Highway mileage is easier on a car (generally) than urban mileage. Even manufacturers note this in their owners manuals, specifying that earlier service schedules for urban driving are a requirement.

The water table and aquifers can be found underground. Exactly where and how good they are will depend on a lot of things, such as rainfall, underground river flows, types of rocks and how porous they are (how easy it is for water to move through the rocks).

There's a lot that goes into it and the best place to dig would be where the rock or soil is easiest to shift and the most water is closest to the surface.

Economically, wouldn’t it be more viable long term that the costs associated with droughts, flooding etc. If you could dictate an areas weather, or increase probabilities, why wouldn’t it be seen in a good light?

You would be surprised.

Back as a kid I tried to make an FM transmitter and it turned out to be a cable TV jammer instead. Worked at a range of at least 100ft on a 9V battery.

Enough power and that signal will work it's way past the shielding in wired connections. Not nearly as much range though.

There's a few reasons I can think of:

• It would be unfathomably expensive to make changes at a scale necessary to have any meaningful impact on the local climate
• The scale of changes required would be an ecological disaster, decimating the habitats of various flaura and fauna
• Climates are complex things, and even if the previous two points were mitigated or acceptable, you can bet there'd be some horrible side effects elsewhere (i.e. Making a change to bring more rainfall to one area might cause severe droughts in another)

Please read this entire message

Your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):

• Rule #1 of ELI5 is to be nice.

Breaking rule 1 is not tolerated.

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe it was removed erroneously, explain why using this form and we will review your submission.

Removing mountains or adding them is the sort of thing that would be necessary to alter rain patterns, and the amount of effort needed to do so is incredible. It's just not seen as practical to go "We'll move mountains and build new ones" or "We'll have to remove mountains" especially when you might also have to change the geography of neighboring regions as well.

Matter*

Theoretically you could do this but the amount of effort involved is huge and you may end up changing the weather over a much larger area than you were hoping for.

"like a liquid" does not equal a liquid. its a solid. not a "solid liquid", which isnt a thing, and its not a liquid.

all liquids flow. every single one of them. it is an intrinsic property of liquid. its literally impossible for a liquid not to flow because flowing is a requirement of being a liquid. if something does not flow, then it can not be called a liquid. the fact that amorphous solids do not flow is exactly what makes them not a liquid, because again, all liquids flow.

>It may vary with location, but in the USA the lowest wifi frequency is 2.4GHz, and the highest cell frequency is 2.2GHz

That is not true. Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_frequencies_in_the_United_States there cellular communication in use at 39GHz.

The car has a battery that will run the accessories and be charged by the alternator when the engine is running.

It’s fine to call it axiomatic. You can get into that Hilbert style formalism all you want. That’s all just backwards justification of math.

There is a reason nobody picked it up and continued that work when he abandoned it.

This might be my favorite copypasta

Idk about osmosis, but dying perhaps?

Are there filters that could be designed to get exactly the compounds you want, without all that guesswork?

Vodka’s definition in a lot of places is just a certain alcohol percentage, doesn’t matter where it comes from as if you concentrate the alcohol that much it most of the aromatics and flavor gets pulled out

But he found a single paper from 2008 that, if read a certain way, supports his view! He must be right!

For the most part, though there are no guarantees at what depth you will hit water, the rate of flow, or the quality of the water when you reach it - the level at which the local aquifer exists varies wildly. Wells can go upwards of over a thousand feet down without finding water. In some places, because the drilling can actually clog aquifers, they'll try hydrofracking to increase rate of flow. And sometimes, people are lucky - they have artesian wells that provide an abundance of water that naturally flows to the surface thanks to the rock formations in that area.

Before a driller gets started on a well, they'll check local water tables, the geology of the area, examine previous wells drilled in that neighborhood to determine at what depths water was discovered, what the average well depth is, and ensure that Call Before You Dig has been out to mark the area with possible underground hazards (cable, power, gas, fiber, sewer, etc). On occasion, they'll blast if drilling where the bedrock is particularly thick (such as granite).

My father and grandfather worked in the water well industry for over 30 years and both have agreed that while dowsing is by no means a perfect process, it can work in the correct hands. A lot of times, my father was able to look at an address and determine the approximate depth the well would need to be, take an estimated guess at the quality so that he could then design a pump and storage system to maximize the well's production.

Interesting. In NYC I've always felt like 30,000 cars from Brooklyn are equal to 100,000 cars from nicer areas in Jersey. But yeah, I totally get what you're saying in the grand scheme.

I've never seen it. Can you share a resource?

> water dowsing is controversial

Weird how people say "controversial" when pretending like witchcraft is real in any other situation is immediately laughable.

When dowsers are successful, it's because they take cues from the landscape. Not a funny twig and some magic.

It's not a liquid at all, my dude. It's a solid that has short-range order, but not long-range order.

It fits no other properties of a liquid.

It's not. See other comments.

Hey that's really interesting I did not know that. Thank you