Hydroxy gas

[Francois]

Thank you Firewatter ,

I read a lot of things about Stanley Meyer , he has been killed
only because he was able to run his buggy with water.
Saoudies don't like that.

I really don't care about all the skeptics , Because I know It works
I know a french scientist who does it perfectly , the proof here :

**broken link removed**

I shall follow my experimentations and I'll let you know.

So, see you soon.

François.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

If you know a French scientist who 'does it perfectly', then why would you need to experiment?. Simply duplicate his 'perfect' design and make yourself rich!.

Presumably he has some excuse why you can't do this?, and why he can't actually prove it works?.

There's a sucker born every minute!

 

[Francois]

FireWater ,

Thanks a lot for all these informations , I 've already built myself THIS
specific electrolyser :

http://files.myopera.com/H2earth/files/WFC 2006 Replication Design.pdf
...but not tested on my old car.

It works perfectly except that choosing two NE555 for this expériment is
not stable in time , this is my conclusion.Choosing quartz is better but yet far behind this amazing concept :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-locked_loop.

I have to read again all the details given by Stanley Meyer in his patent.

THanks again for your help.

François.

 

[Francois]

For Nigels Goodwin :

**broken link removed**

Producing hydrogen is NOT a problem as you can see in the link above.
My main problem is to produce hydrogen with a weak current AND a high voltage.

In the link above they use a huge amount of current.So I'm not interrested in
because the battery in my car can only deliver 12 AMP.

Jean-Louis Naudin is not "a sucker" as you say ,it is a very respectable scientist :

http://www.gifnet.org/

By honesty ,you should at least study what this guy is able to do.

François.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

No, I agree that producing hydrogen is no problem - it's been done commercially for hundreds of years.

What is ludicrous is greater than 100% efficiency, which is what all the fakers (like Meyer) are claiming.

What you need to prove it is a vehicle that has no other power source except water, and works - this has NEVER been done, and for good reason!.

 

[Francois]

Hi Nigel ,

Look at this end of this web link :

**broken link removed**

they say : "The estimated heat out was 800 times higher than input..."



François.

Phrase célèbre "impossible n'est pas français".

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

they say : "The estimated heat out was 800 times higher than input..."

So you claim that France has a scientist who has a perfectly working "energy from nothing" scheme? - yet the French government aren't making any use of this?.

France isn't the USA, that's full of 'conspiracy nuts', France is also desperate for energy, and is one of the worlds largest nuclear energy users - if such a scheme worked France would be using it, and selling it to make a fortune.

 

[philba]

Notice how the device is working perfectly except for "xcept that choosing two NE555 for this expériment is not stable in time". It's kind of like Stoern's bearing failure.

I'm sure the French Nuclear industry is supressing the guy's work because they don't want the competition. They probably sent ex Foreign Legionaires to rough him up. Or maybe ex CIA goons. Let's toss Mossad in there as well.

 

[Francois]

Nigel ,


You ->So you claim that France has a scientist who has a perfectly working "energy from nothing" scheme? - yet the French government aren't making any use of this?.

Me -> Not only in France , but you've NOT read this link
**broken link removed**
.....obviously NOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


If you're intelligent , what did you do with a such amazing new technology ?

-> You decide to spread all this information on the internet ANONYMOUSLY
or
-> You go in a coffin like Stanley Meyer.

Why ?

Because all this world is corrupted ! It's evident.


France is as corrupted as England.
There is too much of financial interest implied so that things change.

The main purpose of this forum is to speak about new information
or tests concerning Hydrogen .

Isn't it ? .

François .

 

[Garibaldi]

While not specifically endorsing any of the mentioned claims, and at the risk of being labeled a “conspiracy nut”, I must mention that technology is frequently suppressed or denied for a number of self-interest, political or religious reasons. “Who Killed the Electric Car” documents the very deliberate effort by GM and others to suppress alternative energy vehicles, including buying out patents for high efficiency batteries and burying them. Solar is the prime example - power companies, who have the best means to develop it, don’t. Solar doesn’t produce an energy dependency that the drug dealers, err, uh, energy dealers can continue making profits from, so the technology has seen relatively little investment from big power companies. They could make huge profits from retrofitting solar energy systems – but that profitability would quickly end long before their lifetime, so they have no interest in such a system.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

If you're intelligent , what did you do with a such amazing new technology ?

But what's amazing about it?, because it doesn't work? - the only amazing thing is how people keep getting conned into financing it.

-> You decide to spread all this information on the internet ANONYMOUSLY
or
-> You go in a coffin like Stanley Meyer.

Everyone dies in the end, the death of Meyer was 'offically' caused by a brain aneurysm, the poisioning theory is just made up by the conspiracy nuts!.

Why ?

Because all this world is corrupted ! It's evident.


France is as corrupted as England.
There is too much of financial interest implied so that things change.

This is the 21st century, the information technology age, you can't kill something like this off - nor would any goverment or company want to, they would profit from it. There's all these plans about, loads of rubbish patents been issued, yet no one has EVER been able to show a working demonstration.

Perhaps you might be the first?, and I wish you well, but I seriously doubt it, tweaking proven non-working technology isn't likely to make it work!.

The main purpose of this forum is to speak about new information
or tests concerning Hydrogen .

It's supposed to be about 'alternative energy' not about imaginary scams that have been doing the rounds for years, and have never worked yet, and presumably never will?. I'd love to see a new, cheap, clean source of energy, but these crackpot schemes are VERY unlikely to be it.

 

[philba]

Nigel, maybe you were right about this section of the forum. At least more right than I thought at the time. I wish it weren't so.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

Nigel, maybe you were right about this section of the forum. At least more right than I thought at the time. I wish it weren't so.

I've been manfully avoiding the 'told you so' dance (if you watch Will & Grace)

 

[HarveyH42]

I don't understand how these threads get so far off topic with arguements and debates, conspiracies. The OP was about a better method of of seperating water molecules to produce fuel.

People are going to keep playing with this, as water is so abundant and freely obtainable. Being able to use it as a fuel would be great in many ways. Of course any claim to something over 100% is crap, what's the point of dwelling on it, unless it's humorous. Nothing tried, is nothing accomplished...

How many people have bought metal detectors, with dreams of getting rich finding lost treasure? And how many actually get rich, or make even one rare find in their treasure hunting? Most barely cover their investment with corroded coins and cheap jewelery, but the dreams and adventure made it worthwhile.

By repeating all these failed attempt, new discoveries are made. Either by observation, or by accident. There have been a lot of persistant people in history, that ignored the constant never-going-to-works, and eventual suceeded. A 'Joe-cell' might not work, but it might be a step in the right direction, or atleast a point of departure. Who really knows?

 

[Hero999]

Global warming is going to have a higher impact on their profits than a perpetual motion technology that doesn't work so the idea that they're killing people involved with it is totally ludicrous.

If the oil companies have killed scientists involved in activities that could damage their profits, such as researching perpetual motion and global warming then why have the former been killed and not the latter?

 

[philba]

Actually, I think that declining production will hurt them a lot sooner. Any company that thinks of itself as an Oil Company instead of an energy company is doomed. History is replete with failures due to short term thinking (railroads vs transportation).

Anyway, if they aren't searching out new sources of energy, they are going away soon. Instead of killing people, they would be courting them with high priced salaries, stock options, fancy labs, ...

It is a fantasy to think that some little guy will figure out what heavily funded scientists and engineers with deep expertise haven't.

 

[Broz]

Nigel ,


You ->So you claim that France has a scientist who has a perfectly working "energy from nothing" scheme? - yet the French government aren't making any use of this?.

Me -> Not only in France , but you've NOT read this link
**broken link removed**
.....obviously NOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



François .

I looked at the website that you linked. If it is true that more energy is going in to heating the water than electrical energy being pumped in, then one is left wondering if there is some chemical reaction that is occuring that is not reversible (reversible meaning with no energy loss). My guess would be the additives to water to make it more conductive. Frequently in these websites they claim the additive is a catalyst. This is not true because the additive is consumed by the reaction, and a true catalyst is not consumed by the reaction. Also, it looks as if the electrodes themselves are being consumed. This means that some chemical reaction is taking place between the electrodes and the products of the electrolysis. If this is the case then one would have to consider the energy requirements for producing the electrodes in these experiments, and also the energy required to produce the "catalyst".

In every case that I have seen of such claims of efficiency greater than 100% there is always some energy that has been snuck in to the system that has not been accounted for that would make the overall calculations show less than 100% efficiency, as it should be according to the laws of thermodynamics.

So, show me in forms of chemical equations that the "catalyst" used and the electrodes used are not contributing to the excess energy somehow in an irreversible chemical reaction and you might make it an appealing science project. I'm not holding my breath though.

 

[Hero999]

Broz,
I agree with what you're saying, the energy has to come from somewhere which makes perfect common sense. The energy in the reaction on the website probably does come from either the electrodes or the 'catalyst'.

The only issue I do have is that the reversibility of a reaction has nothing to do which it. The reaction that occurs when you burn hydrogen is completely reversible by electrolysis (as I'm sure you're aware). I think what you mean by reversibility in this case is that for a chemical to be acting as a catalyst should not be consumed, if it's involved in a chemical reaction that converts it from one form to another the reverse should be happening simultaneously, at exactly the same rate.

 

[firewater]

Phase locked loop

I'am doing more research on phase locked loops after your post Francois, It's very interesting,Here is a excellent link explaining it for others that are interested.

**broken link removed**

 

[joculll]

Not Nice

ok, I did some reading and frankly, it's not as simple as you imply. Fact is that while there have been some reproductions of the effect, there is very little understanding of the underlying science. You speak as if it's a foregone conclusion yet the scientific method you so greatly value is lacking in your analysis. There may well be something there but it's not at all understood.

Sorry, but I think you are a crackpot. have a nice day.

I am a very newbie to this er..blog. It says you are experienced next to your name, Experienced at putting people down just because they are trying to prove what they believe to be true!!!!!. I wonder if you would have said that to Galileo or Columbus had you been alive in their time. Albert Einstien FAILED MATHS and dropped out of school did he not but I bet you know dear Albert. I have seen a 4 cyl engine run for a little over 4 minutes on Hydroxy and that was with NO modification what so ever (it was started on petrol granted) here in Perth the State Government has just finished trialling 2 hydrogen buses (again we are talking about pure hydrogen) but they worked wonderfully. Like my like minded friend I too am taking a very scientific approach to my project,I just don't want it to work I NEED to understand HOW and WHY it works and yes I know it works as I have seen it. The Joe cell was supposedly made by accident in Australia over 30 years ago. I always believed that an interchange
of ideas was a good thing except when someone in the discusion thinks he can make himself feel better by putting another belief system down. There is an old saying "if you have nothing nice to say DONT say anything. I understand there is a long way to go and it is frustrating at times but If we help one another understand what we have learned on a personal level and what our aspirations are then we CAN find academic purity in the end. And after all is it so hard to believe that a frequency can upset the covalence shell that one thing becomes another.