Possibly a WoW Signal Ushering an End To Fossil Fuels

reply to post by Vasa Croe

He is getting traffic to his sites, that is the goal.
Possibly drumming up 'investments'.

crazyewok

g146541
why not post all of your research on every website you can for the good of mankind?

Why should he?

If he HAS done what he has claimed then he desrves to reap the rewards of his hard work and success. I

why should he spill it and let most likley some already rich enegrgy baron take his work and make money off it?

He should patent it first THEN tell us how its done.

Yes, as much as would like to say give it to the world like tesla tried to do he does have the right to make money. Hydrogen is the free energy solution for the world. It is the most common element and no pollution. Germany has already committed to hydrogen change over. Iceland I think it is, is already all hydrogen. Man that is way to go, just plug your house into your car lol.

Man this is awesome. Good luck and I hope when you are rich and working with a hydrogen machine company that you take care of all your ats brothers. Lol

Good luck and change the world man......

The Bot

Angelic Resurrection
reply to post by alfa1

 

I tried the link, it works fine.

Where I am at the moment, the link is blocked by the court order .( I suppose it is because the freeview stuff which also must be available on the same site .)
You have a summation perhaps ?

reply to post by Angelic Resurrection


Good luck and if you are successful I truly hope it does not go the way other such discoveries have and that you do not run into a patent for a similar process now owned by a automotive and fuel conglomerate.

reply to post by Krakatoa

So you state...

So, according to your (warped) logic, I guess I should stop helping humanity then, since I work to enrich myself, but also do what I can to help others. Thanks, now I will have more money for me and mine.... sheesh. Why does everything need to be a yes/no answer in the world. It smacks of the whole "zero tolerance" mantra, which works out sooooo well now doesn't it? < rolls eyes >


ETA: I write this as I am currently wrapping gifts to donate to the Toys-for-Tots charity. SO, perhaps I should just return these gifts to the store, according to you....screw the kids that won't get any present this year from us. Boy....unbelievable.

There is no need to start throwing insults first off.
Secondly, I question your grasp of logic and most probably your view on philosophy.
I believe my logic was very straight forward and easy to comprehend, there is a black or white answer for almost all of life's questions, you just must weigh all things or boil them down to their base components and weigh the averages.
My question happens to be one of the easier ones, and I believe this is something all here would like to know.
The benefits of such an item even if thrust upon the world and crashing all economics would far outweigh the bad of never introducing this tech.
After all, we are currently killing each other over resources anyway, why not get rid of the 1% rather than us pawns in the 99? And the 1% don't even have to perish!
Now onto your charity addon...
I look out for what is mine, this is who I am.
Family dogs, friends are everything to me.
Outside of that, who cares!
That said, I gave a guy $20. the other day, just a random down on his luck guy sitting outside of a strip mall, not begging but just minding his own business.
Did I do this for his benefit??
Certainly not! I did it for how it made me feel, the bonus was it helped somebody at the same time.
If you think that what you do for charity is totally selfless, you need to rethink what it is all about.
And I surely hope you haven't returned those presents, think of how good you are going to feel knowing you have made a childs day.
Unless you are doing it for popularity, then it is still for you.
Win win either way, and merry xmas! or kwanzaa or chakakhan err whatever.

reply to post by Vasa Croe

Not sure why these threads keep going other than for entertainment purposes

I think you nailed it on the head, ATS has had folks clicking on their links all day long due to this thread.
ATS is only entertainment and nothing but.
I so think an invention such as this or any of the other claims the OP makes would be nice to see though.

reply to post by Vasa Croe


My issue is that it lends to the common societal perception that any technology disclosed from an individual in the general public is likely to be fraudulent. It turns into an apathy-laden approach from other individuals in the public who may dismiss it immediately due to extensive past experience. It plays into the stifling paradigm that technology is turned proprietary if it is profitable, which directly impedes the progress of our species as a whole.

After some time, this starts to create an environment where industry titans/corporations become the arbiters of Truth and Knowledge. Because we know that, at the very least, they will use technologies that work as advertised.

At one point, I considered myself somewhat of an "alternative scientist." That was until I learned that my ideas and technologies would either be dismissed outright (by the people who could help the most), or accepted blindly (by people who had no idea what I was talking about).

Open source/crowdfunding/3d printing/etc gives a way out of all that though, and that is why I am such a strong advocate.

At best, what we have in this OPs threads is an attempt to get page hits and possible individual investors so that he can sell out to industry titans and then the public will not see any direct benefit for decades, if at all. And then, even when/if it is released, it will be in the most exploitative and profitable way possible (because that is part of the strategy used to maintain market domination).

/rant

reply to post by Serdgiam


Stanley Meyers did this same thing in the 70s and was poisoned to death,the oil companies would stop at nothing to prevent free or low cost energy.The price of water would skyrocket, I can see them charging $5.00 per gallon .

reply to post by Freeborn


If they are the same person, I will humbly submit my request for threads with a more jedi-esque quality.

crazyewok

g146541
why not post all of your research on every website you can for the good of mankind?

Why should he?

If he HAS done what he has claimed then he desrves to reap the rewards of his hard work and success. I

why should he spill it and let most likley some already rich enegrgy baron take his work and make money off it?

He should patent it first THEN tell us how its done.

I love how these arguments progress.

"I invented free energy"

"OMG Big oil is evil and they are suppressing everything, watch out!"

"Give it away for free to everyone for the benefit of mankind." (Makes sense because everyone is arguing how this will cure the worlds woes)

"No way! He shouldn't have to give it away for free. He should be able to profit big oil 2.0, big hydro


- - -

Does anyone actually follow the contradictory claims and thinking in free energy claims, or do the mix ups, ironies and contradictory statements all seem normal?

reply to post by crazyewok


I agree with you and those that want it released en masse.

What if some big company was willing to pay him vast sums of cash (although still a small drop in the ocean of mega-profits that the fossil fuel comapnies make) to buy the idea off him.........and then bury it.

It wouldn't be the first time.

reply to post by boncho


Agreed Boncho.

Of course....he could be a .gov shill trying to push him to patent the idea so it can be bought and buried.

Dun Dun DUNNNNNNNNN....

I still just don't understand the intent of this thread, if it's not to include details of your method???

You say it's just to discuss your results. But there can be no discussion without understanding how you got them.

OP: "I did X!"

"Umm. OK. How?"

OP: "I'm not saying. Just discuss the results."

"Oh. Sure. Uh... Why did you do X?"

OP: "I'm not saying. Discuss the results only!"

"Sorry. Um. Gee. Really? You did X? Uh. How did... sorry. Um. What if... sorry, sorry! Um. Gee..."

OP: "I did X!"

I just don't know what discussion you're expecting us to have??? That's why it points to a Hoax thread to me...

Regards,
Rewey

LABTECH767
reply to post by Angelic Resurrection

 

Good luck and if you are successful I truly hope it does not go the way other such discoveries have and that you do not run into a patent for a similar process now owned by a automotive and fuel conglomerate.

Thanks, I'll need all the lock to commercialize this invention.
What patent by automotive or fuel giants exactly?
I know they make hydrogen powered cars in Germany.
Bit whether they have cars or patents for an onboard electrolysis plant,
I do not know. I will try to contact them.

ManFromEurope

Angelic Resurrection
..
WoW, Yesterday, I was able to split 4 gms of water ( that was treated with AG environment )
into H2 and O2, using only 0.38 wh, ..

Hmm..

It takes 3.94*10^-19 Ws per molecule H2O to be split.

A mol of H2O weighs 18g, consisting of 6.023*10^23 molecules. Thats 3.35*10^22 molecules per g.

Therefore, it takes 3.66 Wh (Watt*Hour) to split 1g water into H2 and O2, or 14.65 Wh per 4g.

Which leads to the conclusion that if your machine is working, you would have achieved an improvement over any possible mechanism based on known chemistry of 38.5!

Magnificient!

edit on 12-12-2013 by ManFromEurope because: (no reason given)

The problem with your calculation is that it implies that splitting up 4g of water will take 1 hour. You can't use anything like Ws or Wh without telling us how long it take. Either it takes x W for the hole process or y Wh for the duration of x hours (which than can be calculated into a total energy consumption in W although Watt should be converted into Joule)

UnixFE

ManFromEurope

Angelic Resurrection
..
WoW, Yesterday, I was able to split 4 gms of water ( that was treated with AG environment )
into H2 and O2, using only 0.38 wh, ..

Hmm..

It takes 3.94*10^-19 Ws per molecule H2O to be split.

A mol of H2O weighs 18g, consisting of 6.023*10^23 molecules. Thats 3.35*10^22 molecules per g.

Therefore, it takes 3.66 Wh (Watt*Hour) to split 1g water into H2 and O2, or 14.65 Wh per 4g.

Which leads to the conclusion that if your machine is working, you would have achieved an improvement over any possible mechanism based on known chemistry of 38.5!

Magnificient!

edit on 12-12-2013 by ManFromEurope because: (no reason given)

The problem with your calculation is that it implies that splitting up 4g of water will take 1 hour. You can't use anything like Ws or Wh without telling us how long it take. Either it takes x W for the hole process or y Wh for the duration of x hours (which than can be calculated into a total energy consumption in W although Watt should be converted into Joule)

1 Joule = 1 Ws.
If this answer isn't sufficient, I will try to elucidate: The difference between POWER (which for example is a known and documented parameter of your car's engine) and WORK (which depends on the length of time you are using power).

As I wrote, you have to exert the WORK of 3.94*10^-19 Ws per molecule H2O to split it up into H2 and O.
If you do this in 1 second, you need 3.94*10^-19 W.
If you do this in 1 hour, you need 1.094*10^-22 W.
But the same WORK is needed, regardless how long it took. Okay?

ManFromEurope

Angelic Resurrection
..
WoW, Yesterday, I was able to split 4 gms of water ( that was treated with AG environment )
into H2 and O2, using only 0.38 wh, ..

Hmm..

It takes 3.94*10^-19 Ws per molecule H2O to be split.

A mol of H2O weighs 18g, consisting of 6.023*10^23 molecules. Thats 3.35*10^22 molecules per g.

Therefore, it takes 3.66 Wh (Watt*Hour) to split 1g water into H2 and O2, or 14.65 Wh per 4g.

Which leads to the conclusion that if your machine is working, you would have achieved an improvement over any possible mechanism based on known chemistry of 38.5!

Magnificient!

edit on 12-12-2013 by ManFromEurope because: (no reason given)

Thanks your figures read well.
Case of wonders of wormholes.