Posted on 09/25/2007 9:02:17 PM PDT by Dallas
If true, the oil companies will bury this invention.
CLICK HERE for video.
No.
The laws of thermodynamics will bury it first.
Sounds like a movie.
Explain that in terms a third grader could understand.
This was posted several times already. As I recall there was no discussion in any of the reports about the amount of energy input required to achieve the results.
my bad...it didn’t show up in my search
But what would the fish swim in if we burned all the oceans?
Not this again....
Sounds like another case for MythBusters. You do know what happened with their first show of gasoline alternatives?
If not it was fairly predictable. They are still busting other myths not selling or endorsing any fuel saving devices.
Sounds like another case for MythBusters. You do know what happened with their first show of gasoline alternatives?
If not it was fairly predictable. They are still busting other myths not selling or endorsing any fuel saving devices.
Sounds like another case for MythBusters. You do know what happened with their first show of gasoline alternatives?
If not it was fairly predictable. They are still busting other myths not selling or endorsing any fuel saving devices.
OK. Here are the first, second, and third laws of thermodynamics, expressed in language a third-grader can understand.
1. You can't win.
2. You can't break even.
3. You can't get out of the game.
From HowToGAMIT, MIT's guide for incoming freshman, 1974 edition.
When you put it that way....it sounds like a marriage.
It was an occasion for a Democritus, nay, for an Epicurus or a Metrodorus, perhaps, a man whose intelligence was steeled against such assaults by skepticism and insight, one who, if he could not detect the precise imposture, would at any rate have been perfectly certain that, though this escaped him, the whole thing was a lie and an impossibility.
from Alexander the Oracle Monger, by Lucian, 180 A.D.
Exactly... What’s the energy input cost? It’s not free, usually, to generate radio/micro waves...
Yes, 5 new sources of energy...coming out in October/November...this is one of them. It’s goin’ to blow the world away...when these new sources become known.
Yeah, you put 1000 watts into the RF generator, and get 25 watts out. Hell of a deal!
Yeah. I hope the Democrat party doesn't hear about it.
Actually 3. is: You can't even come close.
8^)
It is for me. The aliens send them. I receive them through my tin foil hat.
You need extra sheets of tinfoil in that hat.....
That’s probably the most succint overview of the laws of thermodynamics that I have heard.
Dallas, not to be rehashing this old discussion, but the question you *always* have to ask, is, how much energy it took for them to create the hydrogen to burn, whatever ‘magic’ process they used. If it took more than what you get by burning the hydrogen produced, it’s useless and most likely it has some kind of a scam attached to it.
And they *never* say how much they used. Because, if they measured it correctly, it was far more then what they got out. See law #1.
I loved the episode where they corroded jailbars using salsa and DC current!
The important question here is how much energy is required to start the electrolytic reaction as this is what seems to be happening.
Secondly, this may be a much cheaper way to extract hydrogen instead of the conventional method of using expensive platinum plates from water or from existing hydrocarbon fuels (natural gas, etc) since those methods produces a lot of CO2 by product waste.
Perhaps this is a new RF method for efficiently releasing molecular energy similar to neutron bombardment in fusion reactions.
Considering how simple this method appears along with all that THEY had to go through to decrease the efficiency of fusion power to not upset the status quo we can probably say this guy's a Dead Man Walking. ; )
Err fission power....
Probably. But that announcer could generate some heat....
Let me guess, you got this in an e-mail that said send this to everyone in your address book? This hoax has been posted on FR multiple times before.
OK, OK, I heard you the first time.
Gee, I don’t know. I like the first version better.
Note that these paraphrases shift the semantic ground as they go along, so they are obscurantist in-jokes, and not pedagogical aids.
Note that the First Law says that you always break even precisely, in terms of energy conservation.
The Second Law says that you can’t run a closed cycle at 100% efficiency, hence, “you can’t break even”, but this is in a different sense than the first paraphrase.
The Third Law says that you can’t reach Absolute Zero, which could be seen as some sort of escape, if you could do it, and it continues the poker theme, so it has to be granted a modicum of cleverness.
I don’t know how you would construe the Third Law as, “You can’t even come close” because it says you can get as close as you please to Absolute Zero, but you can never make it all the way.
The modern Philosophers Stone.
This RF water trick and fusion are two different animals. In the case of the water, you are just bonding and unbonding atoms. You take a stable, low energy molecule of water, put energy into it, and you get two high energy hydrogen atoms and one high energy oxygen atom. And when they bond back together (as in combustion), you get back the same amount of energy that you put into them (minus losses due to inefficiencies). With fusion, you are actually converting matter into energy. You are feeding the reaction some energy in the form of energy (to keep it going) and some energy in the form of matter. You get back a lot more energy than you put in, because the matter has been converted. This is not the same as simply bonding and unbonding atoms.
And what is powering the EM field?
This particular claim has been made hundreds of times over the past 50 years or so. It resurfaces every once in a while. Here's a few sites that list these devices for your reading pleasure:
How the scam artists operate:
I’ll share, for free, the secret of generating 10,000 watts of electricity from ordinary water.
First, start with a 1 megawatt nuclear power facility and a large supply of water.
Second, use the electricity from the facility to break down water into its component elements.
Third, burn the hydrogen to generate heat to run a turbine to generate the electricity you want.
Yet another demonstration of how utterly clueless the media is about hard science. If the media can’t understand the basic laws of conservation that are taught in 7th or 8th grade, why would anyone believe their accounts about the environment, medicine or cosmology?
Thermodynamics strongly suggest it’s not a new energy source; but it might be a new method for desalinization of sea water. And it’s a nice addition to the science of water chemistry.
it's quite hillarious to read these idiots postings. they are quite oblivious to what they are actually doing.
These people are what our school is churning out as high school graduates, our "future."
God help us.
I promise I’m not trying to start an argument, but I don’t get why this automatically violates the laws of thermodynamics.
I suspect that since it takes 200 watts to generate the waves used to release the hydrogen that it does require more energy than is released and therefore nothing buy hype. That’s obvious, but the numbers on that aren’t out yet.
In terms of wattage I really don’t know how much is actually being released by the process. It isn’t a case of creating energy but of freeing captured energy. If there are 201 watts released then it is a winning situation (I hate using watts for this since it is inappropriate, but other than temperature watts are the only numbers expressed.
I know that they are currently studying this issue, so I don’t think the automatic dismissals are justified just yet. On the other hand, this kind of research could probably be done in a really short period of time—like before they put out the press release.
Again, just wondering why people seem to automatically think this violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Hmmm, had a girlfriend like that way back in the 60’s. Could get real close but just couldn’t quite make it.
You don’t need expensive plates to make hydrogen from water, stainless steel plates will do. You don’t need large amounts of electricity either, 1.5 volts @ 2- 3 amps will create a good flow of hydrogen gas and oxygen. Salt helps improve conductivity.
Many have tried all sorts of variations and materials to improve the rate of gas generation to achieve “unity”, but the best they can do falls far short of that.
Google around, you’ll find all sorts of basement experimenters trying all sorts of silly things in the attempt to save the planet and stop global warming (none of them have more than a grade 8 education either it seems).
Some of them are quite funny.
Oh yes they are. Google around, you'll find them.
In the least it's a novel form of electrolysis but they're not publicizing it as such.
From what they're claiming it could be the RF is doing on the molecular level sort of what neutrons do at the atomic level in fission reactions. It could be the specific RF is used as a highly efficient catalyst for weakening the di-electric bonds in the water molecule allowing an energy state transition which produces more energy than required by the catalyst. In this case it's the energy from the H and O recombining rather than U breaking down.
If this was the case though he could just scale it up to run a small generator to produce the RF and his "look at this" demonstration would be a closed system with a net power output. To my mind the only thing which can do that to date is atomic fission. So yeah, until they publish the numbers it's probably just a new form of electrolysis and desalinization.
There are already commercial frequency generators on the market that can produces any frequency you want.
Why is his so special? It’s a scam. This has been done a 1000 times over already. (any why don’t they measure the power the thing sucks out of the wall socket to produce this special frequency?)
He’s just another Joe Newman, Dennis Lee, Tilley, Perendev, Bearden, Lutec, Tewari, Amin scam artist.
They all have ‘special’ free energy devices. It’s absolutely amazing however how many people these people manage to suck into giving them all their money.
Perhaps these devices do have some special powers- they suck the common sense out of everyone who see’s them.
I read in another article that it takes 200 watts to cause the separation that seems to be happening. What they haven’t released is how much energy is coming out. I agree that this is probably bad research (hello cold fusion), but everyone saying that the laws of thermodynamics automatically rule it out might be jumping the gun.
I don’t think this is an overunity type claim at all. I don’t see why it is automatic that it takes more energy to extract the hydrogen than is produced by burning it.
The claim is that the hydrogen is reaching 3000 degrees, but that is not put into context at all. I’m pretty sure that 200 watts of juice is more than is possible to get out of that 3000 degrees, but more info is necessary.
I don’t think this is a scam, probably just bad research. Unless they have found a way to drastically reduce the price of desalination. That could be useful.
Never mind. Someone explained the limits the hydrogen/oxygen recombination can reach. Now I understand why it takes more energy to generate the process than can come out of it. Just wasn’t thinking the process through.
The only hope for this is that it can reduce the price of desalination. If this is cheaper than conventional electrolysis it might be make hydrogen more affordable. I guess possible implication for fuel cells.
Yes, one is not going to get more Newtonian energy (H and O recombination) output than input. - 1st law of thermodynamics.
The 2nd law simply says that the conversion of the energy inputs cannot be 100% efficient, the loss is called entropy. But any process which can make electrolysis (free H) more efficient is critically important for the use of H as a energy carrier - which is all that any form of energy, including fission, on the planet is anyway. (fissionable material is the remnant, hence carrier, of the original supernova, fossil fuels are simply the carrier of the Sun's photosynthesis - which incidentally is very inefficient).
Although far beyond this article, or thread, it is possible that given the harnessing of fusion (H to He), and I for one want definitely think that a very long shot, the process could be intrinsic. In which case more sensible energy could be derived than input, because matter is created to energy.
I have not referred to any individual comments here, but the technical cynicism of many is truly depressing, and speaks very poorly of what this forum should expound.
Thanks for the questioning dialogue.
Bastards!
That is simply not a rational statement. Any energy company would pay billions for an invention such as this if it actually worked. They could make a whole lot more money selling salt water than they could drilling pumping, transporting, refining, and marketing oil.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.