Warm fusion = free clean energy!

[Jim Ford]

Originally Posted by eeyore

there is ample evidence that hydrogen molecules only make one bond - and that therefore the only way two hydrogen molecules can bond with one oxygen is as H2O - which proves conclusively that HHO is rubbish.

Don't confuse them with the facts, 'Eeyore' - 'the believers' have made up their minds already!

Jim

[Doggle Avaddit]

Originally Posted by eeyore

there is ample evidence that hydrogen molecules only make one bond - and that therefore the only way two hydrogen molecules can bond with one oxygen is as H2O - which proves conclusively that HHO is rubbish.

Total rubbish. The only available evidence so far merely suggests that. You are saying that no new evidence could EVER come to light that might challenge that idea.
Scientific knowledge is ever changing, you seem to be saying we now know all there is to know. What a preposterous notion.

Originally Posted by eeyore

also if the current for the electrolysis comes from the vehicles alternator there is also loads of evidence to demonstrate that these are not 100% efficient and thus the generation of "HHO" could not give more even as much energy as is input let alone more.

Why are you being so disingenuous here? You know full well that the argument is not about using energy to split water and then burn the products to produce energy again. This has been well covered in the previous threads. We all know this is not efficient, and it has been pointed out ad nauseam that the HHO products may act like a catalyst and a combustion improver, not as a "free" fuel source.

Originally Posted by eeyore

course if you want to think of "HHO" as being a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen (more acurately described as H2+O2) then you may be right that there is no proof either way that injecting this mixture works or not in terms of fuel efficiency - there is however ample evidence that such a mixture would be flipping dangerous as it spontaneously ignites in the presence of sunlight or heat , much better to liberate the oxygen from the electrolysis and just inject the hydrogen if you really must

Well thats just more blind assumptions on your part with no reference to any real evidence whatsoever. Show me some links to cases where sunlight or heat has caused an explosion.


I'm not impressed.






Sorry for the italics and bold stuff, there didn't seem to be any way to correct it, much as I tried. I wan't going to retype the whole thing ...

[Doggle Avaddit]

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

Don't confuse them with the facts, 'Eeyore' - 'the believers' have made up their minds already!

Jim

As have the scientists.
Unfortunately niether of you seem capable of imagining that possibility.

[Dave5xe]

Originally Posted by Doggle Avaddit

As have the scientists.
Unfortunately niether of you seem capable of imagining that possibility.

Hi Doggle Avaddit, keep up the good fight.
There are none so blind as those who will not see!
Kind regards, David

[pressld2]

Originally Posted by Doggle Avaddit

Total rubbish. The only available evidence so far merely suggests that. You are saying that no new evidence could EVER come to light that might challenge that idea.
Scientific knowledge is ever changing, you seem to be saying we now know all there is to know. What a preposterous notion.

Yes, science is ever changing and progressing and yes, some current scientific thinking will change over time as new evidence and new techniques become available or new discoveries are made. But some won't. Some science is understood so thoroughly and in such depth that there really is no possibility of it ever changing. The way that atoms form bonds falls into this category. We not only know with certainty that hydrogen atoms can only form one bond and oxygen atoms can only form two, we also know why this is true and have a precise understanding of exactly how such bonds are formed. This is not going to change with new evidence or new discoveries.

Sorry if that comes across as overly dogmatic! But there really is a distinction between knowledge and belief. In all walks of life, science included.

Dave P.

[Doggle Avaddit]

Originally Posted by pressld2

Yes, science is ever changing and progressing and yes, some current scientific thinking will change over time as new evidence and new techniques become available or new discoveries are made. But some won't. Some science is understood so thoroughly and in such depth that there really is no possibility of it ever changing. The way that atoms form bonds falls into this category. We not only know with certainty that hydrogen atoms can only form one bond and oxygen atoms can only form two, we also know why this is true and have a precise understanding of exactly how such bonds are formed. This is not going to change with new evidence or new discoveries.

Sorry if that comes across as overly dogmatic! But there really is a distinction between knowledge and belief. In all walks of life, science included.

Dave P.

OK, so if this such a certaintly, why can I not find any valid scientific experiments that prove this HHO business is a load of tosh? Why can I also not find any valid experiments on HHO kits for cars? Or HHO welding? The only people who seem to be doing any research at all are the "believers" who say they are getting better mpg, less harmful emissions, higher torque, incredible weld temperatures blah blah blah.


You would think this alledged myth could be debunked in an instant, but apparently it has not been. Why?
I have not seen any valid experiments to show that it does actually work either. Again, why?

I say again, simply saying it can't possibly work because of our current molecular model is NOT evidence, and just as useless as saying that it does work, without having to properly prove it.

[thunder]

Quote
You would think this alledged myth could be debunked in an instant, but apparently it has not been. Why?
Endquote

Your question is answered by your next paragraph.

Quote
I have not seen any valid experiments to show that it does actually work either. Again, why?
Endquote

Almost certainly because it doesn't work.

Why spend time and money 'debunking' something that doesn't exist?

henrya

[Jim Ford]

Originally Posted by pressld2

Some science is understood so thoroughly and in such depth that there really is no possibility of it ever changing. The way that atoms form bonds falls into this category. We not only know with certainty that hydrogen atoms can only form one bond and oxygen atoms can only form two, we also know why this is true and have a precise understanding of exactly how such bonds are formed. This is not going to change with new evidence or new discoveries.

Very, very well put!

Jim

[pressld2]

Originally Posted by Doggle Avaddit

I say again, simply saying it can't possibly work because of our current molecular model is NOT evidence, and just as useless as saying that it does work, without having to properly prove it.

With respect, that's not what I'm saying. And I don't think it's what Pete is saying either. What we are saying is that the only way that two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen can bond together to form a molecule is as H20 - plain water.

It's perfectly possible (in fact, I'd say it's a certainty) that by splitting water into it's constituent elements and adding the pure hydrogen to the fuel mix in your engine you will have an effect on the burn, the power (and heat) generated and the mpg that you get. The trouble is that many of the websites that talk about this technology also say that a way has been found to bond two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen together to form a molecule called HHO. But as this would require one of the hydrogen atoms to be bonded both to the other hydrogen atom and to the oxygen atom we know immediately and with certainty that it is not true. This in turn, rightly or wrongly, makes us question everything else we read on such sites.

Scientists don't always leap to debunk things that are obviously not true as most of them have real jobs to do.

Dave P.

[Lancashire Lad]

Originally Posted by thunder

....Why spend time and money 'debunking' something that doesn't exist?....

Precisely.

Come on people, lets keep it real.

Scientists do not know everything by any means, there is undoubtedly much more still to be discovered, proven/disproven, and this will always be so.

But - there are some principles which are so well evidenced that the whole of physics and chemistry as we know it, would need to be completely overturned. Do you really think it conceivable that everything thus far proven about the elements is wrong?

Do any of you genuinely and seriously believe that the world would still be relying on fossil fuel/nuclear, or that we would be going down the wind/wave energy route, if energy could really be produced in this manner?

On this particular scenario, being a logical and rational sort of person, I know which side of the fence I'm sitting on.

I have a feeling that some people may be confusing HHO with current technology. Yes there are vehicles that run solely on hydrogen (and very efficiently too - eg. BBC NEWS | Business | BMW's hydrogen car: Beauty or beast?), but the hydrogen fuel is extracted by standard commercial means, and delivered to the vehicle from external storage tanks in liquid form. With current technology, when the hydrogen production/storage/transport infrastructure is factored in, the vehicle is hardly any more environmentally friendly than the petrol version.

Regards,
Mike.