Home
JAQForum Ver 20.06
Log In or Join  
Active Topics
Local Time 10:51 29 Apr 2024 Privacy Policy
Jump to

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 : Nothing ever changes...

     Page 2 of 6    
Author Message
Tinine
Guru

Joined: 30/03/2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1646
Posted: 11:51pm 05 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

I guess Jules Verne didn't anticipate such greed.
 
Tinine
Guru

Joined: 30/03/2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1646
Posted: 12:09am 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

Bob Boyce started out not caring about efficiency....he just wanted to win boat races.
He converted his boats to run on hydrogen...produced on demand.

One of the two boats, at a particular RPM would suddenly get a huge burst of power which he couldn't explain.

Back at the shop, he discovered a bad diode in the alternator's rectifier and therefore, an AC signal was being superimposed on the DC circuit which resulted in a huge increase in hydrogen production.

He decided to research this further and ended up using a microcontroller (Great Cow BASIC) to generate these AC signals.

Bob also met an untimely death.

Bob Boyce
 
Chopperp

Guru

Joined: 03/01/2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 1032
Posted: 12:11am 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

  TassyJim said  I bought a new car recently.
Nothing flash, just a Subaru Forester.

Someone counted 71 buttons for the driver to play with.
It took an hour for the salesman to go through all the 'safety' features explaining how they don't work all the time.
They have to do that so I don't sue them when the lane guidance doesn't work.

It took me 2 weeks of fiddling to get the air conditioning working the way I wanted it to.

I have now become immune to all the beeps and bongs that emit from the computer every time it's not happy.

Life was much simpler when I had the '58 Porsche.

Jim


I know what you mean with the beeps. I had a drive from Toowoomba to BNE airport & back last year with a friend in a Forester. Drove me crazy with all the beeps etc.

Another friend has a Disco & he has most of this stuff turned off. Much more pleasant driving in that vehicle expect when he tried talking out loud to his phone to try to dial someone. No warning given.
(Mind you, this vehicle has a million buttons & switches as well).

My 11 YO X-Trail has nothing like that.

Brian
Edited 2020-01-06 10:12 by Chopperp
ChopperP
 
BrianP
Senior Member

Joined: 30/03/2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 292
Posted: 12:31am 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

It seems I've really stirred the pot...
Nice to able to vent our frustrations - now we can focus on our 'Mites

B
 
lizby
Guru

Joined: 17/05/2016
Location: United States
Posts: 3015
Posted: 01:36am 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

Who knows--maybe Jules Verne will yet be proven correct, but if so, it will likely be because energy is created otherwise (produced, transformed) and used to generate hydrogen.

Bob Boyce--"Free Energy -- the secret they can't kill." Exactly who are "they", and why aren't there plenty of other "theys" who'd like the fame and riches that would come from "free energy"--perhaps some of them rich enough already to make themselves secure against the nefarious Theys. There doesn't seem to be a shortage of rich people who want to become richer.
PicoMite, Armmite F4, SensorKits, MMBasic Hardware, Games, etc. on fruitoftheshed
 
CaptainBoing

Guru

Joined: 07/09/2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1985
Posted: 07:46am 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

  Tinine said  Japanese car

Stan Meyer and others


you can add this to the mix also.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfILTM_xcOE rather less crank more mainstream. Texaco acquired the rights (and patents) to NiMH batteries from GM but licensed them specifically so they could only be manufactured in small capacities - this is recorded fact. A logical extraction from that is; it was to prevent the discontinuation of oil products as fuel in a car by preventing anyone making a NiMH battery big enough to power one (@12:00) is fairly honest and straightforward. Why else would they do that? For the same reason YOU would if you were Texaco. Protecting your investment... just follow the money!

  lizby said  Exactly who are "they", and why aren't there plenty of other "theys" who'd like the fame and riches that would come from "free energy"--perhaps some of them rich enough already to make themselves secure against the nefarious Theys. There doesn't seem to be a shortage of rich people who want to become richer.

Oil companies for one. "They" have enormous investment in getting oil out of the ground and they are in no hurry to set that aside for the altruistic betterment of mankind. They'll continue selling Oil until it is gone, escalating the price in inverse proportion to its availability (standard market force) then swoop to mankind's salvation with a new invention that uses something else, but there will be a price to pay! That's right I said it and the stock market figures prove why the oil companies have all the incentive they need to do it. Watch that video above.

So the idea of big corp strangling tech babies in the crib to protect their market - totally believable.

The problem with all the over-unity thing is the "I want to believe" crowd will lie to aid their pet theory... Search youtube for "unlimited energy" and you'll be snowed under with vids of some crap with spinning magnets and a spark plug connected to a mains power strip etc... The "scene" is poisoned by bullsh*tters that do it for the clicks.
Edited 2020-01-06 20:54 by CaptainBoing
 
Tinine
Guru

Joined: 30/03/2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1646
Posted: 08:24am 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

Water, as a source of fuel, tends to be lumped into the over-unity thing but it isn't. It's still a fuel. Tank runs dry and you grind to a halt.
 
Poppy

Guru

Joined: 25/07/2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 486
Posted: 08:30am 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

  BrianP said  It seems I've really stirred the pot...
Nice to able to vent our frustrations - now we can focus on our 'Mites

B


WWBMD?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRyELKGLGag



Venting frustrations is just like farting into the wind!

This is what I meant for keeping our own homeostasis, the question is if talking can be constructive at least showing new possibilities in any way.

... and ya man nowadays BM would not push any "wood" rather than a micromite!

Andre ... such a GURU?
 
Tinine
Guru

Joined: 30/03/2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1646
Posted: 09:03am 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

U.S. Navy using seawater for fuel.

Can anyone make sense of the statement:

  Quote  
Forbes columnist Tim Worstall says the system could be great for the Navy, but he doubts it will be an economically feasible or energy-efficient alternative for those of us on land. "We need more energy to go into the process than we get out of it," he wrote of the Navy's method for converting seawater to fuel, adding later, "[A]s a general rule it’s not really all that useful. We want to produce energy, not just transform it with efficiency losses along the way."
 
Poppy

Guru

Joined: 25/07/2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 486
Posted: 11:49am 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

In my opinion he just says that this kind of making fuel is technically possible but it completely is not energy efficient!

That means to get a result you have to invest more pure energy than this fuel will deliver later on.

So this cannot be a basic solution for our decreasing fuel situation.
Andre ... such a GURU?
 
Tinine
Guru

Joined: 30/03/2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1646
Posted: 01:01pm 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

  Poppy said  In my opinion he just says that this kind of making fuel is technically possible but it completely is not energy efficient!

That means to get a result you have to invest more pure energy than this fuel will deliver later on.

So this cannot be a basic solution for our decreasing fuel situation.


Can you imagine..."Yeah we're gonna take all this energy out to sea and use it to make less energy for ourselves".

To me, it's about not trying to hide the fact that they are using water for energy and spreading disinformation about its viability elsewhere.
 
Tinine
Guru

Joined: 30/03/2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1646
Posted: 01:17pm 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

Maybe I misunderstood that they were processing whilst at sea???
 
Poppy

Guru

Joined: 25/07/2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 486
Posted: 01:25pm 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

  Tinine said  
To me, it's about not trying to hide the fact that they are using water for energy and spreading disinformation about its viability elsewhere.


I donīt know if I get you right!?!

About "not trying to hide", they claim to do so, so I donīt understand what they are supposed to be hiding about that general issue.


Or do you just mean that point as the basis of their "disinformation"?

I am not quite sure if this really is disinformation, but letīs see:

First we donīt know where this exactly comes from, as there is a reporter in between, but if we just take it literally then these statements get highlighted for me:

1)
"calling it a potentially revolutionary advancement."

2)
"The system could potentially shave hours off the at-sea refueling process and eliminate time spent away from missions. "

3)
"The NRL projects the new fueling system could be commercially viable in less than 10 years and could produce jet fuel that costs $3-6 dollars per gallon."


I think the major point is No 2, for being just exclusively positive for Navy issues and from this point of view No 1 can make sense!

The big questioning has to be done about No 3, first they do not claim to solve all energy problems, they are just talking about the No 2 issue, so what the columnist does is just some further thinking, but actually not a part of this report.

I think this really is no disinformation, it is just bad information for being stupidly superficial, too many facts are missing for real interpretation.
Andre ... such a GURU?
 
Poppy

Guru

Joined: 25/07/2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 486
Posted: 01:26pm 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

  Tinine said  Maybe I misunderstood that they were processing whilst at sea???


Thatīs what I understood, that they do so!
Andre ... such a GURU?
 
Tinine
Guru

Joined: 30/03/2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1646
Posted: 06:29pm 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

Some day I wanna grab a cheapie generator and try this simplified approach.
 
lizby
Guru

Joined: 17/05/2016
Location: United States
Posts: 3015
Posted: 07:43pm 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

  CaptainBoing said  So the idea of big corp strangling tech babies in the crib to protect their market - totally believable.


Acquire to kill--I certainly believe that happens.

  Tinine said  Water, as a source of fuel, tends to be lumped into the over-unity thing but it isn't. It's still a fuel. Tank runs dry and you grind to a halt.


But that's not what is meant by "over unity" in the case of hydrolysis or the like. "Useful output energy greater than input energy" doesn't imply that the fuel is never exhausted. (Unlike with some assertions regarding "free energy".)

I readily admit that the oil companies act to try to prevent the stranding of their resources, both through propaganda and more active means, but I don't think that, for instance, the resource-strained Chinese would feel constrained by intellectual property concerns if they felt there were a way to generate the energy they needed without burning coal or buying oil. And I think they (and others) would actively persue any methods that their scientists thought were remotely possible.

  Tinine said  Some day I wanna grab a cheapie generator and try this simplified approach.


Seems easy enough to try.
Edited 2020-01-07 05:53 by lizby
PicoMite, Armmite F4, SensorKits, MMBasic Hardware, Games, etc. on fruitoftheshed
 
Tinine
Guru

Joined: 30/03/2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1646
Posted: 08:07pm 06 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

  lizby said  

But that's not what is meant by "over unity" in the case of hydrolysis or the like. "Output energy greater than input energy" doesn't imply that the fuel is never exhausted. (Unlike with some assertions regarding "free energy".)


There is no getting more out than putting in; hydrogen is way more combustible than gasoline.


As for China, etc., I can also see the potential negative aspects of every Joe Blow having access to unlimited free energy. I mean who wouldn't want a 5,000BHP car and consider weaponry, etc.
 
Poppy

Guru

Joined: 25/07/2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 486
Posted: 09:21am 07 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

We have to differ between "Free Energy" the disinfomative religion and real free energy like solar, wind and water.

It is a matter of calculation!

Energy will not vanish it just gets transformed, so if we get more solar power for example then we could dissipate more for further transformation, but I guess we even cannot evaluate all side-effects and ancillary issues at least for now.
Andre ... such a GURU?
 
JohnS
Guru

Joined: 18/11/2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3659
Posted: 10:42am 07 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

  Tinine said  It has been proven that high voltage, high frequency, negligible current (therefore negligible power) can also split water and generate copious amounts of hydrogen - on demand - no need for storage.


But the energy input is still greater than the energy produced.

So in some circumstances it might be worth doing but generally it would not be.

The navy case might be one - maybe they can use a fat cable to recharge a vessel very quickly then get back to doing whatever that vessel is wanted for.  (Lots of maybes, but overall it might perhaps make "sense" if you think like the navy may.)

However, clearly would be a non-starter as a generally useful everyday thing.

Or has someone proven the Laws of Thermodynamics are wrong?  Worth at least one Nobel prize!

John
 
CaptainBoing

Guru

Joined: 07/09/2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1985
Posted: 10:49am 07 Jan 2020
Copy link to clipboard 
Print this post

  JohnS said  
  Tinine said  It has been proven that high voltage, high frequency, negligible current (therefore negligible power) can also split water and generate copious amounts of hydrogen - on demand - no need for storage.


But the energy input is still greater than the energy produced.

So in some circumstances it might be worth doing but generally it would not be.

The navy case might be one - maybe they can use a fat cable to recharge a vessel very quickly then get back to doing whatever that vessel is wanted for.  (Lots of maybes, but overall it might perhaps make "sense" if you think like the navy may.)

However, clearly would be a non-starter as a generally useful everyday thing.

Or has someone proven the Laws of Thermodynamics are wrong?  Worth at least one Nobel prize!

John


This is where I sit. I know there is quite a "scene" in the USA for splitting water into H & O as an additive to vehicle engines *as a supplement* dropped into the air intake on a (generally) standard setup and there are guys who can demonstrate big power increases.

I'm just not ready to set aside thermodynamics just yet. Happy to be proved wrong but I just can't believe it to be possible with what has been so well documented. In my gut I still feel someone has got their sums wrong.
 
     Page 2 of 6    
Print this page
© JAQ Software 2024