Whatever happened to the water-fueled engine?

because anapawkins doesnt have an argument. She/he has a belief in the perpetual motion machine, and that there is a conspiracy by govt and big business to keep the public from knowing. And anyone who says different must be part of that conspiracy.

oh..no...no...no.. not all. Some are part of the conspiracy and some are just oblivious to the truth and some are just plain stupid.

so you accept there is a conspiracy to hide the truth of limitless free energy from the people?

I do.


Here's a theoretical physicist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Schwinger

"After 1989 Schwinger took a keen interest in the research of low-energy nuclear fusion reactions (AKA cold fusion). He wrote eight theory papers about it, including these [1] [2]. He resigned from the American Physical Society after their refusal to publish his papers. He felt that cold fusion research was being suppressed and academic freedom violated. He wrote: "The pressure for conformity is enormous. I have experienced it in editors' rejection of submitted papers, based on venomous criticism of anonymous referees. The replacement of impartial reviewing by censorship will be the death of science."

ok I respect your position. At least that's cleared the air, we can have a discussion on this. I can well understand why large corporations who influence governments (some say control) would want to suppress ideas or inventions that threaten their raison d'etre.

But equally there are embryonic large corporations, or individuals who would like be a large corporation, eager to exploit the same idea. The truth will out imo, and no vested interest nor government can prevent it coming into the public domain, even if they wanted to.

I'm reminded of the cable companies reaction to early radio experiments. How they would have loved (and actually tried) to kill it. But radio, despite its apparant magical qualities won through, because it was based on sound science. The free-energy or LENR experiments have not won through. Not because their results have been repressed, but because they have failed to establish the break through they claim.

A very valid and defensible argument, steve. The problem that we've already ironed out is that anakpawis isn't armed with the knowledge necessary to argue his/her side of the argument.

I urge you, anakpawis, to seriously do the research. Be your own scientist. Prove it to YOURSELF first instead of just listening to wide-eyed "inventors" seeking a patent.

I'm seriously doing research on my spare time, and I proved it to myself already. I remember being in a chatroom 5 years ago berating people who belives with water-powered car. It sounded so ridiculous and in violation of conservation of energy....so it seems. I thought they're nincompoop until I tried them myself. What a shame I did that to those people.

Well done. Now prove it to me.

I can not prove it to you because you won't believe me.
As I said before, I was an exact duplicate of you. I know exactly what you guys believe in. There's no way anyone can convince me back then.

You just have to see it, hear it, taste it, smell it, in order to believe that it is possible. And thus I'm begging you guys to try.

So basically you're saying that even though all the laws of science (including chemistry and physics) we hold to be true - are wrong because you think you've made a car that runs on water? Doesn't it stand to reason that it's much more likely that you misunderstand what's going on in this car? I think so.

Try what? Your new ice cream?

I can assure you my dear annapawkyns that if you described your perpetual motion machine without resorting to my sense of smell, I would indeed give it my best and unbiased attention.

In fact more than that, I would positively will it to succeed. But unfortunately one does not get success or free energy by will power alone.

I would LOVE to be proven wrong. Do you realize how AWESOME a water powered car would be???

Anakpawis, The problem is, what you have to do is first DISprove the law of conservation of energy which is like proving that 1+1=3... seriously. Its that fundamental. I'm not saying that its not possible, you just haven't done anything to even vaguely do that. You've just posted videos that prove nothing.

You would have to become the first scientist in the world to disprove the law of conservation of energy; the very same law that even Einstein himself used to create E=MC squared, and the very same law that proved his cold fusion couldn't work. If you want to prove it to me, show me someone who has it. I am quiet fluent in Calculus, you can even post the proof and I'll decipher it. Your references to those videos are not people out-thinking Einstein, they are Sci-Fi geeks seeking their 15 minutes and proving to their D&D friends that they are smarter. If they were actually so smart that they could have discovered this way around physics' most fundamental law, I would guarantee that the government would already have them in custody. They don't. Why? Because the government knows that its all hooey.

I would LOVE to believe it, but its no more believable to me than 1+1=3. Its just not possible.

I would like to propose that maybe its not the millions of insanely intelligent scientists that are incorrect, possibly its folks like you without the proper background on the subject to understand WHY its not possible.

If you ACTUALLY proved it to me, I would believe, but a guy on the evening news in a dune buggy and a magical box with lamps in a garage on a VHS tape are absolutely, unequivocally, NOT proof. If they had actually discovered free energy, they would tell us the process, or HOW it works, not just, "hey look at my box, but you aren't allowed to see that there are not batteries inside it."

That's the problem with most of these inventors. Some of them thinks that they can make money from these inventions, not knowing that nobody in the government wants them.

Oh and about the batteries...yeah I think there's batteries in those. Probably 2 AA Duracell batteires. It's harnessing energy from permanent magnets. It's another type of free energy.

And about Einstein, he's not a genius. E=mc2 is a figment of imagination not a fact.

Starting and driving daily a car that is fueled from h20
I know I should not pass judgment and say that everyone on this post does not know a damb thing about running a car off of hydrogen pulled from water.

Here is a link to a zip file containing detailed plans, along with pictures, about how to make your very own "water-powered car" if I may.

http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/carplans.zip

Almost a year ago, I found these plans, and after a few hundred dollars, some hard work along with trial and error, I had my car running off of hydrogen. I own an 89 Dodge colt. Basically, I have the water tank in the trunk, with the pump the bottom end of the tank. I have an electric pump and a pipeline going to my engine compartment. Anyways. With a few little adjustments from the original plan, and about 50 turnovers of the engine, it was working. Beautifully. So for more than 9 months, I have only had to change the oil, and give it a wash.

This technology is the best well-kept secret above anything else. This same technology has been used to create a torch, that is cold to the touch, using water as the basic fuel.

Video link Here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=CMovXzVOzc4

--------

For anyone who does not believe that this technology is possible... try it for yourself. All you need is a working internal combustion engine, propped up or in a car. Spend a little money, getting the parts, coating the engine, etc. before you go and make some false claims without trying it yourself. There are hundreds of videos on youtube of people documenting how hydrogen can be pulled from water and used as a gas to fuel.... anything.

I do hope that this technology will catch on sometime before I die. But if everybody started driving water-powered cars, there would be the highest unemployment spike in history. It's a slow process. I suggest you try it yourself, from the plans I linked to above. Realize that it works, talk about it with friends and family, try it out, and spread your knowledge across the world wide web.

Oh, and my exhaust manifold is a new straight-pipe.

Where do you drive this vehicle with only a straight pipe for exhaust on an internal combustion engine?

I am just curious where the noise ordinances would allow you to make that much noise.

I was willing to give you some rope with which to hang yourself until I read that. OK bye have a good one.

Oregon. It's more of a low rumble than a waaaaaaaaaaahh. The police here in Oregon have a lot more things to worry about than sound ordinances, besides this state is full of trucks with supercharged V8's, blasting country music, that are louder than my exhaust.

But the shape of my exhaust pipe is really not important or relevant to the main topic of this forum.

So, you are claiming you have never put any gas in this vehicle since you changed it over? How far have you actually driven it? Do you need to charge the battery?

Producing Brown's gas is about 90% efficient in this manner. That means at least 110% of the energy from your engine has to go to produce electricity to create more Brown's gas.

Yes, no gasoline or ethanol or anything since. I went on a trip of 400 miles there on the freeway, around town and back. So about 1000 miles in 3 days. The water mileage is pretty good, at about 1 gallon of water being used for every 60 miles driven, going about 80 mph. My tank is a 20 gallon, plastic tank, which holds enough. When I need more fuel, for driving on the freeway, I just fill up with the water from gas stations right next to air pumps. (the looks I get) The battery does not need to be changed. I have a OEM alternator, along with a deep gel cycle battery. The hydrogen chamber uses only 3.5 amps, to power it completely. The battery outputs enough amps to power the chamber, music, air, lights, etc.
Once I get some vacation time, I am going to go as far as I can, and then come back.

I experimented a couple times with putting three chambers up in a daisy-chain form, and resulted in a LOT more power. I tried taking it to the track to drag-race, because I know I would win with the boosted power. But they did not believe my setup and thought I was using alcohol with some other material, so they would not let me. Almost every single person I talk to this about, and show them my car, just do not believe me. Some people are so stubborn, and just refuse the facts and what they see to be real.

As far as the brown's gas goes... It is a lot more than 90% efficient. I am not a scientist and cannot explain to you how it gets more than 90%, but I know that it does. But I do not debate this with people, because this is where most everyone brings out their science books and tell me that I am wrong and that you cannot get more energy out of something than you put it. So, take it or leave it.

Most people do not believe until they try it themselves. So I would suggest doing that, or at least set up as many hydrogen boosters as you can in a daisy chain and have the produced gas feed into your air intake and manifold and see the drastic performance and gas mileage improvements.

One small problem with your car.
Supposedly Brown's gas IMPLODES when it combines back into water.

I am curious how you reconfigured your timing and valve settings.