|
 DieCommie
Ally
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 7,655
Loc: The Union
Last seen: 5 minutes, 57 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Visionary Tools said:It does run on water, an electrode of aluminium and magnesium, with an electrical charge to start it off, will make hydrogen and oxygen bubble off, and it also produces an electrical current in the electrodes. see US patent 5089107 - Bi-polar auto electrolytic hydrogen generator
No it doesnt run off of water. The water consumes energy, it does not produce it. The energy is electrical which comes from the plug and chemical stored in the alloy.
Unless you are doing nuclear reactions, you cannot get energy out of water. Splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen consumes energy.
--------------------
Behold yon miserable creature. That Point is a Being like ourselves, but confined to the non-dimensional Gulf. He is himself his own World, his own Universe; of any other than himself he can form no conception; he knows not Length, nor Breadth, nor Height, for he has had no experience of them; he has no cognizance even of the number Two; nor has he a thought of Plurality; for he is himself his One and All, being really Nothing. Yet mark his perfect self-contentment, and hence learn his lesson, that to be self-contented is to be vile and ignorant, and that to aspire is better than to be blindly and impotently happy.
|
 makaveli8x8
Stranger
 
Registered: 02/28/06
Posts: 6,761
Last seen: 4 hours, 3 minutes
|
 Re: water torch [Re: Anno]
#8319769 - 04/23/08 05:13 PM (7 months, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Anno said:
Quote:
buddhahoodlum said:
an alternator uses about .5 hp off your engine so say you have a 100 horsepower engine thats .5% of your engine power but you get a 10% power gain from having a 3 liter per min hho electrolysis cell being injected straight into the intake
If you invest 0.5 HP off your engine into electrolysis, you CAN NOT get more than a 0.5 HP equivalent in H2 and O2 gas out of it. In reality probably substantially less due to efficiency losses.
This is called the law of the conservation of energy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy .
ok so currect me if im wrong but there are some saying a hydrogenerator will not increase your mpg?
This is how i understand it so currect me if im wrong
your engine is already turning the alternator regardless of what you have hooked up to it. The faster you go the faster it turns, but the draw from the battery doesn't effect how fast the alternator turns does it?
I understand the law you linked to, but i just view the engine/electrical system in cars to be wasteful is that currect?
So let me go through my thought process and currect me where seen fit so i can understand this
Your engine is running off gasoline turning your alternator which charges your battery. This alternator has a limit to how much electricity it can produce, but the entire time your car is running it is feeding your battery and electrical components.
It must be feeding more than the battery + electrical needs otherwise the battery would go dead eventually. So by tapping into this unused electricity and producing hydrogen you are saving. Also this hydrogen is then feed into the gas system and part of it gets "recycled" by turning the alternator producing more HHO again??
--------------------
  We were sent to hell for eternity  Ø h®
We play on earth to pass the time 
Over-population the root of all Evil-brings the Elites Closer to the gates.
|
DieCommie
Ally
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 7,655
Loc: The Union
Last seen: 5 minutes, 57 seconds
|
|
Quote:
The faster you go the faster it turns, but the draw from the battery doesn't effect how fast the alternator turns does it?
Right the speed is fixed, but the difficulty of turning the alternator is not! If there is a load on the alternator, like charging a battery or performing electrolysis, then the alternator will be harder to turn and will consume more power from you engine.
The work you alternator is doing charging the battery or doing electricity has to come from somewhere, it comes from the engine. The more work you alternator is set up to do, the more work the engine must do. There is no way around it.
--------------------
Behold yon miserable creature. That Point is a Being like ourselves, but confined to the non-dimensional Gulf. He is himself his own World, his own Universe; of any other than himself he can form no conception; he knows not Length, nor Breadth, nor Height, for he has had no experience of them; he has no cognizance even of the number Two; nor has he a thought of Plurality; for he is himself his One and All, being really Nothing. Yet mark his perfect self-contentment, and hence learn his lesson, that to be self-contented is to be vile and ignorant, and that to aspire is better than to be blindly and impotently happy.
|
 johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 7,022
Loc: Americas
|
|
Quote:
bmiles said:
Quote:
norml840 said:
the oil giants will take care of him. keep your eyes on him. he and his technology will soon fade away.
My thoughts exactly.
But damn, this is amazing.
Read the whole thread he's allready dead 
Quote:
He was a shame to hear that he was poisoned (March 98') and longer with us. He died in the parking lot of a restaurant in his home town of Grove City, Ohio.Sharks came a week later and stole the the dune buggy and all of his experimental equipment, according to his brother, Steve. Stan said while he was alive, that he was threatened many times and would not sell out to Arab Oil Corp......
Who you suppose poisoned Stan? A jealous onlooker? Do you think the Oil Corp.'s are happy to see a converted car running for FREE?? Our own US DOE, and the present administration are heavily involved in the Oil business.
http://waterpoweredcar.com/stanmeyer.html
Best one  :
Quote:
There are not words to describe the magnitude of this tragedy. It is the greatest injustice in history as it effects all of humanity and the earth....
but in March 1998, Stan was poisoned and died in the parking lot of a restaurant in his home town of Grove City, Ohio. According to his brother Steve, the U.S. Government came to Stan's home a week after his murder and confiscated his car, which got 100 miles per gallon of water, and they stole all of his research equipment which he had used to develop the new technology.
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2007/04/04/p15700
Quote:
Inventor Stanley Meyer poisoned by Shadow Goverment ? … but his patents expired in june 2007 , so his inventions pops up everywhere !
http://www.need2know.eu/?p=410
Oh Noes! They got him 
(read the thread, I allready discussed this.)
But a point of note, he allready applied for patents years ago. Why would these devilish government people murder this loon? The information is allready public record, and long before the "murder" occured. What the hell is the other quote above talking about re: the patent expired on such and such date? Patents are not secret, by definition. Its not like this was a fluke or something. You can read exactly the method some multi billion dollar company uses to form their product if its patented, for obvious reasons. How can you avoid infringing upon a process you don't know of?
I love all the talk about this was the "greatest tragedy in the history of the world", lol. Have these people never taken 7th grade science class?
And yeah, diecommie hit the nail on the head, which he should since he's the resident physicist, lol, the alternator takes energy to turn. The electromotive force from an alternator is directly proportional to the mechanical energy put into it, so there is no free lunch here, as would be expected. Maybe this is the issue people don't understand? That alternators aren't free energy?
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 16,838
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 hours, 42 minutes
|
|
> Oh, and not explosive!
Please stop spreading the not explosive misinformation. Hydrogen gas is explosive in oxygen from 4% up to 75%. The HHO mixture is aprox 66% hydrogen in oxygen, thus it is explosive.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
Anno
Experimenter
Registered: 06/17/99
Posts: 24,013
Loc: my room
Last seen: 15 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
buddhahoodlum said:
For every 1 liter of water you put into your cell you get out 1800 liters of hho gas you do the math and then get back to me on that one Anno.
I did the math. In order to split the water to gas you need more energy than you get when you burn the gas to water again.
That's all what matters, and that's the reason why your engine won't work like you envision it to do.
--------------------
The Rich Jerk
Grow Mushrooms from Spores - PF-Tek for Simple Minds
|
makaveli8x8
Stranger
Registered: 02/28/06
Posts: 6,761
Last seen: 4 hours, 3 minutes
|
Re: water torch [Re: johnm214]
#8321876 - 04/24/08 02:04 AM (7 months, 8 days ago) |
|
|
A certain amount of energy is released from the gasoline and its more than what is needed, hence wasteful. Im not stating that as fact, im just saying thats what i think at the given moment and i havn't quite seen convincing evidence or i don't understand it well enough yet.
Like if i just take my foot off the break, my truck is going to move, if i hook it up to a car behind me, its still going to move without me giving it anymore gas, its wasteful, it produces more than is needed.
Whenever you let your foot off the gas during driving, your engine is still going to produce electricity right? By collecting this you are gaining energy and saving mpg.
Lets say your going 60 MPH and just turn off your engine, the alternator will still turn, collecting energy. Purhaps HHO is just a fancy electric motor in a way? but its also alot cheaper than say installing an electric motor.
Infact wouldn't HHO be better than adding say breaking alternators, and a electric motor? Because with extra alternators not only would you have the extra mechanical load, but also extra friction? or is that just the same thing?
So i understand now that the alternator takes more energy to turn with more load, but isn't a engine turning at 1000 to 1500 RPM's over producing to start with?
--------------------
We were sent to hell for eternity Øh®
We play on earth to pass the time
Over-population the root of all Evil-brings the Elites Closer to the gates.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 16,838
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 hours, 42 minutes
|
|
> Lets say your going 60 MPH and just turn off your engine, the alternator will still turn, collecting energy.
Nope. The alternator is turned by the engine, not by the wheels. If you turn off the engine at 60 MPH, the engine is no longer turning, thus the alternator is no longer turning, thus the alternator is no longer producing power. (The transmission decouples the turning wheels from the engine.)
> but isn't a engine ... over producing to start with?
Somewhat, but most of the waste is in the form of heat.
|
makaveli8x8
Stranger
Registered: 02/28/06
Posts: 6,761
Last seen: 4 hours, 3 minutes
|
Re: water torch [Re: Seuss]
#8321898 - 04/24/08 02:24 AM (7 months, 8 days ago) |
|
|
weird i thought it was only if you put it in neutral that that happened. I seen this guy with a dead battery open his door and start pushing with his big giant calves and got his battery a little juice to start it or so i thought
--------------------
We were sent to hell for eternity Øh®
We play on earth to pass the time
Over-population the root of all Evil-brings the Elites Closer to the gates.
|
johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 7,022
Loc: Americas
|
|
your car does consume more gas when it moves than when it idles, it would stall otherwise, as it would likely do w/ a manual transmission. Your gas pedle isn't equivalent to the gas going into the engine. An automatic has to automatically increase fuel delivery or the car would likely stall every time you release the break.
The alternator likewise takes energy to produce energy. It takes more energy in, like all processes, to produce equivalent energy out.
The only way something like this could work is to capture truely wasted energy, as the hybrid cars do w/ breaking. But why would you invest in a fickle and dangerous process like electrolysis when you could just use batteries and an electric engine like is done now?
All it boils down to is that you can't get 100% efficiency out of any process. There is no way to do it. Think of a use for this technology that doesn't require you to break this rule.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 16,838
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 hours, 42 minutes
|
|
> weird i thought it was only if you put it in neutral that that happened.
Yep. If you are in gear, your car quickly comes to a stop. (From what I remember, not an expert here) automatic transmissions will automatically drop into neutral when the engine cuts off.
> I seen this guy with a dead battery open his door and start pushing
On a standard transmission, you can drop it into gear while moving to turn the engine to start the vehicle when you let out the clutch. Doesn't work with an automatic transmission. In this case, you were correct, and the alternator would continue to produce power until the car comes to a stop. My bad for assuming automatic transmission.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 7,022
Loc: Americas
|
|
Quote:
makaveli8x8 said:
weird i thought it was only if you put it in neutral that that happened. I seen this guy with a dead battery open his door and start pushing with his big giant calves and got his battery a little juice to start it or so i thought
he probably just did a rolling start. He got the car going in neutral and then turned the ignition on and shifted to first gear, using the momentum of the car to turn over the engine in lieu of the starter You can do this going backwards to using reverse
|
buddhahoodlum
Bodhisattva
Registered: 04/30/07
Posts: 328
Loc: Buddhahood
Last seen: 2 days, 8 hours
|
Re: water torch [Re: johnm214]
#8324437 - 04/24/08 07:49 PM (7 months, 7 days ago) |
|
|
Wow can we get any more off base lmao. Anyways Anno go look at vids on youtube man thats i'll I need to see. I guess you have a profound distrust in everyone on there. Also take a look John Kanzius recent work with cancer research and water gas that alone proves that this technology is real he just has a better way of doing it.
--------------------
“I believe that water will one day be employed as fuel, that hydrogen and oxygen which constitute it, used singly or together, will furnish an inexhaustible source of heat and light, of an intensity of which coal is not capable.” – Jules Verne, T
“Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by power obtainable at any point in the universe...it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheel-work of nature."
- Nikola Tesla
Edited by buddhahoodlum (04/24/08 10:05 PM)
|
johnm214
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 7,022
Loc: Americas
|
|
throw out some citations re: "water gas" and "cancer research" I'm curious what that's about
|
RuNE
bomberman
Registered: 09/23/00
Posts: 2,241
Loc: tartarus
Last seen: 4 days, 19 hours
|
|
Quote:
buddhahoodlum said:
Wow can we get any more off base lmao. Anyways Anno go look at vids on youtube man thats i'll I need to see. I guess you have a profound distrust in everyone on there. Also take a look John Kanzius recent work with cancer research and water gas that alone proves that this technology is real he just has a better way of doing it.
Bad troll is bad.
--------------------
~Happy sailing~
|
buddhahoodlum
Bodhisattva
Registered: 04/30/07
Posts: 328
Loc: Buddhahood
Last seen: 2 days, 8 hours
|
Re: water torch [Re: RuNE]
#8335905 - 04/27/08 09:48 PM (7 months, 4 days ago) |
|
|
Bad troll is bad makes no sense. I came up with something highly relevant to the matter at hand and that's all you can say. John Kanzius results speak for themselves. Have fun paying $5 a gallon gas prices guys.
--------------------
“I believe that water will one day be employed as fuel, that hydrogen and oxygen which constitute it, used singly or together, will furnish an inexhaustible source of heat and light, of an intensity of which coal is not capable.” – Jules Verne, T
“Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by power obtainable at any point in the universe...it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheel-work of nature."
- Nikola Tesla
|
DieCommie
Ally
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 7,655
Loc: The Union
Last seen: 5 minutes, 57 seconds
|
|
It looks like your beloved John Kanzuis doest even believe his technology is an energy producer that will displace gasoline. From wikipedia...
Quote:
Kanzius admits that this process could not be considered an energy source, as more energy is used to produce the RF signal than can be obtained from the burning gas and stated in July 2007 that he never claimed his discovery would replace oil, asserting only that his discovery was "thought provoking."
Never claimed it would replace oil... hmmm...
--------------------
Behold yon miserable creature. That Point is a Being like ourselves, but confined to the non-dimensional Gulf. He is himself his own World, his own Universe; of any other than himself he can form no conception; he knows not Length, nor Breadth, nor Height, for he has had no experience of them; he has no cognizance even of the number Two; nor has he a thought of Plurality; for he is himself his One and All, being really Nothing. Yet mark his perfect self-contentment, and hence learn his lesson, that to be self-contented is to be vile and ignorant, and that to aspire is better than to be blindly and impotently happy.
|
buddhahoodlum
Bodhisattva
Registered: 04/30/07
Posts: 328
Loc: Buddhahood
Last seen: 2 days, 8 hours
|
|
Yes exactly but it proves that water can burn when it is split into hydrogen and oxygen this has never been defenatively proven before him. Electrolysis on the other hand does do it efficiently enough to get quite a return maybe not free energy but damn it's clean and comes from water. In the end though its all the same gas thats produced with these methods which is oxyhydrogen. It's a gas that burns extremely hot people hotter than any other gas on record. If hydrogen is a good fuel then why isn't this gas. Especially when you can easily produce it on demand and you don't even have to store it in tanks like hydrogen. You can't argue with the combustiblity potential this gas has if you do than you need to retake third grade science class.
--------------------
“I believe that water will one day be employed as fuel, that hydrogen and oxygen which constitute it, used singly or together, will furnish an inexhaustible source of heat and light, of an intensity of which coal is not capable.” – Jules Verne, T
“Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by power obtainable at any point in the universe...it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheel-work of nature."
- Nikola Tesla
Edited by buddhahoodlum (04/28/08 01:16 AM)
|
Anno
Experimenter
Registered: 06/17/99
Posts: 24,013
Loc: my room
Last seen: 15 days, 11 hours
|
|
What exactly is it that you don't understand?
Quote:
Electrolysis on the other hand does do it efficiently enough to get quite a return maybe not free energy but damn it's clean and comes from water.
The energy doesn't come from water! The energy comes from whatever source you are using to produce electricity you need to split water into hydrogen and oxygen: hydro, thermal, nuclear, solar...
And you need more energy to split water into the gases than you get back when you burn them.
Quote:
It's a gas that burns extremely hot people hotter than any other gas on record
Another thing you are wrong about.
Acetylene with oxygen burns considerably hotter. See http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1998/JamesDanyluk.shtml
The temperature of the gas is mostly irrelevant for the energy considerations though.
Quote:
Especially when you can easily produce it on demand and you don't even have to store it in tanks like hydrogen.
You can only produce it on demand where you have an electricity source.
--------------------
The Rich Jerk
Grow Mushrooms from Spores - PF-Tek for Simple Minds
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 16,838
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 hours, 42 minutes
|
|
> but it proves that water can burn when it is split into hydrogen and oxygen this has never been defenatively proven before him.
Hydrogen was first discovered between 1493–1541 by Paracelsus. It was rediscovered by Robert Boyle in 1671. Henry Cavendish was the first to recognize hydrogen as an element in 1766. He was also the first to discover that water was a combination of hydrogen and oxygen. Jacques Charles invented the first hydrogen balloon in 1783. In 1800, William Nicholson and Sir Anthony Carlisle discovered hydrogen gas occurs when passing electric current through water. Faraday's laws of electrolysis were published around 1830. Sir William Grove invented the first fuel cell in 1839. Finally, on May 6, 1937 the world was shown how well hydrogen burns when the Hindenberg caught on fire.
So, unless your con artist was alive in the late 1700's and early 1800's, then he most certainly WAS NOT the first person to split water into hydrogen and oxygen and he WAS NOT the first person to "defenatively" (sic) prove that hydrogen burns in oxygen.
|
|
login or 
register to post messages and view our members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, encrypted messages, file attachments, board customizations, and much more!
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
