|
|
#11
09-12-2007, 07:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Scientist Burns water--Nobody Cares?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] What does burnt hydrogen turn into? Water. Perpetual motions machines don't work. [/ QUOTE ] I'm not sure that I understand this argument in this context... But this was posted a long time ago. My first search on youtube found something posted in May http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGg0ATfoBgo [/ QUOTE ] The idea is that, at a bare minimum, you have to pump in enough energy to the water w/ the RF radiation to break the two O-H bonds. Then, when you burn the hydrogen, you get water right back, and the energy you release is exactly equal to the energy in two O-H bonds. In other words, as a best case, the energy you get out is exactly equal to the energy you have to pump in. Furthermore, according to the laws of thermodynamics, you're never going to be able to achieve this best case. Instead, energy you're pumping in will be lost along the way due to heating the environment, so the energy you spend is going to be greater than the energy you get out, resulting in a net loss. Now, this would be acceptable if somehow we got the RF radiation for free, say, from the sun. However, we don't exactly get a whole lot of RF radiation from the sun. Instead, we get a lot of IR, UV, and regular old light, and that's not what we need here. To power this guy's RF source, he's using electricity, energy we've already taken great pains to produce. Thus, this system represents a pretty significant net loss in energy. He's found a cute substitute to electrolysis, the process in which you break the O-H bonds in water with straight electricity, but he's not found a miraculous source of energy. Any junior physics or engineering major could tell you this guy's a crackpot. [/ QUOTE ] Ahhhh...who says oot can't, make you smarter. 
|
|
#13
09-12-2007, 07:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Scientist Burns water--Nobody Cares?
[ QUOTE ]
Well they're saying it's salt water * RF -> hydrogen -> fresh water. The loss of salt make any difference to perpetual motion? [/ QUOTE ] No, my above argument still holds. I believe that the salt's contribution will be negligible to relevant energetics of the system. Now, might this be a more efficient system of desalinization? Possibly, but it's really hard to compete with shining sunlight on a big vat of water, evaporating it, and then condensing pure water. It's hard to do on a large scale, but that system is still pretty darn close to being free, at least after the startup costs.
|
|
#14
09-12-2007, 07:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Scientist Burns water--Nobody Cares?
all of your arguments and the above article are missing the guy's point. the only people arguing he's made some great source of energy are internet idiots and the media. the guy who made it wants to kill cancer cells with it.
|
|
#15
09-12-2007, 07:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Scientist Burns water--Nobody Cares?
|
|
#17
09-12-2007, 07:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Scientist Burns water--Nobody Cares?
These crackpot discoveries keep popping up. Last year, there was similar hype around a company called Hydrogen Technology Applications. I emailed their PR person to ask, "Has your company heard of the first law of thermodynamics?"
Two weeks later, he responded, "gee, no, please edu-ma-cate us." That was 8/31/06. It doesn't look like they've done anything since.
|
|
#18
09-12-2007, 08:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Scientist Burns water--Nobody Cares?
[ QUOTE ]
[But this was posted a long time ago. My first search on youtube found something posted in May http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGg0ATfoBgo [/ QUOTE ] The funny thing is that you can even see in the video that the small test tube is in between some huge radio frequency producing machine. Anyone with a half a brain would look at that and realize that the machine is requiring much more energy to run then the little flame in the test tube is producing. It's like the people that think ethanol from corn is "free energy" because corn grows from the sun.
|
|
#19
09-12-2007, 08:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Scientist Burns water--Nobody Cares?
[ QUOTE ]
A guy once came up with an automobile-like transportation device that was powered by compressed air. OMFG MAN! COMPRESSED AIR! But nobody cared, because the thing was a piece of [censored] and wasn't very useful. It's too early to pass judgment on this discovery, but it's very possible this turns out to be a piece of [censored] also. [/ QUOTE ] you are very very wrong. The car is being produced as we speak, in India. You can see it on the streets of India in the summer of 2008. Check This Link This Link
|
|
#20
09-15-2007, 05:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Scientist Burns water--Nobody Cares?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [But this was posted a long time ago. My first search on youtube found something posted in May http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGg0ATfoBgo [/ QUOTE ] The funny thing is that you can even see in the video that the small test tube is in between some huge radio frequency producing machine. Anyone with a half a brain would look at that and realize that the machine is requiring much more energy to run then the little flame in the test tube is producing. It's like the people that think ethanol from corn is "free energy" because corn grows from the sun. [/ QUOTE ] Yup, takes more energy to grow, harvest, transport and refine corn than you get out of it at the pump. Sugarcane is the cheapest to produce and is far more efficient, but the aggricultural (corn)lobby make inporting sugar so expensive that it becomes cost prohibitve for the US to use it.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
