Post by thread:[EE] water as fuel for car : "HHO" ?

due to fossil fuel price increase, looking for second alternative energy recourses are highly attention. does anyone know or any info for efficiency way for produce HHO gas from water? As from Stanley Meyer claim that have something "resonant" to as high as 700 times compare with conventional electrolysis, refer to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atytufuUJDA but, there other opinion, refer to : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWQE6Tm-VAw I'm experimenting on HHO gas, any info ? refer to : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YYasgMSuHM best regards waicon

> due to fossil fuel price increase, looking for second > alternative energy > recourses are highly attention. > > does anyone know or any info for efficiency way for > produce HHO gas from > water? As from Stanley Meyer claim that have something > "resonant" to as high > as 700 times compare with conventional electrolysis, refer > to I'll make this brief and blunt. There is NO way to do this. People who claim to do so are trying to "break the laws of physics". As Scotty of Star Trek tells us, you can't do that. People who claim to do this and want to sell you equipment based on doing it are charlatans or deluded. All the above is sad but true. You are welcome to disagree with this for whatever reason, but it won't produce useful results. Pressure of work precludes my usual detailed 4 page rambling answer :-) Leaving for China in 21 hours ... Russell

cllow2020(gmail) wrote: > does anyone know or any info for efficiency way for produce HHO gas > from water? What the heck is "HHO" supposed to mean? If that's meant to be H2O then you boil it, of course. If you mean a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen, then that would be H2 + O2, so I don't have any idea what you're trying to do. Be careful, there are a lot of unscrupulous claim in the area of using water somehow as a fuel. By itself water is useless as a fuel because of its low energy state. To turn it into anything that has a higher energy state, such as needed to use as a chemical fuel, requires adding energy. A lot of claims are just fancily dressed up perpetual motion machines. ******************************************************************** Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

Apptech wrote: > As Scotty of Star Trek tells us, you can't do that. I think it would have been much more like "Ya no canna do dat". > Pressure of work precludes my usual detailed 4 page rambling > answer :-) I guess chinese manufacturers are useful for something after all ;-) ******************************************************************** Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

> -----Original Message----- > From: spam_OUTpiclist-bouncesTakeThisOuTmit.edu On Behalf Of cllow2020(gmail) > > due to fossil fuel price increase, looking for second alternative energy > recourses are highly attention. > > does anyone know or any info for efficiency way for produce HHO gas from > water? As from Stanley Meyer claim that have something "resonant" <snip> In 1996 Stanley Meyer was convicted of gross and egregious fraud by a court in Ohio over this device. Whoever is pushing his ideas now (he died in 1998) is likely just trying to make some fast bucks, hold on tight to your wallet. Wikipedia has pretty good coverage of this with references. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Meyer Paul Hutch > > best regards > waicon

Russell: Why don't you stay in China, and maby repair some jet ski's while you are there. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Apptech" <.....apptechKILLspam@spam@paradise.net.nz> To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <piclistKILLspammit.edu> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 9:33 AM Subject: Re: [EE] water as fuel for car : "HHO" ? |> due to fossil fuel price increase, looking for second | > alternative energy | > recourses are highly attention. | > | > does anyone know or any info for efficiency way for | > produce HHO gas from | > water? As from Stanley Meyer claim that have something | > "resonant" to as high | > as 700 times compare with conventional electrolysis, refer | > to | | I'll make this brief and blunt. | There is NO way to do this. | People who claim to do so are trying to "break the laws of | physics". | As Scotty of Star Trek tells us, you can't do that. | | People who claim to do this and want to sell you equipment | based on doing it are charlatans or deluded. | | All the above is sad but true. You are welcome to disagree | with this for whatever reason, but it won't produce useful | results. | | Pressure of work precludes my usual detailed 4 page rambling | answer :-) | Leaving for China in 21 hours ... | | | | Russell | | | --

> What the heck is "HHO" supposed to mean? If that's meant > to be H2O then you > boil it, of course. If you mean a mixture of hydrogen and > oxygen, then that > would be H2 + O2, so I don't have any idea what you're > trying to do. HHO aka Brown's Gas aka ... Gargoyle knows. So does Wikipedia. Brown's gas was (is) real but 99% ++ of the claims for it are dreams. Russell

Apptech wrote: >> If you mean a mixture of hydrogen and >> oxygen, then that >> would be H2 + O2, so I don't have any idea what you're >> trying to do. > > HHO aka Brown's Gas aka ... > Gargoyle knows. > So does Wikipedia. So in other words, yes, all he meant was a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen. This sounds even more like the work of a shyster now. Note he never said "Brown's gas", and even the Wikipedia article on Brown's gas didn't use the term HHO. Apparently he knows that if he said "a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen", it would be obvious right away that you can't get that from water without putting in at least as much energy as you get out by combusting the mixture. If the OP really believes in this stuff he should contact me. I've got this bridge in New York for sale. ******************************************************************** Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

> > If the OP really believes in this stuff he should contact me. I've got > this > bridge in New York for sale. > In an old Laurel and Hardy movie, one of them said "We haven't made a mistake this big since we bought that bridge in Brooklyn." The other responded "Yes, but just wait... Some day that bridge will be valuable!" Harold -- FCC Rules Updated Daily at http://www.hallikainen.com - Advertising opportunities available!

"HHO" r Brown's gas all right, a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen. below are copy paste info from energetic forum @ watersparkplug do u think is reasonable to keep an eye on this issue ?:- Voltage leads current through an inductor and current leads voltage in a capacitor. Next we take a closer look at the inductor. Inside that coil is roughly 1/4 mile of wire. We call this a delay line since it delays the voltage and current arriving through the inductor side of the circuit. Aaron used the term "water hammer effect" which is a cavitation. Here is what happens in a cavitation: First off, a cavitation is an atomic event. The way it is initiated is by moving mass through the ambient medium faster than the mass can travel without cavitation. So a jet going supersonic produces a cavitation because the sound can't keep up with it and a cavity is sucked into the air which is made of atoms and then the atoms begin to clap against each other as the cavity moves through the air and collapses upon itself. A bit like an atomic head on collision. This condition rips a hole in the universe for an instant. The universe fills the hole by pressing back from all directions and in the process, creates trillions of little atom smashers all pointed at the center of that cavity where the atoms come together. The pressure is so great for an instant, that electrons cluster momentarily and we call this electron clustering. Electrons being negative in charge are repulsive but will cluster under some conditions usually in groups of just 4, 6, 8 or so - very small numbers. Once the pressure begins to equalize, the electrons explode back out and in the process collide with and free other electrons. We call this event electron cascade effect or secondary emission. This process of creating a cavitation and electron cascade event is how we convert mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass and is at the heart of all free energy machines. Usually we use H2 to H1 transmute as the mass. If you understand that you will never lose the thermodynamics argument again. An atom bomb (hydrogen bomb) is an OU free energy machine and works by converting mass to the atomic energy contained within the mass. And so when Aaron talks about electricity banging into the diodes and so on, while he is not technically correct, intuitively he is almost right on the money. Another thing that most people don't understand, including most engineers and scientist, is what electricity is and how it is created. I am not going to get into the details here, this post will be plenty long enough but a few brief understandings are in order: Electricity is made of two things. Current and voltage. Current is the magnetic component of electricity and created by electron movement. Voltage is the shock wave that moves the electrons. The electrons move from the ground to the positive voltage source. Voltage moves at 300 million meters a second where as an electron moves down a copper wire slower than a snail crawls. An electron spirals down copper but moves in a straight line across the surface of steel. A bit about what occurs in the water is also going to be helpful: An atom has four forces. Electrostatic, (voltage) electromagnetic (current) and strong and weak nuclear force. I feel we could state that an atom only has two forces and the other are effects of the original two. This is my theory and not something you will read somewhere else so take it for what it is worth.. I.e., electromagnetic force is an effect of the electrostatic shock wave. As the voltage from the coil arrives at the spark plug, it is wanting some magnetic current which is 90 degrees behind. But it sees the current that is coming from the cap straight ahead and through the diodes and heads for that. Shortly after that, the voltage from the cap arrives at our water droplet and sees the current now arriving from our coil and they get together. In the middle of all this out of phase collision is our water droplet that just got the snot beat out of it from two sides from two forces both heading right at each other at the speed of light. That is where this post started - cavitation - being breaking the speed limit and creating a electron cascade. You see, electricity can only go so fast and was originally created from a cavitation so we could say it is going mach 1. If we take two positive charges of different potential and ram them into each other head on, boom! We just broke the speed limit of our mass by 300 million meters per second and now we have mach 2. "Nobody ever thought of using an accelerator before" - Stan Meyer The law of force: F=MA The law of force has three exceptions. One of them is if the mass is moving at or near quantum speeds. There is some backup right there from mainstream science. Final thought - If you don't think this circuit approximates Meyer's VIC circuit, you haven't read and understood Meyer's notes. Here is a thought, why don't you lose the spark plug, and use three electrodes in contact with the water droplet like Meyer did. The two positive and the ground in the middle. You have what amounts to a fuel cell since the electrons are going to try and hop over the fence. ;-) Also, somewhere in this forum someone wrote that electrolysis is all just a waste of time and what Stan and others were doing is exploding water with high voltage impulses. I think that person was was right. I have a pretty good understanding of Meyer's components and I am sure that water went to what you all refer to the injector. In reality, it was not an injector, it was an igniter. The injector was the gate control valve and I feel where the resonant cavity lives. I could get into that another time if you are interested. It will explain why Meyer used the term fracturing instead of electrolysis. the end

cllow2020(gmail) wrote: > "HHO" r Brown's gas all right, a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen. > > below are copy paste info from energetic forum @ watersparkplug > do u think is reasonable to keep an eye on this issue ?:- If you are interested in text snippets that can be used in an SF novel, by all means yes! -- Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

cllow2020(gmail) wrote: > below are copy paste info from energetic forum @ watersparkplug > do u think is reasonable to keep an eye on this issue ?:- Yeah, sure, this stuff is hysterical. There were some real gems in there: > First off, a cavitation is an atomic event. > A bit like an atomic head on collision. > This condition rips a hole in the universe for an instant. I can think of another place to rip a hole. > ... in the process, creates trillions of little atom smashers > all pointed at the center of that cavity where the atoms come > together. > ... electrons cluster momentarily and we call this electron > clustering. Catchy. You really must give me the name of your marketing person. > Electrons being negative in charge are repulsive That's not all that's repulsive. > This process of creating a cavitation and electron cascade event is > how we convert mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass Wow, nuclear reactions in your garage. Must be a secret government conspiracy keeping it out of all reputable peer reviewed journals. That must be what happened to Ponds and Fleischman. Hey, who are you? How'd you get in here? What the... let go of me... > and is at the heart of all free energy machines. And I thought snake oil was. You learn something new every day. > Usually we use H2 to H1 transmute as the mass. > If you understand that you will never lose the thermodynamics > argument again. You mean like sticking my fingers in my ear and shouting louder than the other side? > I am not going to get into the details here, Of course not. > this post will be plenty long enough That's OK, TV is all reruns this time of year, and this stuff is much more entertaining. > This is my theory and not something > you will read somewhere else Gee, I wonder why. > electromagnetic force is an effect of the > electrostatic shock wave. > As the voltage from the coil arrives at the spark plug, it > is wanting some magnetic current which is 90 degrees behind. Ya gotta love this stuff. > Shortly after that, the voltage from the cap arrives at our > water droplet and sees the current now arriving > from our coil and they get together. Ooo. Those of you under 18 better stop reading here. > You see, electricity can only go so fast and was originally > created from a cavitation so we could say it is going mach 1. > ... if the mass is moving at or near quantum speeds. > Final thought But this implies the other statements were thoughts too. > Here is a thought, Not another one. Careful, you don't want to spoil the fun. You should run out and patent this stuff before the government conspirators catch up to you. Make sure to say in the patent that you have invented a "perpetual motion machine". That gives your patent a special legal status, which will expedite its resolution. I suppose this should be on [AD], but since I'm here already, you should contact me about this lovely bridge I've got for sale in New York. Of course I can't go into detail here. I know you understand. ******************************************************************** Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

This discussion reminds me of "A Little Bit of Knowledge" on This American Life. Listen to it at http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?sched=1251 . Harold -- FCC Rules Updated Daily at http://www.hallikainen.com - Advertising opportunities available!

I'm chinese, not use to write in English, but I understand. copy text is the faster way to transfer info, sorry about this. but for Wouter is SF, for me is S only..:) have u heard about GM car Chevy Volt at USA? or at japan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCsexLUC4FM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCy6tiCTRhA best regards cllow2020 -------------------------------------------------- From: "Wouter van Ooijen" <.....wouterKILLspam.....voti.nl> Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:54 PM To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <EraseMEpiclistspam_OUTTakeThisOuTmit.edu> Subject: Re: [EE] water as fuel for car : "HHO" ? {Quote hidden}> cllow2020(gmail) wrote: >> "HHO" r Brown's gas all right, a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen. >> >> below are copy paste info from energetic forum @ watersparkplug >> do u think is reasonable to keep an eye on this issue ?:- > > If you are interested in text snippets that can be used in an SF novel, > by all means yes! > > -- > > Wouter van Ooijen > > -- ------------------------------------------- > Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl > consultancy, development, PICmicro products > docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu > > --

Harold Hallikainen wrote: > This discussion reminds me of "A Little Bit of Knowledge" on This > American Life. Listen to it at > http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?sched=1251 . I really liked the quote "A little bit of knowledge can be a entertaining thing.". It sums up this thread perfectly. ******************************************************************** Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

cllow2020(gmail) wrote: > but for Wouter is SF, for me is S only. You are talking about science fiction versus science. If you really feel that way, you need actually learn some science. That will cut down on running around making rediculous claims. > have u heard about ... It doesn't matter. At this point nothing you say is relevant. ******************************************************************** Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.