Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



GDS 3 KW generator runs on water

Started by ramset, October 25, 2014, 09:24:26 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 22 Guests are viewing this topic.

TinselKoala

Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on December 04, 2014, 06:18:15 PM
I will say it again...nobody knows whether the generator has been modified.

For example, look at the thread about the lensless generator...who's to say he hasn't done something similar with his  generator ?

Regards...
I say it, and the evidence is the sloppy visible wiring in the displayed unit. Anyone who could rewire a generator would not make such a mess of the simple wiring in the rest of the device. Would you?
Not only that, but also nothing has been demonstrated that contradicts the assertion that the batteries are simply powering the rest of the stuff in the perfectly ordinary manner that anyone can achieve with COTS parts.

Now, where is there any _evidence_ that he has modified anything in that unit to make it "water powered"?

TinselKoala

Quote from: synchro1 on December 04, 2014, 06:37:54 PM

It's more correct to compare salt water to crude oil then it is to compare it to potash based on the arguments you're citing.

Where have I mentioned crude oil, or potash? Water, salty or not, is not a fuel. It can be converted to fuel by the use of energy, and the resulting energy you get from the water-converted-to-gaseous-fuel is _always_ less than the energy needed to convert it in the first place. If you are the US Navy, with nuclear reactors giving you more energy than you can use, but you _can_ use gaseous fuels in your portable vehicles, then accepting the hit in energy may be worthwhile. Most of the energy produced by the Navy's reactors is wasted as unused heat, anyhow. Stand in your backyard with a garden hose on full blast spraying water into the yard. If I come by with a bucket and catch some of the spray for my own use, does that show up on your water bill?

Cap-Z-ro

My repeatedly ignored point is that no one can make definitive or conclusive statements without knowing what is inside the generator.

Speculation is all that can be done until that is determined or the presenter goes into full Hope girl mode.

Regards...


synchro1

Quote from: TinselKoala on December 03, 2014, 12:11:38 AM
Water is not a fuel, because it is the _ash_ of burning fuel, that is, burning hydrogen. Water is a _low energy state_ of the combined H and O atoms; it takes energy to split the water molecule to yield hydrogen and oxygen gases. If you had a perfect, no-loss-whatsoever system (the magic factor) you could get nearly as much energy back by burning the gases as you put in to split the water in the first place. But there are no perfect, zero loss electrolysis systems or hydrogen or ho-ho-ho burning engines.
Take some white ashes from your fireplace. Get some more energy out of that, why don't you? Nobody would even try, they know it's a waste of time.

Injection of water into the combustion chambers of internal combustion engines, either by direct manifold or cylinder injection or by mixing it with fuel in an emulsion, can have benefits such as increased fuel economy, smoother burning in high-compression supercharged engines, even increased power in such engines that operate at manifold pressures greater than ambient. None of these effects are due to "burning water" though, in fact just the opposite. The water retards explosive combustion (knocking) and promotes even fuel burn. If there is too much water, though, you may have more power than without the water, but your TBO (time between overhauls) will go way down. If you are, say, using your big turbosupercharged radial engine operating at 40 inches of MAP to deliver bombs or food to troops, who cares about TBO, nobody does, that's what mechanics are for. If you are trying to make a consumer-grade economy vehicle, your manipulations had better not cut the lifetime of the engine in half, or your extra power just isn't worth it.

Here's where you say it Einstien!

TinselKoala

Quote from: synchro1 on December 04, 2014, 07:01:42 PM

Here's where you say it Einstien!

White ashes from your fireplace are not potash. They have to be processed first and the yield of actual "pot ash" from them is low. Nowadays the term "potash" refers to mined minerals that are not the same composition as what you get from plant ashes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potash

Now go ahead and burn some potash, from any source, and tell me what happens.