design. The point being that, done properly,
|> | it will work/succeed. It is only your modification
|> | where there is a need to "see if that succeeds or
|> | fails". (See below)
|> | I'm beginning to get the impression that you actually
|> | have no intention of building a viable system, and that
|> | this is a purely "intellectual" endeavor, for your personal
|> | entertainment.
|> The impression is off. I intend to be a viable system. But I do intent
|> jump directly to a different design (which has already changed as a result
|> of info others have posted in this thread).
| Well, good luck with that, and since you have no more
| to provide to a discussion of the subject, farewell.
I'm here trying to get information. Some people have provided some.
Maybe they will provide more.
| If you ever have any actual practical information to
| impart someday, let us know. If you should ever be
| willing to disclose this "different design", there might be
| something to discuss.
Sure thing. If I come up with something better, I will. In the mean
time I will continue my research and study, which does include talking
| For those of us in alt.energy.homepower we don't construct
| systems that employ battery banks strictly for the learning
| experience. (In fact I suspect most of us would rather avoid
Neither do I. That's why I'm doing the learning ahead of the design and
| as many "learning experiences" as possible, as they are often
| painful.) It seems that you want to design "something different"
| based on our experience, but aren't interested in acquiring any
| of your own. You expect us to provide answers to suit your
| needs, but we just like to examine subjects of interest to us.
So are you saying I should skip the learning and construct every possible
design I come up with?
| By "learn as much of the science as I can", you mean seeing
| what NewsGroup posters have to say about a subject? To be
Sure. Maybe they know about actual science, or know where they have seen
| fare, I should inform you that we seldom cover as much "of
| the science" as you expect. Some things get left out of the
| discussions. But if you actually build something that works,
| you would have to have learned a few more things, related to
| the issue, than what might appear in a dozen threads.
I'll learn as much as I can before I build anything.
| Then there is the fact that actual projects get a lot of support
| from interested posters ("z" and his pelton wheel micro-hydro
| project for example.) If or when, you actually are trying to design
| or construct something real, try posting again. (Hopefully not too
| many will remember this run around.)
I'll continue to post when _either_
I have some useful information to offer,
or have a question soliciting useful information. For the latter, I have
learned that most posts in response fall into these categories:
1. people providing actual useful information
2. people intending well, but provide useless information
3. people providing useless information but really don't care
4. detractors that just like to post drivel
5. responses to any of the above
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
Click to see the full signature.