It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Japanese invent car that runs on water

page: 5
35
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by apolluwn
reply to post by Quazga
 


Who is claiming that this guy was killed? You should heed your own advice and read before you post.

As for your mass production claim; I will ask you again. Where are you getting this information? The development of vehicles for military applications is hardly mass-production and doesn't mean anything would be seen in the public sector.

[edit on 6/14/2008 by apolluwn]



Did you even read the post? Look at the link posted in the quote above "WATER CAR INVENTOR MURDERED".

I know someone else died, but thats not what I'm saying is wrong. The assertion that Hal9000 isn't buying the story of a car that runs on water because of a conspiracy and then posts that link to the alleged murder of a water-car inventor.

All I'm saying, with my post is that many different people are inventing this independently of each other.




posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:11 PM
link   
theres alot of very interesting reading on this site about cars www.panacea-bocaf.org...

[edit on 14-6-2008 by fatdad]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000
reply to post by Quazga
 

That is not Stanley Myer. You should try taking your own advice.

Here is a link to a website with links to the videos I was talking about.

The Car That Ran On Water




Dude, you are confused. You want to argue about Stanley Myer. I never said you were talking about this other guy. What I said was that there are plenty of people making water cars, and no one has killed this guy.

Man... you just want to argue instead of debating.

If not, then what say you about this other water car I just posted above? Eh? He's ready to start building cars in 6 months.







[edit on 14-6-2008 by Quazga]

[edit on 14-6-2008 by Quazga]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Quazga
 


Obviously, you have a problem backing up the claims that you make. This is the second time you have avoided my question...

Your original post was unclear if it did indeed have to do with what you -now- say it did. I can't see it as saying that, but I don't have my decoder ring...

[edit on 6/14/2008 by apolluwn]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by apolluwn
reply to post by Quazga
 


Obviously, you have a problem backing up the claims that you make. This is the second time you have avoided my question...

Your original post was unclear if it did indeed have to do with what you -now- say it did. I can't see it as saying that, but I don't have my decoder ring...

[edit on 6/14/2008 by apolluwn]



I explained what I said. I said that hal9000 was wrong, because of his belief that TPTB have killed other inventors of this before.

I posted a Youtube video about a guy who has done it in America as well, and stated "He hasn't been murdered"


So I don't understand what you think I am "dodging" as I am here engaging you.


Also, what do you think about the guy in the Youtube Video?



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Quazga
 


[This was in error my apologies Quazga it was originally asked to someone else a comment about production made me think it was you. I am sorry I should have looked.]

As for your explanation.. That is fine; I know you have explained what you meant, but if you read it as it was posted it doesn't look like you are saying that at all. It is very confusing.

I do not believe that Hal9000 was saying that because "TPTB" killed Meyer's that this guy was going to be killed. He was saying that he was skeptical of Meyer's and is therefore skeptical of this guy.

Edit:
I think the video is very interesting. Of course, I am skeptical until I see the actual numbers, but the military being interested gives it more credibility. I don't know the intended function of the hydrogen in his designs for them so until more information surfaces on that I can't really comment...

Edit 2:

Removed questions that were originally asked to another user because of similar comment. Sorry about that.

[edit on 6/14/2008 by apolluwn]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Just a thought. Or a theory, if you like.

Let's assume -- without thinking of the physics laws as we know them today -- that water really could be used very effectively as a fuel. Broken into Brown's gas, HHO, or whatever, using some kind of a resonance electrolysis cell that seemingly defies the physics laws. Some people have built these devices, and they seem to work somehow.

The engine or the fuel cell would use this gas, and turn it into mechanical energy or directly into electricity for the motors. What else would we get as the byproduct? We would get water, in the exhaust of the engine / fuel cell. Consume one gallon of water as fuel, get one gallon water as the exhaust, in the form of water vapor.

Then the first thought would of course be to condense the exhaust vapors back into liquid water, and feed this water back to the fuel tank. Effectively we would get a perpetuum mobile, pumping constantly new energy out from the condensed water again and again. The fuel tank of the car could be topped off right at the factory, and there would be no need to fill more fuel during the lifetime of the car.

I'm sure it wouldn't work this way. There's no free lunch.

Most likely the once used and condensed exhaust water could not be broken into gas any more "with extraordinarily little power" using a resonance electrolyser, but it would obey only the normal rules of electrolysis instead. The extra amount of "easy" energy that was stored in the water is now gone, extracted in the first electrolysis cycle and finally it was used to power the car.

You may ask, what extra energy might there be stored in the water?

My theory is that the used exhaust water would have to be discharged back to the nature where it would be "charged" again over time, before it could be utilized again later -- but only after it has rained back after many days, weeks or months of recirculation in the atmosphere. What would "charge" the water then? I'm sure we've all seen the answer.

It's the Sun.

I wouldn't be surprised if we found out in the near future that there actually is some kind of a metastable higher energy state in the water molecule, caused by the Sun's rays. It's exactly this excess Solar energy that some have been able to extract from water, using pulsed electricity in a resonanse electrolysis cell, or using this special fuel cell which I call the Japanese Magic Box.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rumrunner
This is one of the stupidest/scariest idea's I have ever heard of!

The world can do without oil but it CANNOT do without water!



You do realize the differences between water and oil?

Water is a renewable resource. There is more water then land on this green earth.

Oil takes millions of years to form and break down. When it runs out it runs out.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quazga
I explained what I said. I said that hal9000 was wrong, because of his belief that TPTB have killed other inventors of this before.

Relax and take a chill pill. I only posted the link for others that may want to read what has been talked about in the past. I by no means believe he was murdered. That is the claim that everyone refers to about Stanley Myer. I simply did a quick search and posted the first thread that came up.

I don't think it is true that he was murdered, nor do I think his car or any other car will run solely on water. If so, why not build a generator that would be more useful?


sty

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


overunity is the holly grail of all engineers. I am not sure on what the Japanese team did as I do not have enough information. Is the watercar possible? hm.. i would say not as far as we know . But there is still a possibility we did not quite understand all on the subatomic level. I am sure that one day we will explain overunity , and we will understand it is nothing magical with it . At the moment the quest for overunity is shadowed by a lot of fraud , but this does not mean that overunity will or could never happen. We still do not fully understand the electron , so let us hope for surprises
.And of course they will come from countries that are not able to access the petrol reserves of the planed. All the best!
STY


[edit on 14-6-2008 by sty]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by mybigunit
I have bad news for everyone here. This will never hit the showrooms and I mean never. They have had this technology for awhile now and it will never hit the showrooms because there is no money to be made for the big oil companies. Sorry it sucks but its the truth.


So you think companies like General Motors, Ford, Chrysler are just going to be bankrupt rather and keep their secrets? Do you think ever car company in the world, is just sitting on it?

What about all the scientists? Are they part of it too? Someone could become an instant multi billionaire, and would have overturned modern physics by showing free energy from water. Are they all part of the conspiracy too?



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Quazga
 


Quazka do you realize that video is over 2 years old and still nothing has happened. Nothing will happen either. Its to easy of a fix and it will really hurt big oil do you think our government is going to allow that? No not at all you we all will be taking it in the rear till we get rid of the fascist elements in the government. Sorry but its the truth.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by sty
 

Well you are preaching to the choir, my friend. I also believe free energy could be possible, but this ain't it. Years ago I played around a lot with making my own electric motors. Here is a picture of the last one I made.



edit to add: BTW this motor is NOT a free energy device. I only used it for experimenting.

I am an electronics engineer and have researched the subject. I can look at just about any claim and have seen a problems with almost all of them. Some are intriguing, but the only way to know if it is really over unity is to inspect it first hand or build it yourself. If it can't be duplicated, then it is not useful to anyone.


[edit on 6/14/2008 by Hal9000]

[edit on 6/14/2008 by Hal9000]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 


Well the technology has been known since the 70s and still nothing has been done why do you suppose this is? This is not new technology my friend its just normal people are starting to wake up and realize that the government and big oil has bee screwing us for the past umpteen years. Nothing will happen. We will be stuck on oil for at least another 10 years sorry.


sty

posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


I appreciate your work , it looks interesting! The device in the picture reminds me of Peter Lindeman`s work .I tried something easier - just playing up with some magnets but of course it did not work out. However, my hope is you will not give up your experiments as I believe the next great discovery I come out from a garage again


Greetings,
STY



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by sty
 

I was testing an interesting motor drive circuit that I saw based on the work of John Bedini. It was only the drive circuit and not the generator he is most well known for. Amazingly it did increase the efficiency and the motor ran faster with it in place. When I tried to add my own design of a generator though, it bogged the motor down and I wasn't able to generate enough power to equal the input. It was fun as hell and I learned a lot from it. I should fire it back up and see if it still runs.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by rjmelter
reply to post by Macrotus
 


WoW... reading your post was a waste of my life.

Water is power, it is what powers your human body in a very real and powerfull way. If you cannot except that then you will never see the truth in all things. Replying might have been a waste of my time too.


Ehhhhh..... No.....

Try living off of water for more than a week and see how long you live, genius.


As for this nonsense, it takes secondary school science to debunk that this water car bull is just ridiculous. People have been duped for many times and they never learn and it baffles and boggles the mind.

There are many examples from past fake money stealing endevours, off the top of my head The Jasker Machine, Stearn Orbo, The Stanley guy, and some other hillbilly I can't remember his name that claims his car runs off water.

WATER IS NOT FUEL. WATER IS NOT FUEL. WATER IS NOT FUEL.

Of course those who didn't pay attention in science class would insist that you can get more out something that you put in. And in about a month I will assure you this nonsense will be debunked, disapproved and disappeared from the earth because of it's fakeness.

See you in a month.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   
I haven't read this entire thread so I'm not sure if this point has been made. If this technology is possible, the biggest impact on our lives won't be land based transportation. Maritime industry would be far greater impacted.

Imagine the fuel cost savings in shipping and fishing. Vessels would literally be afloat in fuel.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Macrotus
 


I wont ... See... you in a month but I advise you to sit through more science class and do the research. Nobody is saying you will get a suns worth of warmth out of a triple A battery from ENERGIZER, they are however saying using the right amounts of currents oxygen will start shedding hydrogen from its outer shells and a better rate then other currents previously USED... GIVING IT MORE than it WAS.

MORE RESEARCH MORE RESEARCH MORE RESEARCH

Water is fuel, water is life... water is what gave your ignorant existance breath and existance. If I were you I would just hold your tongue for a bit... Will we see this in a month? no! So why you say a month? However it is possible they have air and water cars. Air works great too... it comes in cold and pressureized then it is super heated by means THAT YOU ARE UNCAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING apparently at a lower voltage than previously used...

WoW... lol your really aggrivating. Its like explaining propulsion to a 5 year old who is completely awwed but uncapable of grasping HOW it works. PLEASE DO MORE RESEARCH. Im not a Dr. or Engineer Im just interested and willing to spend time to help the world... instead of trash it. A primitve old way of thinking.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by rjmelter
 


I can't believe anyone could fall for such a blatant fraud! Burning hydrogen and oxygen does give you water and energy. But to break the water back into hydrogen and oxygen requires exactly as much energy as you got by burning those gases in the first place. You end up right back where you started, and there is no energy left over to run a car or anything else.

This is PHONY! PHONY! PHONY!!!


This is readily apparent as a scam to anyone who's had at least an 8th grade education and paid attention in science class.

These "run your car on water" people are coming out of the woodwork because gas prices are high so people are more likely to fall prey to a scam like this one.

Everyone in here need to crack open a thermodynamics book, if they are up to it.


[edit on 14-6-2008 by Macrotus]




top topics



 
35
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join