Insane but real future tech

It is a Hoax, obviously, even worse than the cold fussion one. :D

CruddyLeper said:
OK. Here's how'

1) First the water is electrolyzed into seperate H2 and 02 molecules. This seperation continues right up to the nozzle tip.

Nothing new, except that H2 and O2 are gases at room temperature and pressure, not liquids, and they are not very soluble in water, specially H2.

Burning H2 (gas) and O2 (gas) is how the space shuttle works, it burns H2 and it uses O2 as the comburent.

As Xenocrates says, the hydrolisis proccess is energy consuming, and if you combine the two reactions (hydrolisis and combustion) you have water at the beginning and water at the end. Therorically the best you can do is to break even in energy terms. In practice, the energy you obtain burning H2 and O2 is less than the energy necessary in the electrolisis proccess.

2) Next both sets of molecules are ionized into H+ H+ and O- ions.

These get fed out to the nozzle and reignited past the tip. Hydro thermic lance.

That is not the way. If you ionize H2 into H+ you'll loose electrons and you'll release a lot of energy in the process, so you'll lose the energy needed to ignite the tip before it gets combined with O-.

Same happens with the ionization of O2, BTW, the best you can do is O2^2- as in oxigenated water, O^2- or O3 (ozone) which is very toxic and reactive in lower atmosphere. There is no O- ions.

It's a great invention, but all it's really doing is storing electricity as ionised gas - great idea. But it doesn't solve the energy problems because you still have to make the electricity which makes the process work.

Yeah, supposing the other things were correct, all you are really doing is storing energy (not electricity). That is the truth behind the hydrogen car technology. The problem, though is to store the hydrogen (H2, not H+) and make it available. And in this case if it is ionized hydrogen is not H2 and ionized H+ gas per se (alone) is not stable at room temperature. Not even hydrogen radicals are stable at room temperature.

The only way to have H+ in water is having a counterion stabilizing it. When you dissolve HCl gas in water you end up having H+ and Cl- dissolved in water. But those H+ are not going to react with O2 or with any other form of oxygen and feed a flame, Why? because combustion is an oxidation proccess, H+ ions are already oxidized and there is no way H+ can loose more electrons because it doesn't have any left. H+ is just a proton.

As a side note, pure water have some H+ dissolved in it, more or less at a concentration of 10^-7 molar. That is what pH of water = 7 means. They are in equilibrium with H20 molecules. H20 <---> H+ + OH-

Oh, ionized Hyrdrogen creates all sorts of problems with engine blocks and pistons. Tends to rot them very quickly. Stainless steel is only solution I've heard to that problem.

Yeah, strong acids tend to react with metals. It is not strictly a rotting proccess. Rotting is produced by oxygen, who gets reduced (gains electrons) by oxidizing the metal (who looses electrons). The acid attack happens when H+ gets reduced to H2 and oxidizes the metal.
 
CruddyLeper said:
2) Next both sets of molecules are ionized into H+ H+ and O- ions.

When you say O-, do you mean O^2- , O2^- or O2^2-?

I've never encountered O-, so I'm skeptical about this ion.
 
Urederra said:
Yeah, strong acids tend to react with metals. It is not strictly a rotting proccess. Rotting is produced by oxygen, who gets reduced (gains electrons) by oxidizing the metal (who looses electrons). The acid attack happens when H+ gets reduced to H2 and oxidizes the metal.

Correct term = hydrogenisation. Not exactly in common use. Where rotting gives the same idea. It's a basic problem of all the hydrogen powered engines.

OK, so I know jack about ions. At least I worked out how it works! It does work, but it's very energy inefficient. Must cost a bundle in electricity to power the cutter and I don't see plugging your car into the mains electricity supply catching on very quickly.
 
Except that it doesn't work, at least not in the way he claims to work. H2 does not dissolve in water at room temperature and pressure, neither O2 in significant amounts. H+ does dissolve but it is already oxidized, and does not have any electrons to further reduce oxygen.
 
This is a hoax. Since there is no real net chemical reactions occuring, no energy can be released. Laws of Thermodynamics forbids this. Plus combustion reactions can't happen with water, and still yield energy.
 
well its obviously not a hoze if:
1. He has a patent on it
2. he has passed every safety inspection thus far, that means people who know what they're talking about have looked at it
3. He's making a Hummer for the US Army that uses this stuff, so you know it works
all of which are stated in the video

I also reccomend reading the Wikipedia article on it, called "Brown's gas"

here it is

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown's_gas
 
1. Oh yeah? Penta has a patent on it's useles junk, and so does a bunch of phony patents, a teleport patent, a warp drive, and an anti gravity machine being some of them.

2. Not necessarily. He could just be clever, and found a way to bypass it.

3. The US army isn't exactly the smartest of people... They have been known to purchase ordinary hammers for $50, and other outrageous prices, not to mention giving soldiers going to Vietnam guns that worked perfectly under perfect conditions, but jams in the presence of mud. (which 'Nam had a lot of)

Besides, the Wiki Article was skeptical about it, stating that: "Claims regarding the properties of Brown's Gas are often grandiose."
 
I don't think Brown's gas has ever been analysed, due to the patent holder not releasing the special electrolysis method he used to obtain it. Patents are ten for a penny as Bluemofia said.

The real question is, if can run his car on just water, why does he still use a "gasoline/water" hybrid? (My moneys on him using petrol for fuel and water to wash the windcreen...)
 
1. He has a patent on it

Proves nothing. Patents are not peer reviewed, and all kinds of non functional junk has been patented over the years.

2. he has passed every safety inspection thus far, that means people who know what they're talking about have looked at it

Doesn't tell us much either. In any case the device may not be dangerous, but it may do absolutely nothing.

3. He's making a Hummer for the US Army that uses this stuff, so you know it works

And it wouldn't be the first time the US army has paid for something that doesn't work.

The wiki article on Brown's gas is highly sceptical of whether it exists at all. Many of the claims made of this substance are inherently impossible, no matter what the fuel source, and most of the chemistry discussed about it makes absolutely no sense.
 
It would be cool if it actually worked. However, my understanding of physics and chemistry make me very skeptical of what he has (or has claimed to have) achieved.
 
Another thing if he can run his car solely on water, why make it a gas water hybrid, if 4 oz of water gets 100 miles?
 
AL_DA_GREAT said:
a chemical can't be called hho it is a hoax

Why not? If I say NaKXeH gas exists, does that mean it does?

EDIT: Sorry, I misread it as "a chemical can't be called hho if it is a hoax" :blush:
 
He just simply didn't use punctuation.

He means to say:

a chemical can't be called hho. it is a hoax.
 
Truronian said:
My moneys on him using petrol for fuel and water to wash the windscreen...

Good line Mr Pasty! :lol:

I think you're all being too cynical; the gas that powers the car isn't HHO but:

HOHOHOHOHO

and

HEHEHEHEHEHE

:lol: :crazyeye: :lol:
 
Cheezy the Wiz said:
yea i hadnt thought about the whole gas-water hybrid thing. I wonder why that is?

He needs petrol to ensure the car moves...
 
Back
Top Bottom