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 this Forum, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above
Thanks to ALL for your help!!


HHO and mag-motor futility; cold fusion experiments needed.

Started by RealScienceNowPlease, October 28, 2008, 01:19:55 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RealScienceNowPlease

I've spent many months researching the field of sustainable energy production and have drawn the following conclusions. I post this to encourage debate and hopefully encourage enthusiasts to pursue an avenue which very strongly suggests promise: low temperature nuclear reactions, or "cold fusion" as it is somewhat dirtily named.

Please view http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=PTBSp1QvCuw for a very interesting documentary about the subject's troubled history. Also have a look at Blacklight Power's website.

Building a device which outputs more energy than is inputted is known to be impossible without some kind of nuclear process taking place. For hundreds of years people have attempted to build perpetually running devices from the magnetic and mechanical - all have failed, and they have done so for reasons that are obvious to any physicist. Thoroughly debunked, should you care to research, is the work of Meyer, Stoern, Perendev, Bedini, etc. If it's not obvious to you the reason why the devices created by these individuals have not made it, the information - reliable, repeatable, and scientifically sound - is out there.

Like Ravi on this site, the hero of the water-as-fuel movement Stan Meyer would not provide input power figures for his electrolysis device. After closely replicating Meyer's work, Ravi vanished is a cloud of rumour about "men in black" paying him a visit and preventing him from undertaking further discourse on the internet. I believe this is just outright lying. I have never personally experienced the pain of discovering that someone I held in high regard turned out to be a fraud - and after investing so much  personal time, energy and money it must particularly sting.

This video shows the ultimate outcome of "HHO" experimentation, both steady state and pulsed DC. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=cRw_h5gjQ9s . There are many sites on the internet debunking the fuel additive theory also. I recommend: http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam.shtml . There you'll learn about the person who started the scam, and there's a very telling YouTube video which is examined in proper scientific detail.

I realise the allure of conspiracy theories is compelling and some will take this as a blanket attack on those "trying to save the environment" from Evil Oil and Government, Inc. Hopefully my inclusion of the link to the "War Against Cold Fusion" YouTube documentary will allay the fears that I have some vested interest in protecting the status quo.

What motives me is that in everything I have studied and researched, I know many endeavours of the people here are just doomed to their own kind of perpetual failure cycle. The future of free, non-polluting energy, beyond any doubt in my mind, is in low temperature nuclear reactions. I believe breakthroughs will come within the next few years, and if just 10 per cent of the energy that is expended on "HHO" and perpetual motion with magnets or other systems was invested into LTNR, we would surely find the answer to our problems, and there is nothing Big Oil or and any governments could do about it.

Peace.

Mike G.

Creativity

well ok,i agree to some extent.But what keeps me thinking is, how a world wide scientific community with big labs r not able to get fusion to work?it is even alligned with science so no rare physics is applied here...
personally i beleive in renewable resources and distributed electricity production as a solution.I would even consider alga at home :) Getting cold fusion to work will just warm up the earth further(eventually any energy goes into heat-just see what problems France has with its nuclear reactors in the summer when temp of the rives is high...),but catching wind or tidal or even solar is just "in balance" with Earth.With amount of money invested in CF u could start building geothermal plants(no new technology and deep drillings r already mastered)

OK,but about CF..let make some hydrogen ice and bombard it with high energy proton beam.With some probability proton wil hit almost standing(ice) hydrogen...Or let us wait for meta atoms to be created with high concentration of hydrogen atoms in it,like hydrogen cristals :) and then bombard them with protons.or freeze water in strong magnetic field to align water molecules and then bombard water from the direction that will have best chance to hit hydrogen.na,that's my 2 cents  ;D

About HHO busters i alos wrote on this OU forum how it can and can't work,but that's not the point really..what is good is that people start to think about alternatives and try creative ways to achieve it :0 so keep them stimulated and maybe something will pop up later on.Of course scammers are the big plague,but they r everywhere anyhow.Just spread reliable info around and scammers will have no space anymore :)
Blues it through your outstanding life,leaving more than just footsteps behind (1999 B-stok by me).

By being intensively responsive to what others say,i do run a risk: I open myself up to the opinions of others.i will,at times, have a great understanding for their opinion.Sometimes,i will even change my own opinion because i realize that the other person is right.This "risk" i do not run if i am unresponsive to what others say.