Video with water making fire?

CyberPitz

CyberPitz

Party Escort Bot
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
24,792
Reaction score
7
I KNOW I saw the video here,*i may not have* but after 5 minutes of searching, I can't find it. My guess is, I'm either blind or it's in a thread titled something COMPLETELY different.

Any help?
 
Water making fire?

You mean the mixture of magnesium or calcium and h20?
 
I don't really know. He said he made it so his welder is filled with water, electrolysis kicks in, making the flame. He was able to touch the flame with no pain, but it also turned an iron ball into a red hot iron ball within seconds. My dad is curious about it, and I can't find the video anywhere.
 
Ahhh, there it is, thanks.

My dad's researching it, to see how useless this really is. I think it's cool, but I'm not the one with the physics major...
 
It wouldn't work in a car because they need more electricity to electrolyzing water than is generated by the burning HHO gas.
 
Vegeta897 said:
Wtf is HHO? It's called H2O.
Click to expand...

Unbonded hydrogen and oxygen atoms. By the looks of it, they've been stripped completely of their electrons.

So essentially protons and oxygen making a positively-charged plasma gas, which burns very hot and turns back into H20.

Like I said though, turning water into this state is bound by conservation of energy to cost as much or more energy than is released by burning the gas.
 
WTF!? Go back to chemistry class you noobs!

H2O means two hydrogens and one oxygen.

2HO doesn't make any sense at all. The number goes after the element. It's properly written as a subscript.

Though I understand now that HHO is different than HOH which is water. It has to do with the arrangement.
 
Vegetas a newb. 2HO is 2 elements of nothing, one of hydrogen and one of oxygen. Its perfectly legit!
 
theotherguy said:
Like I said though, turning water into this state is bound by conservation of energy to cost as much or more energy than is released by burning the gas.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming that's why his motor still runs on unleaded. Maybe it can work if you stuff a small deisel generator in your car somewhere. :rolleyes:
 
theotherguy said:
It wouldn't work in a car because they need more electricity to electrolyzing water than is generated by the burning HHO gas.
Click to expand...

Did you not see the part where he has a car that runs on a gasoline/water mixture?
 
I don't think it accepts a true mixture, I think he can run one or the other between start ups. He might have to run the gas engine long enough to charge up some spare batteries, then switch to hydro and run on that until the batteries drain.
His technology is still pretty much secret, though.
 
I'm torn between thinking this guy is a joke or the big bad oil companies are covering it up.

WHO DO I BELIEVE?!
 
The torch obviously works. Two things are possible: it uses way too much electric energy to be cost effective, or torch and torch fuel companies are paying/threatening him to keep it off the market.
I'm sure it requires distilled water. If the oil companies can get their mitts onto a few simple purification plants they can enter the market and not have a reason to cover this up. Lord knows they can afford one or two plants. :rolleyes:
 
Krynn72 said:
Vegetas a newb. 2HO is 2 elements of nothing, one of hydrogen and one of oxygen. Its perfectly legit!
Click to expand...

That's what I'm saying. Everybody knows that 2 of nothing makes 2 of the element ahead of it.

Geez vegie, I thought you were smarter than that.
 
Vegeta897 said:
WTF!? Go back to chemistry class you noobs!

H2O means two hydrogens and one oxygen.

2HO doesn't make any sense at all. The number goes after the element. It's properly written as a subscript.

Though I understand now that HHO is different than HOH which is water. It has to do with the arrangement.
Click to expand...

wouldn't 2H0 be H202/ hydrogen peroxide?
 
DreamThrall said:
Did you not see the part where he has a car that runs on a gasoline/water mixture?
Click to expand...

He's using power from the gasoline engine to split the water to burn into the engine again. It's a closed system that's losing energy to heat and friction. The car would be much more efficient if he just used the gasoline to run the engine and didn't bother splitting the water.

The only way hydrogen vehicles can be viable is if we manufactured vast quantities of hydrogen using biochemical farms of bacteria, and then piped it all around the nation. Otherwise, any method we use to extract hydrogen from water or hydrocarbon would use more energy than it produces.
 
Why do people assume that a car running on water is going to be a solution to our problems?
 
sinkoman said:
wouldn't 2H0 be H202/ hydrogen peroxide?
Click to expand...

No. H202 implies a bond between all of the molecules.

2HO is just 2(HO)

or in chemical terms h202 would be like H-O=O-H and 2HO would be like H-O: H-O: .It should be written as 2(H)+ O. (or H H : O : )

When you have a coefficient, it just represents an amount of an element or molecule. Subscripts represent bonded elements in a molecule.

If you have 50 water moelecules, it would be written 50H2O. If you had 100 hydrogen molecules it would be written 100H. If you have 2 unbonded hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom it is 2H + O.
 
Note to theotherguy; we always use more energy than we produce, it's just a matter of economically putting that energy in the right place to do the things we want. It doesn't matter if we're using more energy than we produce, it matters if we can keep doing that for a while still maintaining current human expectations.

If we can find some way to reduce the consumption of oil (which is, allegedly, running out, and isn't renewable) then that'll put us on the right track to last a little longer.

Or we could just ignore the energy problem altogether by inventing a way to drill on the ocean surface, which houses the largest quantities of oil on Earth. The problem is the oil is mixed in with the rocks, so separating them would be hard. At that depth, anyway.
 
Pesmerga said:
Note to theotherguy; we always use more energy than we produce, it's just a matter of economically putting that energy in the right place to do the things we want. It doesn't matter if we're using more energy than we produce, it matters if we can keep doing that for a while still maintaining current human expectations.

If we can find some way to reduce the consumption of oil (which is, allegedly, running out, and isn't renewable) then that'll put us on the right track to last a little longer.

Or we could just ignore the energy problem altogether by inventing a way to drill on the ocean surface, which houses the largest quantities of oil on Earth. The problem is the oil is mixed in with the rocks, so separating them would be hard. At that depth, anyway.
Click to expand...

Problem: To produce energy, we either need to burn oil or use alternative energy sources like nuclear, wind, or solar. So using more energy to produce hydrogen and make hydrogen vehicles would still produce the same amount of pollution as simply using oil.

Solution: Increase funding to solar, wind, and nuclear. use these sources to produce hydrogen where needed.
 
But if you can use a smaller quantity of oil in combination with a large quantity of a largely available resource like water to create the same amount of energy, you can do a lot about the current energy problem.

You don't just have to completely throw oil out the window.
 
Pesmerga said:
But if you can use a smaller quantity of oil in combination with a large quantity of a largely available resource like water to create the same amount of energy, you can do a lot about the current energy problem.

You don't just have to completely throw oil out the window.
Click to expand...

It takes X amount of oil to produce movement in a gasoline engine.

It takes X amount of oil + C, the energy lost to friction and heat to convert water into 2H + O gas and use it to power an engine. The potential energy created by breaking apart H2O comes from the gasoline itself.

Thus, you are using C gallons of gasoline more to power your car this way than if you used gasoline alone. Unless you find another energy source to produce 2H + O gas, you are going to use more gasoline in the long run.
 
2HO would be the same as 2OH-, just incorrectly ordered according to IUPAC's rules.
 
WHY DOES EVERYBODY KEEP WRITING A ZERO FOR OXYGEN. FFS.

*shoots self*
 
Vegeta897 said:
WTF!? Go back to chemistry class you noobs!

H2O means two hydrogens and one oxygen.

2HO doesn't make any sense at all. The number goes after the element. It's properly written as a subscript.

Though I understand now that HHO is different than HOH which is water. It has to do with the arrangement.
Click to expand...

2HO

If the number is before it means two of the molecule not the atom.

Meaning 2 unbonded Hydrogen and oxygen bonds?

Don't Worry People, Im 14
 
Emporius said:
Why do people assume that a car running on water is going to be a solution to our problems?
Click to expand...
Well, for one, you can get the electricity required to gain the hydrogen from renewable energy sources. Pretty damn handy to essentially get it for free (building costs and maintenance costs withstanding)
 
Has google ceased to exist or soemthing?
The water fuel cell is a device invented by American Stanley Meyer, which he claimed could convert water into its component elements, hydrogen and oxygen, using less energy than can be obtained by the subsequent combustion of those elements. If the device operates as claimed, the water produced by the combustion of the hydrogen and oxygen could be recovered and reused, allowing the device to run as a perpetual motion machine and thereby violating the first law of thermodynamics. Meyer's claims about the Water Fuel Cell and the car that it powered were found to be fraudulent by an Ohio court in 1996.[1]

Similar devices have been promoted by others (see Water-fuelled car): there is no evidence that any of these devices operate as claimed.
Click to expand...

The man was a kook and a fraud...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
1K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
bbson john
Hi everyone. I am new to this forum!
Replies
11
Views
6K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Barking Dog Studios' work for Valve
Replies
0
Views
11K
Barnz
B
B
Community Interviews: Final Exchange development team
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
Back
Top