Could this discovery solve the fuel crisis?

myob

13 years ago

It doesn't work. :rolleyes:

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4602978].message }}

kbayer63 13 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

It doesn't work. :rolleyes:

Is that first hand experience -- or the "official story"?
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

"Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll sit in a boat all day and drink beer."
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4603069].message }}
- myob 13 years ago
  
  This is at least three years old, and I have not seen any clinical proof this process effectively treats cancer. As far as producing energy, it takes far more energy to break the chemical bonds than is released. And there are other much more safer methods, for example using electrolysis, as this process releases toxic chlorine gas as a by-product. Hardly anything practical here at all for these claims beyond novelty entertainment value.
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4603212].message }}

albertosm

13 years ago

salt water cheap
radio wave gen. from scrap
to power the radio wave gen. $$$

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4605935].message }}

mongsky

13 years ago

big oil companies wont allow it. the will say it's not feasible

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4606133].message }}

Tashi Mortier

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mongsky

big oil companies wont allow it. the will say it's not feasible

Problem is that the law of physics chime in

Energy can't be created out of nowhere, and all matter tries to get to a more stable, meaning energy-less, state.

I'd be more interested in what Nikola Tesla had to say, but that is still confidential

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Want to read my personal blog? Tashi Mortier

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4606837].message }}

highhopes

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Tashi Mortier

Problem is that the law of physics chime in

Energy can't be created out of nowhere, and all matter tries to get to a more stable, meaning energy-less, state.

I'd be more interested in what Nikola Tesla had to say, but that is still confidential

True I am a big fan of Nikola Tesla, the trouble was nearly all his confidential papers were stolen, after his death in New York......he had some great ideas, i wonder?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Ways to grow your online business. Earning online tips for the home worker and essential steps to take to earn money online.
http://wwwtheearninghub.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4607442].message }}

Tashi Mortier

13 years ago

Originally Posted by highhopes

True I am a big fan of Nikola Tesla, the trouble was nearly all his confidential papers were stolen, after his death in New York......he had some great ideas, i wonder?

I've read stuff like a car that drove without fuel etc. It seems like he had some technology to tap into the earth's magnetic field. To generate electricity from the natural potential between the sky and the ground...

Maybe we'll rediscover what he's had discovered a century ago. At least this sounds a lot more plausible to me using energy in some way to produce a new fuel. Last thing I heard was that they found a way to create coal out of your kitchen scraps. Great! Only thing is you've got to cook it for 12 hours. And then you get a little heap of coal - not very efficient.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Want to read my personal blog? Tashi Mortier

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4607463].message }}

HeySal

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Tashi Mortier

I've read stuff like a car that drove without fuel etc. It seems like he had some technology to tap into the earth's magnetic field. To generate electricity from the natural potential between the sky and the ground...

Maybe we'll rediscover what he's had discovered a century ago. At least this sounds a lot more plausible to me using energy in some way to produce a new fuel. Last thing I heard was that they found a way to create coal out of your kitchen scraps. Great! Only thing is you've got to cook it for 12 hours. And then you get a little heap of coal - not very efficient.

Electromagnetism is what they were working on about 4 or 5 years back as a means of propelling spacecraft - also were talking about shields for asteroids or some such something. Hmm - maybe some of Telsa's work isn't as lost as it is claimed, eh?

Alternate power for vehicles that they probably won't give us because of cost (like almost zilch)? Helium3.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4617827].message }}

thunderbird 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Tashi Mortier

Problem is that the law of physics chime in <snip>

I think it is more to do with economics (and corruption) than physics. The value of the US dollar is pegged to oil, using the de facto (if not official) "Oil Standard" that replaced the "Gold Standard" in 1973.
- Thanks
Signature

Project HERE.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4617336].message }}

seasoned

13 years ago

MYOB is RIGHT! Want to pay less per gallon? EASY! Use alcohol, or even just TAP WATER! Simply put it in your car! Oh SURE, you won't get as much mileage! Alcohol may not even turn the engne over, and water probably won't do ANYTHING, but HEY, you spend less per gallon!!!!!!

BTW this is NOT an "amazing break through"!!!! It is based on a theory that has been known for centuries, and was first commercially available in 1947! Obviously, this is lower power, but is it REALLY any different from MICROMAVES? EVEN the flourescent trick dates back to AT LEAST the 1970s, and uses theories that date back to even before its beginnings.

As for the flaming salt water? If the sodium is not involved, why must it be SALT water? electrolysis IS considered the best way to extract hydrogen and oxygen. They WOULD use it, but it takes too much surface area and too much power.

As for that engine, to have real applications, it would have to be FAR more powerful. The more power, the bigger the drive, that means it needs more heat, etc... It begs the question of why he didn't use a bgger engine.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4606285].message }}

highhopes

13 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

MYOB is RIGHT! Want to pay less per gallon? EASY! Use alcohol, or even just TAP WATER! Simply put it in your car! Oh SURE, you won't get as much mileage! Alcohol may not even turn the engne over, and water probably won't do ANYTHING, but HEY, you spend less per gallon!!!!!!

BTW this is NOT an "amazing break through"!!!! It is based on a theory that has been known for centuries, and was first commercially available in 1947! Obviously, this is lower power, but is it REALLY any different from MICROMAVES? EVEN the flourescent trick dates back to AT LEAST the 1970s, and uses theories that date back to even before its beginnings.

As for the flaming salt water? If the sodium is not involved, why must it be SALT water? electrolysis IS considered the best way to extract hydrogen and oxygen. They WOULD use it, but it takes too much surface area and too much power.

As for that engine, to have real applications, it would have to be FAR more powerful. The more power, the bigger the drive, that means it needs more heat, etc... It begs the question of why he didn't use a bgger engine.

Steve

Yes but this is the first building block. The wright brothers flight could hardly be viewed as a complete safe mode of transport. but it paved the way for the future.

Quote from an eminent scientist on this experiment;
"In the life sciences, the role of water is infinite, and this guy is doing something new in using the most important and most abundant material on the face of the earth."

Note something NEW!

Read more: Salt water as fuel? Erie man hopes so

Thanks

Signature

Ways to grow your online business. Earning online tips for the home worker and essential steps to take to earn money online.
http://wwwtheearninghub.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4606509].message }}

BritneyRef

13 years ago

I don't think so.. nothing will solve gas problem.. unless if they were able to find another permanent resource! like using wind, sun... etc

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4606772].message }}

seasoned 13 years ago

Originally Posted by BritneyRef

I don't think so.. nothing will solve gas problem.. unless if they were able to find another permanent resource! like using wind, sun... etc

Effectively NO act of nature, short of a nuclear blast anyway, can destroy atoms. And hydrogen, if presented with enough heat in the presence of oxygen, will convert to water.

But you have to WATCH all these things. Frankly, I would want to take a person somewhere with NO power and NO batteries, and try to power a car weighing at least 600 pounds, EMPTY, and able to carry at least three passengers weighing a total of at least 600 pounds, and drive it at least 400 miles.

The problem with using power is that you have to subtract it from the equation. Anyone remember the cold fusion scams? As for the 600+600? That would probably be MINIMUM usable capacity! The 600 is likely minimum for an enclosed and protected vehicle. 3*200 allows things like a couple with baggage.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4608032].message }}

joekyut

13 years ago

We hope it will work and change our fuel challenges

Thanks

Signature

Photography in Kenya

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4608949].message }}

Aero69

13 years ago

She herself said "it sounds crazy".

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4611197].message }}

Alexmark

13 years ago

Most people associated with alternative fuel methods generally disappear or end up dyeing very quickly after public knowledge of their existence.

Yes there are new methods for producing power even the car that runs on water worked. Seen with own eye. (oh yer he died also)

Lets be honest folks, if the governments are open to welcoming some one with a new energy source, why is there so much difference between European car gas mileage and USA gas mileage for the same car?

I live between both the US and UK. The one thing I find amusing is gas mileage. Check it out what a mini in the UK does per gallon and one in the US does per gallon. See a problem??

Here I rest my case! lol

Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4611239].message }}

myob

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Alexmark

why is there so much difference between European car gas mileage and USA gas mileage for the same car? I live between both the US and UK. The one thing I find amusing is gas mileage. Check it out what a mini in the UK does per gallon and one in the US does per gallon. See a problem??

ROFLMAO! Bring your gas can with you next time for comparison. The UK gallon is more than a US gallon.

US gallon 3.79 liters
UK gallon 4.54 liters

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4616664].message }}

Tashi Mortier 13 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

ROFLMAO! Bring your gas can with you next time for comparison. The UK gallon is more than a US gallon.

US gallon 3.79 liters
UK gallon 4.54 liters

Argh! Please just everybody switch to liters and the metric system, I go crazy with all these conversions!
- Thanks
Signature

Want to read my personal blog? Tashi Mortier
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4616914].message }}

seasoned

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Alexmark

Most people associated with alternative fuel methods generally disappear or end up dyeing very quickly after public knowledge of their existence.

Yes there are new methods for producing power even the car that runs on water worked. Seen with own eye. (oh yer he died also)

Lets be honest folks, if the governments are open to welcoming some one with a new energy source, why is there so much difference between European car gas mileage and USA gas mileage for the same car?

I live between both the US and UK. The one thing I find amusing is gas mileage. Check it out what a mini in the UK does per gallon and one in the US does per gallon. See a problem??

Here I rest my case! lol

First of all, this is BULL!!!!! Last I knew, it was geneally ILLEGAL to drive a UK car in the US. THAT means you are NOT driving the same car. Some things may affect milage a LITTLE, like linkage changes, or different tires. OTHERS may have a DRAMATIC effect, like maybe different bore size, weight, materials, bumpers, freon, catalytic converter. Some people here have BRIBED people to rip off catalytic converters. One benefit is INCREASED gas mileage! But it is geneally ILLEGAL! Older A/C systems were more efficient but they ALSO, in the US at least, are now ILLEGAL!

ALSO, driving conditions are likely different in the US.

ALSO, WHAT is MPG?!?!?!? Simple question, but can you answer it? A gallon in the US is a gallon in the US! It is a national standard, and a GIVEN! A gallon in the UK is probably a gallon in the UK. OK, I will give you that! *******BUT****** a gallon in the UK is probably about 1.2GALLONS in the US! I forget the base reference in the metric system volume, but 1CC is 1Gr, and 1000CC=1L, so THAT is standard:

The Mini Rocketman concept was announced in February 2011 and will be unveiled at the Geneva Motor Show. This will be a three-door hatchback, about a foot shorter than the current model, with a panoramic glass roof etched with the Union Flag.[79] It is not much bigger than the original Mini, and has unusual doors. Constructed by carbon spaceframe, Mini said that the Rocketman can do 94 miles per imperial gallon (3.0 L/100 km; 78 mpg-US), on average

UK (IMPERIAL) GALLON=4.54Liters (STANDARD=1.1978891820580474934036939313984)
US GALLON=3.79Liters (STANDARD=1)

MILES, at least up to 1959 were ALSO in doubt! Of course, 100cm=1M and 1000M=1KM!

A mile is a unit of length, most commonly 5,280 feet (1,760 yards, or about 1,609.3 metres). The mile of 5,280 feet is sometimes called the statute mile or land mile to distinguish it from the nautical mile (1,852 metres, about 6,076.1 feet).[1] There have also been many historical miles and similar units in other systems that may be translated as miles in English; they have varied in length between one and fifteen kilometres.
The exact length of the land mile varied slightly among English-speaking countries until an international agreement in 1959 established the yard as exactly 0.9144 metres, giving a mile of exactly 1,609.344 metres. The United States adopted this international mile for most purposes, but retained the pre-1959 mile for some land-survey data, terming it the US survey mile. In the US, statute mile formally refers to the survey mile, which is about 3.2 mm (⅛ inch) longer than the international mile; however, for most purposes, the difference is insignificant, and statute mile can be used for either the survey mile or the international mile.
The use of the mile as a unit of measurement is now largely confined to the United Kingdom and the US.[citation needed

I tried to check out the minis, just to see WHAT the difference is, but I could probably account for over 40% difference JUST from the gas and catalytic converter deal.

Do you REALLY think the US conspires to REDUCE gas mileage? That is CRAZY! The government mandates have forced the car companies to do things that really risk upsetting customers. And WHY would a little UK company risk upsetting its reputation needlessly?

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4617197].message }}

thunderbird 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Alexmark

Most people associated with alternative fuel methods generally disappear or end up dyeing very quickly after public knowledge of their existence. <snip>

Interesting. Examples?

I get the impression that Amerityre Corporation never seemed to go far after Goodyear bought it out.
- Thanks
- 2 replies
Signature

Project HERE.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4617361].message }}
- myob 13 years ago
  
  That guy who demonstrated the device that could solve the fuel crisis and cure cancer had high hopes. But this inventor, John Kanzius, died suddenly in February 2009 under suspicious circumstances. Pneumonia.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4617635].message }}
  
  The 13th Warrior 13 years ago
  
  Usually, the cures for problems are cheap, therefore, unprofitable by corporations standards.
  
  The inventions are already here, invented long ago, for cancer, engines, everything else.
  
  They will either buy you out , ruin you , or get you in some planned car accident, with NO media coverage that even a dedicated media consumer would not notice.
  
  Like dude posted, the problem is not technology, the problem is not even the problem, it is corruption, plain and simple as the nose on your face.
  
  Corruption is the power.
  
  The 13th Warrior
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4617809].message }}
- seasoned 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by thunderbird
  
  Interesting. Examples?
  
  I get the impression that Amerityre Corporation never seemed to go far after Goodyear bought it out.
  
  The website indicates that the unique tires are for low speed. HEY, I recently got my tires filled with something that supposedly makes them last longer, and less likely to deflate. The physics is certainly sound! What was it? NITROGEN!
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4619949].message }}

horowitzz

13 years ago

Was there ever a scientific proof on this story? I suggest no one cling on false hopes unless it's proven to be not one of those hoax stuff

Shaw Capital Management

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4611444].message }}

seasoned

13 years ago

BTW the first car I bought had two models that looked IDENTICAL!!!!!!!!!! SAME LOOK! SAME NAME! BOTH the only variant of that name sold in the respective countries. One could probably, in some cases maybe even have gotten some better gas mileage on the one in Japan. But the bore displacement WAS larger, so the US might have balked. It had a supercharger, that would cause insurance costs to go up, and it was a more expensive car and duties were high at the time. Whatever, they didn't sell it in the US. who knows, I do think I heard that the catalytic converter on the other variant might burn out.

My point is that they do NOT sell the same cars here. There are a TON of laws, and many are likely peculiar to the US.

Steve