Boating less due to fuel prices?

Dora Jean-

Chalk this one up with "Cold Fusion", stem cell cloning, snake oil, and a lot of other hoaxes.

Goes against all existing understandings we have in chemistry and physics.

No specific explanatory information of process, just baseless claims.

Next stage: They want to sell you a phony machine, make you a dealer, invest in their company, or all three.

How do these outfits get away with these phoney-baloney, take the money and run operations???

Joe.
 
Here's another one:

British Inventor Unveils 8000 MPG Car

May 12, 2006 2:18 p.m. EST

Julie Farby - All Headline News Staff Writer

London, England (AHN)—A British inventor unveils the world's most fuel-efficient vehicle, a three-wheel “TeamGreen” car capable of doing 8,000 miles to the gallon.

The 45-year-old inventor, Andy Green, from the University of Bath, built his budget eco-motor for just £2,000, and will be the sole British contender for the title of the world's most fuel-economic car in a global competition being held later this month.

It has taken Mr. Green more than two years to design and build the car, which will be the fourth eco-vehicle he has built. He holds the British record for fuel-efficiency, with 6,603 miles to the gallon in a previous car.

According to the report, the new vehicle is powered by a single cylinder four-stroke engine with a capacity of just 35cc and runs with a special management system incorporating fuel injection.

A spokesman for Bath University says, "Andy Green is keeping the spirit of the lone British inventor who takes on the world very much alive."
 
dogon dory":1wq62wlj said:
rogerbum":1wq62wlj said:
I read through the site and their "scientific paper" - two words - it's crap.
Click to expand...
Careful lest you resemble the "factanista" from your prior post.
Click to expand...

That's why I didn't bother to provide any backup opinion or detailed analysis of the paper. Like Cobert, I just know in my gut that it's crap.
 
I too doubted the claims. But then some 'group' of people are sure going to a LOT of effort to push this hoax. Videos of the heat generated, ultra clean burning are hard to fake -- I know it's doable. The scientific paper has been written by at least one chemist or someone quite verse in the science of molecular theory, supposedly a PhD (I know I know, piled higher and deeper).

Another thought that supports the 'discovery' is that they aren't claiming to solve ALL the worlds problems with it, right now they're concentrating on welding applications. Sure, he 'supposedly' converted his '94 Escort into a sort of hybrid gas/HHO vehicle, but it only enhances the fuel rather than replaces (increases 30-40%). I originally thought he was burning straight water on his 100 mile trip using 4 oz of water, but it was really only supplemental (if water only, that would be something like 3000 mpg!).

And lastly, the process of separating the Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms from H2O has been around since the 1800's as explained, only he's developed a method that significantly lowers the energy required to separate the atoms and somehow neutralizes the H-H attraction (non-valence event) -- that's the part I'm having trouble with. Something about 30-35 psi pressure during the process, 220V (maybe feeds a step-up tranformer up to 10,000 volts(?)), looks to be a significant amount of current/power if it uses $1.00 of electricity per hour, my rates hover around $0.10 per kilowatt-hr.

I've often thought, what if I invented or discovered something like this, how would I, with limited resources and funds, go about unveiling it to the world while protecting my invention -- like with his patents (real?). Any way to search a public patent knowledge base for it?
 
Dora~Jean":1y2q54j8 said:
I too doubted the claims. But then some 'group' of people are sure going to a LOT of effort to push this hoax. Videos of the heat generated, ultra clean burning are hard to fake -- I know it's doable. The scientific paper has been written by at least one chemist or someone quite verse in the science of molecular theory, supposedly a PhD (I know I know, piled higher and deeper).
Click to expand...
From my reading - not too bright or too verse in molecular theory. However, people often go though a lot of effort to either perpetrate a hoax (perhaps to gain $'s from unsophisticated investors) or to present ideas which they actually believe but are not capable of objectively self evaluating. One key test of a good "scientific paper" is has it been published in a good, PEER REVIEWED journal. This work has not and it won't be (because it's crap).
Dora~Jean":1y2q54j8 said:
Another thought that supports the 'discovery' is that they aren't claiming to solve ALL the worlds problems with it, right now they're concentrating on welding applications. Sure, he 'supposedly' converted his '94 Escort into a sort of hybrid gas/HHO vehicle, but it only enhances the fuel rather than replaces (increases 30-40%). I originally thought he was burning straight water on his 100 mile trip using 4 oz of water, but it was really only supplemental (if water only, that would be something like 3000 mpg!).

And lastly, the process of separating the Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms from H2O has been around since the 1800's as explained, only he's developed a method that significantly lowers the energy required to separate the atoms and somehow neutralizes the H-H attraction (non-valence event) -- that's the part I'm having trouble with.
Click to expand...
You've latched onto EXACTLY the part to worry about. There is (and never will be) a methods that significantly lowers the energy require to separate the H atoms from the O atoms in water. That requires a fixed, quantifiable amount of energy per molecule that will never change.
Dora~Jean":1y2q54j8 said:
Something about 30-35 psi pressure during the process, 220V (maybe feeds a step-up tranformer up to 10,000 volts(?)), looks to be a significant amount of current/power if it uses $1.00 of electricity per hour, my rates hover around $0.10 per kilowatt-hr.

I've often thought, what if I invented or discovered something like this, how would I, with limited resources and funds, go about unveiling it to the world while protecting my invention -- like with his patents (real?). Any way to search a public patent knowledge base for it?
Click to expand...

There are patents issued on this "invention" - you can search for US patents easily on line for free at www.uspto.gov. However, the existence of a patent is not in and of itself a guarantee of a working or "real" invention. It simply indicates that the US PTO thinks one has a novel idea. They don't check to see if the idea is correct or real prior to issuing a patent. If you do come up with a great idea,
1) Do a patent search on terms related to your idea. Many times, the best ideas have already been thought of and patented by others.
2) If you determine that what you have is novel and likely to be valuable, contact a decent lawyer. Then have the idea evaluated by others who can assess it. Find some true experts and have confidentiality and non-compete agreements drawn up (your lawyer would do that). Don't be surprised is experts in the area of the invention tell you it won't work etc.
3) If 3 or more experts tell you this is a good and feasible invention then file a patent.
4)After that, then try to build a company around it or sell of the patent etc. Detailed advice for this part can't be provided in the abstract other than don't go into business with people you don't know and trust EXTREMELY well.
 
Yep, I here ya Roger, all the same concerns. How can a person with a 'limited' scientific background like this person 'proudly proclaims' simply stumble across a different method of separating the H2O molecules using far less energy than our current physics require? Goes against the basics, Maxwell's equations -- BTW, I have a deep regard for them and a few scars from one of my physics classes where the professor required that every equation used throughout any of his tests must first be DERIVED from Maxwell's equations. Very painful, but we gained a deep foundation!

I'm going to continue to follow this guy and his company as they develop, but can only rely on what is published of course. They have contact info, I'm going to try and find info from some of the schools they've 'given' their product to for experimentation (they may be in cahoots too...). They seem to be very careful about not 'selling' anything, only donating.
 
Here in a blue collar section of Detroit, the marinas are mostly empty. It is still early in the season but many guys have unloaded their boats or put them up for sale. (The local neighborhood marina services Detroit River/Lake Erie boaters and was at about 50% capacity last year compared to waiting lists for slips in the mid-nineties) I have not read every post on this thread, but have noticed pro/con oil company and political arguments over the cost of gas. Here in the rust belt the economy is not booming, so that plays into the empty marinas as well. Diesel around Detroit marinas and filling stations is a few cents more than gasoline. I realize that more diesel is being used, but isn't it cheaper to produce than gas? Someone is making a higher profit because of demand. If I am forced to sell my boat it will be due to job insecurity (elementary teacher)rather than fuel consumption. In general, the cost of fuel will be another spike into the heart of Great Lake boaters who are considering giving up a great lifestyle.
 
More hocus-pocus!!!

What he apparently has a conventional electrolysis device which separates hydrogen and oxygen into gases, then he uses phopographic trickery to make it look like it does amazing things, like produce incredible temperatures.

I don't buy into it--everything in our training says it's impossible and beyond known parameters.

If this were real, the U.S. military would confiscate and apply this technology, the scientific community would be undergoing a revolution in thinking, and our inventor friend would be hearlded as the Second Coming of Christ!!!
 
Reading about this R M Santilli guy and the project is better than the Sunday Comics! See: http://www.crank.net/perpetual.html. Also very interesting digging into his CV and his writings, which dispell most of modern physics.
Also he seems to be part of those who feel that it is a conspiracy by the Governments and oil companies to not recongnize his "works". He even has his own societies and "scientific Journals".

It appears that his formation of hydrogen, consumes more energy than it produces--which is a common thread in these types of claims of free energy.

If you look at his various "affiliations"--basically he is applying for, or has lived off various grants--in other words been financed by the taxpayers.

Sorry I don't buy it. For a portion of my life one of my positions was evaluating scientific research projects and grant applications at one of California's major medical college's teaching hospitals. He would have gotten a "no" from the committee I chaired, based on what I can find on the internet and reading a couple of his papers.

Still boating just as much--life is short and must be lived!
 
After reading Dog on Dan's intro to this topic I must say that the fossil fuel theory and the economics related to it is the biggest scam.

Does anyone know how to convert my Floscan fuel monitor so it can read dinosaurs per hour? Inquiring minds want to know.
 
HOCUS-POCUS
Meaningless talk or activity designed to distract attention.

The word is nowadays applied to anything, speech or action, that’s designed to stop you seeing what the politician or salesman is really up to or what’s actually happening. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, Dorothy ...
It is known that the word appeared in the seventeenth century as a mock-Latin formula or incantation used by conjurors. What that formula was and where it came from is less certain.
Thomas Ady wrote in his book of 1655, A Candle in the Dark; or, a Treatise Concerning the Nature of Witches and Witchcraft: “I will speak of one man ... that went about in King James his time ... who called himself, The Kings Majesties most excellent Hocus Pocus, and so was called, because that at the playing of every Trick, he used to say, Hocus pocus, tontus talontus, vade celeriter jubeo, a dark composure of words, to blinde the eyes of the beholders, to make his Trick pass the more currantly without discovery”.
Many people today believe that the phrase originated in a corrupted form of the words of the consecration of the host in the old Latin mass: hoc est (enim) corpus (meum), “this is my body”, an idea that was first aired by John Tillotson, who was Archbishop of Canterbury between 1691 and 1694. But as this was part of an anti-Catholic sermon, it may be taken with a fair-sized pinch of salt. Another possibility, suggested in current Oxford dictionaries, is the nonsense Latin phrase “hax pax max Deus adimax”.
Whatever the source, hocus-pocus was at first a general name for jugglers and conjurers and then—later in the seventeenth century—it became a term for a trick or deception. It’s also the source of another common English word, since at the end of the following century it was contracted to make hoax.
 
I now see that Harbor Freight has a miracle gizmo...(looks like a magnet) that attaches to yer fuel line and gives you up to 33% better fuel milage
(as long as ya don't drive) and it is really inexpensive (should be)

Joel
SEA3PO
 
Don-

So what am I, the B.S. Detector or somethng???

De Ja' Vu....!!!

Same old B.S. as on pages 4 and 5 of this thread!

Did you invest your entire retirement fund with the Water Wizard?

Wonder why his 1994 Whatever car is still rigged to run on a "partial" gasoline mixture instead of pure water?


Joe.
 
Back
Top