Anybody seen this yet?

Unknown

this was just added a couple of days ago, pretty interesting.<BR>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiKa4nOkHLw<BR><BR>Dave

singh

Interesting

Never mind the cars.
1500* centrigrade flame? Should make for a nice hot water boiler !

However, seperating hydrogen from water is a High School science experiment. I gather his machine is ingniting hydrogen. How much electrical energy is required to run his radio wave machine to produce that flame. In a car , what energy source will run the machine? What source of energy will run the machine to turn a turbine engine, to create electricity in a power plant?

It will always take more energy to seperate hydrogen, than hydrogen can give back in energy.

Heat cannot be 100% completly converted into, useful work. Energy can't be created or destroyed. According to thermodynamic principles.

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Barbarossa

Which law?

Which one was Newtons law of thermo?

Glenn Sossin_2

will anyone follow up

I watched this also. Very interesting. I understand the idea of conservation of energy. But then think of the atom bomb. How much energy was used to create the bomb? I would think alot less than the heat,sound, and kinetic energy released by splitting a few atoms. It seems, this is what he is doing, splitting the molecule apart into two flameable components.

Plenty of salt water out here on the East Coast.

scott markle_2

matter to energy

If my high school physics and chemistry serves me right the first law of thermodynamics states that mater can neither be created or destroyed.

Nuclear reactions being an exception of sorts. In a nuclear reaction mass is actually converted into energy. e=mc2 describes the amount of energy that will be created from a quantity of matter that is transformed into energy. I believe that in a typical fission reaction very little mater is actually converted.

In non nuclear chemistry energy is "created" by releasing the potential energy of molecular bonds, the resulting products of this reaction have just as much mass as the original reagents.

This really strikes me as bad journalism. I think the implication that this is some kind of new source of energy source was written into the story by lame brained media idiots, more eager to entertain their viewers and sell advertising than report on scientific discovery in a thourough and non sensational way.

Remember also the second law of thermo dynamics, Entropy. Perpetual motion is impossible, Heat seeks equilibrium with its environment, it's why an indirect loses heat even if no hot water is drawn, It's probably why industrial man will be but a blip in geological time.

T.S Eliot "This is the way the world ends This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper..."

I hope I'm wrong

singh

Newton's law of cooling.




To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"