 Notice. New forum software under development. It's going to miss a few functions and look a bit ugly for a while, but I'm working on it full time now as the old forum was too unstable. Couple days, all good. If you notice any issues, please contact me. |
Forum Index : Microcontroller and PC projects : AI research project for this month
  Page 9 of 11   |
|||||
| Author | Message | ||||
| JohnS Guru  Joined: 18/11/2011 Location: United KingdomPosts: 4121 |
Fell through because it doesn't work despite charlatans saying it does. WTF it's not April 1st! John |
||||
Mixtel90 Guru Joined: 05/10/2019 Location: United KingdomPosts: 8267 |
Load of cobblers. Clickbait. You need serious energy to split a stable molecular bond such as water. If the vehicle engine is providing the energy to split water fast enough to be able to power itself then it won't have enough power to move the vehicle - you always get less energy out of the cycle than you put in, it has to come from somewhere else if the system is to run at all. No, "magic chemicals" can't split the water fast enough either, unless they are actually powering the loop as well as the hydrogen. You may as well use petrol or diesel. They do have the energy density needed to split water fast enough, but you may as well use them as a fuel directly. :) I take it that you noticed the repeated dialogue in several parts of the "Toyota" video? Do you think that a company like that would put their name to a shoddy video production like that? ;) These won't "come to market" for one very simple reason - they aren't possible. :) Youtube is wonderful but it won't replace Science... Mick Zilog Inside! nascom.info for Nascom & Gemini Preliminary MMBasic docs & my PCB designs |
||||
| PhenixRising Guru Joined: 07/11/2023 Location: United KingdomPosts: 1623 |
Really? You wanna go tell the US Navy? Seawater Powered Ships Arthur C Clarke puts you at "stage one" |
||||
| PhenixRising Guru Joined: 07/11/2023 Location: United KingdomPosts: 1623 |
No you don't. It can be done with AC voltage at a specific frequency. It has been proven by many. |
||||
| lizby Guru Joined: 17/05/2016 Location: United StatesPosts: 3464 |
You're expert mechanically, and have resources. Build it then. Fame and wealth beyond the dreams of avarice follow. All this stuff about "big oil" suppressing this threatening development: China doesn't care what big oil thinks. If it worked, they'd pursue it. They've proven that with solar; they've proven it with batteries; they've proven it with EVs. Think they wouldn't turn water into fuel if it could be done with a net gain in energy? Globally, the "big oil" boogeyman is well past its "use by" date, however locally powerful the industry is. PicoMite, Armmite F4, SensorKits, MMBasic Hardware, Games, etc. on fruitoftheshed |
||||
| PhenixRising Guru Joined: 07/11/2023 Location: United KingdomPosts: 1623 |
China produces 80% of all solar panels. US produces 1.9% China produces 44% of all wind turbines. US produces 15% China knows what it's doing and laughing all the way to the bank. |
||||
| lizby Guru Joined: 17/05/2016 Location: United StatesPosts: 3464 |
It's also the case that the end-user profits far more from solar panels than the manufacturer does. The world should buy as much as China can produce (at less than 10¢ a watt shipped to any port in the world) and it can economically install--without tariffs. If China is willing to subsidize end-users world-wide, we should take advantage of the opportunity. The same is true for batteries. We can all laugh our way to the bank. PicoMite, Armmite F4, SensorKits, MMBasic Hardware, Games, etc. on fruitoftheshed |
||||
| JohnS Guru Joined: 18/11/2011 Location: United KingdomPosts: 4121 |
It doesn't say how it does it and indeed does say it's not the answer "in the short term" - so has that changed? John |
||||
| JohnS Guru Joined: 18/11/2011 Location: United KingdomPosts: 4121 |
If the claim about seawater was true (other than, say, using nuclear to do it) then China would be doing that as well and yes laughing all the way to the bank. They're not and no-one else is or will be. John |
||||
| JohnS Guru Joined: 18/11/2011 Location: United KingdomPosts: 4121 |
Please let's go back to AI rather than this ridiculous stuff. John |
||||
| lizby Guru Joined: 17/05/2016 Location: United StatesPosts: 3464 |
Yes. Or solar, when solar electricity price is negative or very low. But no one is saying that there will be more energy in the hydrogen that is produced than there was in the solar (or nuclear) electricity put into the hydrolysis. PicoMite, Armmite F4, SensorKits, MMBasic Hardware, Games, etc. on fruitoftheshed |
||||
| Mixtel90 Guru Joined: 05/10/2019 Location: United KingdomPosts: 8267 |
Links please. In electrolysis you *can* use AC of any frequency, but it's very inefficient. The material from the electrodes keeps moving from the cathode to the anode and reverses when the polarity changes. It might help the electrode life in some cases, I suppose, but that's all. Eventually the electrodes will dissolve in the liquid as not all the electrons will migrate. At high frequencies it does no electrolysis as there isn't time for the current to build up. At low frequencies it does, but the reaction reverses on each polarity change so the net result tends toward zero - hence the inefficiency. Incidentally, electrolysis is *current* driven. The voltage is simply "enough to overcome the resistance of the liquid". Pure water is a terrible conductor of electricity. For electrolysis to occur it almost always has to be dosed with a metal salt just to make it conduct enough for the reaction to occur. The idea that you could extract hydrogen from pure water at any speed using any sort of electrolytic or even catalytic action (which also depends on the movement of electrons through a fluid, just with less or no electricity) is laughable, At molecular level it takes a certain amount of energy to split the two hydrogen atoms from the oxygen atom. the same amount of energy will be released when two atoms of hydrogen are recombined with an atom of oxygen. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. If everything was 100% efficient then the energy taken to split the fuel would be identical to that released by burning the hydrogen in the engine. It's nowhere close to approaching 100% efficiency though, not even a tiny percentage of that, so there's a serious deficit of energy in just turning the mechanical parts against friction. Mick Zilog Inside! nascom.info for Nascom & Gemini Preliminary MMBasic docs & my PCB designs |
||||
| Volhout Guru Joined: 05/03/2018 Location: NetherlandsPosts: 5420 |
Mick, You cannot convince them, stop trying. If it would be more energy efficient to have H2 and O2 separate, regardless the process, by now all water on earth would have been transformed in H2 and O2 by nature itself. There would not be a sea at all. H2O is the lowest energy (most stable) bond between H and O. That is why there is so much water. So any transition from this bond costs more energy than recombining supplies. I am convinced there may be methods more efficient that electrolysis, but efficiency of the cycle will always be less than 1. Volhout PicomiteVGA PETSCII ROBOTS |
||||
| PhenixRising Guru Joined: 07/11/2023 Location: United KingdomPosts: 1623 |
There is a tendency for people to believe only what they have been told to believe. Example: I work with mechanical engineers who are naturally capable of calculating kinetic energy based on mass, velocity, etc and they fully understand material strengths etc. So I ask them to calculate the kinetic energy of a wing-tip of a passenger airliner. The velocity is provided by the plane's turbo fans. The wing-tips are sheet aluminum. So show me, mathematically how the wing-tips sliced through steel reinforced concrete. The response? "Oh you're one of those conspiracy theorists" Not a single one will follow through...not one. I know why....the numbers don't make sense...but they saw it on the telly and that's all that matters. |
||||
twofingers Guru Joined: 02/06/2014 Location: GermanyPosts: 1666 |
How did they come up with that? I don't understand.  causality ≠ correlation ≠ coincidence |
||||
| lizby Guru Joined: 17/05/2016 Location: United StatesPosts: 3464 |
Another Phenix hobbyhorse introduced. How long now before the whole herd is stampeding? PicoMite, Armmite F4, SensorKits, MMBasic Hardware, Games, etc. on fruitoftheshed |
||||
| Mixtel90 Guru Joined: 05/10/2019 Location: United KingdomPosts: 8267 |
No doubt any LLM would give a definitive answer. :) Mick Zilog Inside! nascom.info for Nascom & Gemini Preliminary MMBasic docs & my PCB designs |
||||
| PhenixRising Guru Joined: 07/11/2023 Location: United KingdomPosts: 1623 |
So you guys like to cite "science"? Please go ahead and provide me with the kinetic energy as described and how sheet aluminum slices through steel reinforced concrete. You won't because you must believe the official narrative. I'm waiting. |
||||
| twofingers Guru Joined: 02/06/2014 Location: GermanyPosts: 1666 |
ChatGPT: causality ≠ correlation ≠ coincidence |
||||
| PhenixRising Guru Joined: 07/11/2023 Location: United KingdomPosts: 1623 |
This is what I mean;appendages do not magically inherit the kinetic energy of the fuselage. They are objects in their own right. The fuselage and turbofans are elsewhere. The point of contact of the wing tips is a matter of the wing-tip's mass and velocity vs that point of contact. If you drive a truck over a fence post at 50Km/h, the truck won't even feel it but stick your arm out the window to attempt to knock the fence post over instead. Try it and get back to me, typing with your one remaining arm. |
||||
| Page 9 of 11 |
|||||
 Print this page |
 |
The Back Shed's forum code is written, and hosted, in Australia. | © JAQ Software 2025 |
