100 Miles On 4oz of Water

[quote]Vegita wrote:
eengrms76 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
There is a sucker born every minute.

Some minutes there are two…

And Galleleo was killed for insisting the earth was round, and the greatest physicist at the time laughed openly about the wright brothers, claiming that he had already disproved that men could fly and how funny it was that two bycycle repair men from the US somehow think they have discovered how to do it. Some of you science buffs need to study a bit of history now and then also.

The one thing any scientist or even rational person should know is that we know embarrasingly little about how things work. Anything is possible to an extent. Surely a simple compound like water which is two thirds hydrogen and one third oxygen has enourmous energy potential. Also consider a catalyst, they have been known to radically alster standard chemical reactions, thus maybe there is a catalyst which acts to separate water into it’s parts with much less energy than normally required. I’m not saying believe everything you read see or hear, but it is possible that this guy is onto something.

V[/quote]

It’s possible. But there are other alternative energy sources that seem more likely and feasible.

[quote]Vegita wrote:
eengrms76 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
There is a sucker born every minute.

Some minutes there are two…

And Galleleo was killed for insisting the earth was round, and the greatest physicist at the time laughed openly about the wright brothers, claiming that he had already disproved that men could fly and how funny it was that two bycycle repair men from the US somehow think they have discovered how to do it. Some of you science buffs need to study a bit of history now and then also.

The one thing any scientist or even rational person should know is that we know embarrasingly little about how things work. Anything is possible to an extent. Surely a simple compound like water which is two thirds hydrogen and one third oxygen has enourmous energy potential. Also consider a catalyst, they have been known to radically alster standard chemical reactions, thus maybe there is a catalyst which acts to separate water into it’s parts with much less energy than normally required. I’m not saying believe everything you read see or hear, but it is possible that this guy is onto something.

V[/quote]

The difference is Galileo had the scientific method on his side.

These snake oil salesman do not.

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Doesn’t look very promising to me. What is promising is corn-run cars someday. [/quote]

I don’t think so. There are already a few ethanol threads already but the production is not very efficient. This could change but the overwhelming amount of farmland required to produce the corn makes it unlikely it will ever be worthwhile.

I am sure we will piss away a good amount of tax dollars on it though.

This reminds me of “That 70’s show” When Hyde would get stoned and talk about a car that “runs on water man”

Biodiesel is the way to go for biomass products, IMHO. It uses wastes that are othewise useless, and makes a fuel that will run today’s diesel engines. No muss, no fuss with new hydrogen pumps, no extra components so a car can run E85. It’s not particularly efficient right now, but it’s better than ethanol.

[quote]DTLV wrote:
You guys never took much chem, I guess.

This guys uses electricity
[/quote]

You never took much English, I guess.

[quote]DTLV wrote:
Water doesn’t burn. You can turn water into hydrogen and oxygen gases, which do burn, but the energy you get from burning them is ALWAYS going to be less than or equal to the energy you put into separating them from each other in the first place.
[/quote]

I don’t know if this guy is full of shit or not, but your statement that “but the energy you get from burning them is ALWAYS going to be less than or equal to the energy you put into separating them from each other in the first place.” got me thinking. What other laws that apply has water defied? I don’t know enough about chemistry to argue with you, but I also have a big problem labeling something with ALWAYS.

Hey DTLV, take a Prozac or something and chill. I never said I was a chemistry genius. So you know more about chemistry than me. Wadda want, a cookie? How about computers? How much do you know about them? I’d be willing to bet I’ve forgotten more than you know about them. Don’t call me stupid or imply that I am. You don’t know me so don’t assume you do.

I tell you, water doesn’t contain half the energy that mutant orange-yellow piss does.

These scientists don’t know dick.

Fools!!!

I have a piece of buttered toast strapped butter side up to the back of a cat.

I have dropped it into my engine compartment. (Minus the engine)

Since cats always land feet first and the buttered side of the toast always lands on the buttered side, the cat and the toast are spinning away and providing me a constant source of motion to power my car.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[quote]vroom wrote:
I tell you, water doesn’t contain half the energy that mutant orange-yellow piss does.

These scientists don’t know dick.[/quote]

Vroom,

Are you on a HOT-ROX, Alpha Male Cycle?

[quote]btm62 wrote:
Fools!!!

I have a piece of buttered toast strapped butter side up to the back of a cat.

I have dropped it into my engine compartment. (Minus the engine)

Since cats always land feet first and the buttered side of the toast always lands on the buttered side, the cat and the toast are spinning away and providing me a constant source of motion to power my car.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA![/quote]

ha ha ha ha ha ha

PERPETUAL MOTION!!!

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Doesn’t look very promising to me. What is promising is corn-run cars someday.

I don’t think so. There are already a few ethanol threads already but the production is not very efficient. This could change but the overwhelming amount of farmland required to produce the corn makes it unlikely it will ever be worthwhile.

I am sure we will piss away a good amount of tax dollars on it though. [/quote]

It’s effcient if you use sugar. 8 times as efficient as corn. But then the farmers will go a-bitching. I also don’t know how well sugar could grow in America. I’ve heard some promising things about soybeans as opposed to corn, but I don’t know all that much about that. Still, it’s definitely something we should be working on and trying to make more efficient. Oil is not particularly efficient either-not too mention the forced dependance on nations we would be better off washing our hands of and the environmental impact.

[quote]btm62 wrote:
Fools!!!

I have a piece of buttered toast strapped butter side up to the back of a cat.

I have dropped it into my engine compartment. (Minus the engine)

Since cats always land feet first and the buttered side of the toast always lands on the buttered side, the cat and the toast are spinning away and providing me a constant source of motion to power my car.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA![/quote]

This only works if you have expensive carpet in the engine compartment.

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Doesn’t look very promising to me. What is promising is corn-run cars someday.

I don’t think so. There are already a few ethanol threads already but the production is not very efficient. This could change but the overwhelming amount of farmland required to produce the corn makes it unlikely it will ever be worthwhile.

I am sure we will piss away a good amount of tax dollars on it though.

It’s effcient if you use sugar. 8 times as efficient as corn. But then the farmers will go a-bitching. I also don’t know how well sugar could grow in America. I’ve heard some promising things about soybeans as opposed to corn, but I don’t know all that much about that. Still, it’s definitely something we should be working on and trying to make more efficient. Oil is not particularly efficient either-not too mention the forced dependance on nations we would be better off washing our hands of and the environmental impact.[/quote]

You are correct. It is far more efficient with sugar cane. This is why Brazil is having some success.

Unfortunately sugar cane does not really grow in the US.

We could take over Cuba and use their sugar cane.

[quote]vroom wrote:
I tell you, water doesn’t contain half the energy that mutant orange-yellow piss does.

These scientists don’t know dick.[/quote]

I could make my bathroom a filling station! I could double up on my multis and make a batch of super premium high octane! The possibilities are endless!

[quote]btm62 wrote:
Fools!!!

I have a piece of buttered toast strapped butter side up to the back of a cat.

I have dropped it into my engine compartment. (Minus the engine)

Since cats always land feet first and the buttered side of the toast always lands on the buttered side, the cat and the toast are spinning away and providing me a constant source of motion to power my car.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA![/quote]

Very nice!

V

Uh,…once again.
When did I saw a vehicle can run on water?

[quote]DTLV wrote:
Well, my “conspiracy theory dorks” comment was directed at dukefan4ever and Zen warrior, but whatever.

The big problem with stupid people is that they’re stupid, obviously. However, the EVEN BIGGER problem with stupid people is that they don’t know that they’re stupid. See this link for more on that topic, including one of the funniest quotes in the history of mankind “but I wore the juice”:
http://content.apa.org/journals/psp/77/6/1121.html?sid=d7472d9a-4720-432b-a87b-25de15da22aa

You don’t understand chemistry, which is one thing. It’s not that big a deal: chemistry is kind of complicated, but if you wanted to learn about it, you could. The real problem here is that you don’t understand the difference between people who do understand chemistry (like me, and the other people who are laughing at you) and the people who don’t (like you, dukefan and ZW.)

What is HHO?

How is it different from H2O?

Where did the 4 oz of water go? (if all the HHO “burned” turns back into water, why would you ever lose any of it?)

How is it possible to turn H2O into HHO, and then back to H20 with a net gain of energy without violating the first law of thermodynamics?

What is the first law of thermodynamics?

If you can’t answer any of those questions (and I bet you can’t even answer one without googling), you don’t know enough to evaluate the truth or falsehood of any of this guy’s claims.

Water doesn’t burn. You can turn water into hydrogen and oxygen gases, which do burn, but the energy you get from burning them is ALWAYS going to be less than or equal to the energy you put into separating them from each other in the first place.

Cthulhu wrote:
First of all,I never said there was any conspiracy with the oil company.
They wouldn’t want to go out of business, though.
Second of all,it converts H2O to HHO.
It’s not running on pure water,but it is USING water( to seperate water into hydrogen and oxygen gases).In other words,it’s dependent on water.No matter what you want to call it,the vehicle on the video was using water,but was not running on pure water.The guy himself said he drove 100 miles on about 4oz.
Too many people have jobs with the oil industry.I believe the oil industry will do whatever it can do to hold on to it’s place at the top.
So,to say it runs on pure water would be a false claim.But it does use water.
So,yes,the future does look bright.Why does it matter if the vehicle runs on water or not? The point is that the vehicle USES water and not gas.That is the whole point.
So please stop calling everyone childish names and grow up.
[/quote]

[quote]dukefan4ever wrote:
DTLV wrote:
You guys never took much chem, I guess.

This guys uses electricity

You never took much English, I guess.

[/quote]

lol

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Vegita wrote:
eengrms76 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
There is a sucker born every minute.

Some minutes there are two…

And Galleleo was killed for insisting the earth was round, and the greatest physicist at the time laughed openly about the wright brothers, claiming that he had already disproved that men could fly and how funny it was that two bycycle repair men from the US somehow think they have discovered how to do it. Some of you science buffs need to study a bit of history now and then also.

The one thing any scientist or even rational person should know is that we know embarrasingly little about how things work. Anything is possible to an extent. Surely a simple compound like water which is two thirds hydrogen and one third oxygen has enourmous energy potential. Also consider a catalyst, they have been known to radically alster standard chemical reactions, thus maybe there is a catalyst which acts to separate water into it’s parts with much less energy than normally required. I’m not saying believe everything you read see or hear, but it is possible that this guy is onto something.

V

The difference is Galileo had the scientific method on his side.

These snake oil salesman do not.[/quote]

No he didn’t… no one took the scientific method seriously 'till newton. that’s why newton is The Man.

And if one more guy questions the laws of thermodynamics in any way other than jest, i’m gona drop a dumbell on his head.