Burning salt water

[Bullseye]

This was sent to me by a friend and I thought it would interest some of you. Not needing a fuel tank or being concerned of fuel at all. Let's hope this technology is put to good use, curing cancer and marine propulsion

[Rick Willoughby]

You may not need a fuel tank but you would need to be close to a powerful radio transmitter or have a long extension lead to power your own transmitter. Maybe lots of people all using their mobile phones at the same time would get the required power input.

It does highlight a potential risk with placing saltwater in a microwave. It may be possible to create a highly explosive atmosphere in and around the oven by the decomposition of the water. Something I had not thought about before.

From the cancer perspective I am not sure that I would be willing to expose my body to the radio waves knowing that the energy causes salt water to decompose and my body comprises a substantial amount of water containing various salts.

Rick

[Frosty]

T Let's hope this technology is put to good use, curing cancer and marine propulsion

Youlle be lucky,--just about any invention is used for war first, or crime.

Even if it worked,- oil and petroleum products could not be shut down.

To bring in an invention of this success ( if it is) would be more devastating to world economy than it would benefit, even though its benefits would be tremendous.

It will take as long to ween the world off oil than it will to allow the oil supplies to deminish by our own consumption. Financially the world canot stop using oil. Quite simply its what makes the world go round.

Oil is truley liquid gold.

[MikeJohns]

What Rick said ...

Forget it as a fuel. The water isn't burning. You need sufficient energy input to disassociate the hydrogen and oxygen. Spraying it onto a white hot surface works too and similarly the net energy available from recombining Hydrogen and Oxygen would be a fair bit less than just using the electricity to start with.

[yipster]

why does everyone allways want to have cars ride on (salt) water
when sailing on salt water is so much more natural :P

[mydauphin]

There is a system that lets power a ship with almost infinite power and range using saltwater. There are many ships using it today. It uses a little thing called a nuclear reactor to heat the water generate electricity etc... Do you think Homeland Defense would let us have one on our boats...

[Bullseye]

Darwin deduced we evolved from the ocean because the salt content matched that in a mothers womb. This might require even less expossure to treat a cancerous cell in the body. You first;)

A person in the know told me that there is a group(s) of people that absolutely don't want cancer cured. It's not hard to imagine there are also groups that don't want any free energy devices unless maybe developed by them.

While we are thinking along these lines, What do ya'll think of Zero Point Energy(Fluctuation)?

http://www.secret-solutions.com/zpe.htm

This term Zero Point Energy has been based on the concept that even if matter were cooled down to absolute zero (minus 273oC), in terms of its temperature, this energy still remains. Because it exists in a vacuum, ZPE is homogenous and isotropic as well as ubiquitous. In addition, since ZPE is also invariant with respect to Lorentz transformation, the ZPE spectrum has the characteristic that the intensity of the energy at any frequency is proportional to the cube of that frequency.

Consequently, the intensity of the energy increases resulting in an infinite energy density for the radiation spectrum. It appears that this energy is quite intense. Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman and one of Einstein’s protégés, John Wheeler, calculated that there is more than enough energy in the volume of a coffee cup to evaporate all the worlds’ oceans. We fail to easily recognize this immense energy source as it is analogous to trying to weigh a beaker of water underneath the ocean.


http://www.electrifyingtimes.com/santazeropoint.html

This technology has remained unharnessed as far as mainstream science is aware. Although a few private inventors besides Nikola Tesla have had successes tapping into the Zero Point electromagnetic energies, their technology has been highly suppressed. Inventors labs have been raided or destroyed.

Dr. Marc Millis of NASA's new Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Research Program has published articles relating to Zero Point Space Drives. "Challenge to Create the Space Drive" (J. Prop. & Power, V.13. No. 5, 1997, p. 577). In it Dr. Millis states, "Electromagnetism is also suggested as a target phenomenon for space drive research because of ZPF. (Zero Point Field) ZPF is also an electromagnetic
phenomenon and discovering a way to react with ZPF would likely create a space drive"

References: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9901011 and Inside Zero Point Energy by Thomas Valone, Infinite Energy Magazine, Vol 5, Issue 26,
1999, www.infinite-energy.com

Postscriptum:
On June 23, 2004 we received this email from Jack Nachamkin.
Remy C. ET webed

Dear Electrifying Times,

I came across this web page that gave all the credit to Frank Mead for our invention to tap zero-point energy. While I can't claim full credit, the invention was based on my previous work on electromagnetic scattering, when I noticed that near-resonances occurred on spherical dielectrics at specific frequencies, enhancing the fields by many orders of magnitude. Frank was my boss at EDWARDS AFB at the time of the patent application and we, along with Bob Forward, had a number of discussions on the subject.

[mydauphin]

Attention!!! Attention!!! Call Bob Lazar, Someone stole the alien space ship. Can you pass me the dilithium crystals.

[MikeJohns]

Perpetual motion was a big thing in the 1800's lots of the same sorts of thing misguided and often very capable inventors too caught up in their own mistaken belief.

Likewise cures for cancer We can now cure most cancers and no-one has hindered the science of oncology.

I dare say you could find mountains of pseudo scientific claims to free energy.
Physics indicates that you would be foolhardy to invest in such technology whether that of the 1800's or the more modern versions.

[Bullseye]

mydauphin,
Attention!!! Attention!!! Call Bob Lazar, Someone stole the alien space ship. Can you pass me the dilithium crystals.
That is way funny
I took you as more of a Buzz Lightyear kind of guy with a Flux Capacitor.LOL

Mike
Likewise cures for cancer We can now cure most cancers and no-one has hindered the science of oncology.
Hey buddy, I beg to differ. When the cure is chemotherapy!!!!! I unfortunately know people that went through that and if that's what we call an acceptable cure then we all are Brainwashed.

Frosty
I'm inclined to side with you on the Black Gold. We are swamped at work and it's supporting the BG market so it's all good.

Rick
Your probably correct on the return on power. They don't elaborate on the quick take.

I really appreciate all the honest input. Personally Mr. Tesla was in my humble opinion the most gifted in our history.

Again Thanks to all

[mydauphin]

Tesla was a very bright, so was Newton, Einstein, Galileo and even Da Vinci. Fortunately, we know more than they today. The built the laws of physics and chemistry.

Let me give the ten laws of Boat design

1. The amount of fuel consume is directly related to horsepower used. ( A lot of boats are overpowered)
2. The higher the speed of the boat the higher the fuel consumption (Most boats travel below 14 knots because that is most fuel effiecent speed)
3. Energy is lost and it cost fuel to produce (No free lunch)
4. Draging a boat across the water consumes energy. (Water generates more drag than water, it doesnt compress)
5. Lifting a boat over water to go faster consumes more fuel.(Of course more horsepower needed)
6. Then there are all kinds of formulas for calculation hull speed, displacement etc... They actually work. These are not science fiction
7. A boat is either in Displacement mode or Planing or in between, anything else is not a boat. (Even Hydrofoils plane on foils. Hovercraft function more like Plane in ground effect )
8. Nothing works perfectly, everything is a compromises
9. A lot of people keep trying things that dont work, that doesnt make then work.
10. What works in one boat design may not work in another design.


I could add many more.

But get me a fat propeller, put a complex variable pitch electromechanical system to control it, spin it 1500 rpm in a non-compressible corrosive liquid then have it slam into pockets of boiling water and air and then tell me it revolutionize the marine industry soon.

Can I sell you this bridge in Brooklyn? It is only 100 years old, you could make alot money in tools.

All in good fun... But dont believe half of what you read. Popular Science Magazine is full of Wanabees and their looking for your money....

[Bullseye]

Well put, I understand and agree with your optimism. Everything must be repeatable or it's theory.

I run into info such as this.


http://www.spiritofmaat.com/announce/drgreer.htm

[MattZ]

Sounds like a bunch of bologne to me. The energy required to split the water is greater than the energy obtained from recombining it.

[tallen]

Mattz, is right. This new idea of using radio waves to produce hydrogen might be a better option then electrolysis (which remains to be seen), however, it will never produce more power then is put into it.

Furthermore, Like many others I believe Hydrogen is an awesome fuel (while dangerous) but currently its either too inefficient or too environmentally unfriendly to produce.

[charmc]

What's interesting about this water separation technique is that it would enable hydrogen production on board, avoiding the storage and transportation problems.

http://news.uns.purdue.edu/x/2007b/070827WoodallNanotech.html

[Bullseye]

Here is supposedly the most current Tesla of our time.
Using the ignition energy to split the H2O.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7BAODqqcpQ

I was told the D.O.E.(Department Of Energy) stated 40% more energy in a unit of water as in the same unit of gasoline? Can anyone confirm.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9JagAv2nUE

Many said you couldn't fly when the Wright Brothers were in the air. Stan calculated 22 gallons to trek from Ohio to Washington with this buggy.
It's all very interesting.

[kerosene]

Look

If you could get more energy out of hydrogen created with microwaves/electrolysis/magic than the process took the last thing would be to burn it in internal combustion engines that usually have efficiency of around 30% at best rpm - if even that.

If it really did work you would see people setting up powerplants. There are number of these con men who have gathered millions in investor's money but have little to show for it. And no the oil companies destroying the projects is not the explanation.

[skipjackbj]

Ever hear of Stanley Meyers?
He had the most documented use of hydrocarbon equipment using water.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3333992194168790800

[skipjackbj]

Browns Gas is another alternernative by product made with water.

http://www.brownsgas.com/brownsgashome.html

[skipjackbj]

One interesting link.

I have to wonder what would happen if I conected it to my inline marine 6 cyl engines...

http://www.savefuel.ca/oxy-hydrogen/?gclid=CI2W7Iy9vI8CFQcmgwod7Fj9dA

[kerosene]

"A perpetual motion machine of the first kind produces strictly more energy than it uses, giving the user unlimited energy. It thus violates the law of conservation of energy. Over-unity devices, that is, devices with a thermodynamic efficiency greater than 1.0 (unity, or 100%), are perpetual motion machines of this kind."


"In 1996, inventor Stanley Meyer was sued by investors to whom he had sold dealerships, offering the right to do business in Water Fuel Cell technology. According to The Times, Meyer claimed in court that his invention "opened the way for a car which would 'run on water', powered simply by a car battery."[1] The car would even run perpetually without fuel since the energy needed to continue the "fracturing" was low enough for the engine's dynamo to recharge the car's battery.[1] His car was due to be examined by the expert witness Michael Laughton, Professor of Electrical Engineering at Queen Mary, University of London and Fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering. However, Meyer made what Professor Laughton considered a "lame excuse" on the days of examination and did not allow the test to proceed.[1] The Water Fuel Cell, on the other hand, was examined by three expert witnesses in court who found that there "was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and that it was simply using conventional electrolysis".[1]

On the basis of the evidence the court found Meyer guilty of "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered to repay the investors their $25,000.[1]"




-
-
-



and there are like 5 other recent inventors who all have "invented" electrolysis - which seems to still work in fooling people who are not familiar with the concepts. People see water vapor coming from exhaust and they think that this is the saving technology. common denominator for the water fuel cars is that the dudes collect money and tech never gets under proper scientific studies. Wrap in a conspiracy or two and you are set.

[skipjackbj]

If, an object like an electrical producing unit that say, put into motion in space. Spinning at a certain RPM.
Would the unit continue to spin at the set RPM ? Thus putting out electrical current with out any device or moter turning the armature?

[kerosene]

No.

Let me see if I get this right - you suggest that we put some sort of dynamo spinning in space (or any place where it is totally isolated from other forces). If we assume that there is no mechanical resistance at all thing could spin forever - however the moment we try to get energy out of it it will slow down. Creating electric current is indeed going to slow down a rotor of a dynamo even if there was absolutely no physical connection.

You cannot get something for nothing.

A lot of people think that dynamo's and alwernators have resistance only from their mechanical design - this is not true at all. The very fact that you move a rod or coil in magnetic field (or magnet in coil) requires energy. The system will resist that movement and that apparent resistance is the energy that turns into electricity. Your car will indeed burn less fuel if you don't have your headlights on - will you notice it? probably not.

[skipjackbj]

fair enough. Yet, in space, with no real need for bearings if the thing was balanced. Resistance would be low.

So, some energy would be needed to continue the turbine type gen set going.

Yet, I think in zero gravity the amount of power needed to boost the system now and then would be very low.

The next problem would be to hang a long cord thru the the atmosphere down to my house....

Guess we would just have to make a large ball on earth and project a form of lighting bolt.

[masalai]

Unlimited free energy? Find a blackhole. In outer space!

[skipjackbj]

Boats get free energy all the time.

I spend lots of my energy working on them !