| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Physics Forum » Car on water which instead of over 20 l/100km burns...
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| ... |
 Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:37 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Such a car weas build by two young hobbyists from New Zealand. It was
shown in television. The television crew subjected it to a simple test
to determine the saving on fuel that it accomplishes. It burns only
around 5 liters per 100 kilometers (plus around 1 liter of water),
while the car of an identical model, and year, burned on exactly the
same road and with exactly the same speeds over 20 liters per 100
kilometers.
About this kind of "cars on water" I remember to read theoretically
alteady in 1997 during my professorship in Borneo. But I never had an
opportunity to see how they compare to factory models. So with a great
interest I looked on Friday, 13 June 2008 at 7:00 pm to 7:30 pm on the
channel 3 of television New Zealand the program called "Campbell Live"
which was just about one such car constructed by two young New
Zealanders in their 20s. In this programme was also explained what the
design and operation of such a "car on water" was about. I described
this design and operation on my web page "free_energy.htm" (updated on
15 June or later) the address of which can be find if in the www.google.com
someone types the key words "Jan Pajak free_energy.htm" but without
quotes. In the program this "car on water was also subjected to an
experiment. Namely it was taken for a ride together with another
identical car of the same year and model, only that still in the
factory condition (it was probably "Ford Falcon"). Both cars drove the
same path with the same speed. After they went through 100 kilometers,
the fuel consumption was measured ion both of them by the TV crew. It
turned out that the "car on water" burned around 5 liters of petrol,
while the factory version of the same car burned over 20 liters (both
after 100 km on the road). So the saving on fuel amounted to 75% (or
three quorters) the the original (factory) fuel consumption.
The mopdification of these two boys was extremely simple. They just
added to an old car that they had a small "dissociator of water" which
they build themselves. This dissociator consumed energy from the
dynamo and dissociated water into hydrogen and oxygen. The oxygen was
let out, while the hydrogen was added to the air at the car's
carburattor. So this hydrogen, after entering the cylinder mixed with
the air, burned in the cylinder with the fuel and thus increased the
temperature of the burning. This raise in the temperature of burning
in turn caused the better burning of the fuel, and also the lack of
smoke in the exhaustions. So the burning become much more efficient.
The final effect was that the car consumed 75% less petrol. So the
entire saving on fuel results from this increased temperature in the
cylinder. The changes themselves were technically very simple, so that
even these two boys could complete them successfully.
Because in this program there were no details of the car, I looked in
internet at web pages of the "Campbell LIfe" to find these details.
This particular program has 2 web pages, namely www.3news.co.nz and
www.tv3.co.nz. But I could NOT find anything in there about thye car.
Therefore I described everything that I remembered from this program
on my web page. Interested readers can find it at the addresses of my
web page "free_energy.htm" update on 15 June or later. (This web page
needs to be seeked via www.google.com as there is a lot of such web
pages - not all of these are updated on 15 July 2008. To find these
one needs to type key words listed before.)
So it seems that it is worth to experiemnt with cars, as such simple
change as the "car on water" may save some of us even around $ 100 per
week.
With the totaliztic salute,
Jan Pajak |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In sci.physics Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Your anti-US tirade aside, that's the way it is around the world
whether you like it or not.
The STINKING USA NEEDS TO HAVE A BLOODY TIRADE AGAINST IT FOR BEING ENERGY HOGS AND MONSTROUSLY ***STUPID*** TO FUCK AS WELL
Oh, so you did read the links that showed your original premise was
nonsense, so now you lash out in rage over your own ignorance like
a little child.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 5:36 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 19, 7:14 pm, Alba Rocstas <amberlawnmof... at (no spam) tesco.net> wrote:
...
Quote: Hi all you head in the sands ,
cannot believe how you are quick to spit at someone how was just
trying to give info he found and thought it was worth letting you all
know , before you make your self look silly have you spitters tried
it or is your brain programed to only listen to the multi corrupt and
your fat arses are stuck to your seats , never knock what you have not
tried as you have no knowledge to give , but if it is true you would
all want it probably for free as long as someone else does the work ,
well I'm going to experement with this myself ,
Jan do not take the spitters to heart as they sound like the sort of
people how think there offroading when they park on a grass verge and
call the garage if it gets splashed with mud ,
Well said my bit here in wet Scotland ,
Callum, thanks for the moral support. I also believe that these
spitters and mud throwers act as you described - just try to show how
high IQ they have by tramping on everything that is good around them.
I am intensely trying to find these two young hobbyists, although it
is NOT easy - they simply did the improvement for themselves and never
seeked the fame or earnmings from what they accomplished. If I manage
to find them, I will try do get from them the desaign for their
modification of the car, and then I will publish this their design on
my web page "free_energy.htm" - so that everyone can benefit from it
for free. So if you intend to do this improvement, please look at my
web page "free_energy.htm" from time to time. You can find this web
page through typing in www.google.com the key words "Jan Pajak
free_energy.htm", but without quotes. When looking at this web page
please check whether it is the newest update (i.e. at least update on
18 June 2008, or later), as there are numerous such web pages
available in Internet and I am not able to update all of them at the
moment.
With the totaliztic salute,
Jan Pajak |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Sylvia Else... |
| Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:52 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
janpajak at (no spam) gmail.com wrote:
Quote: On Jun 19, 7:14 pm, Alba Rocstas <amberlawnmof... at (no spam) tesco.net> wrote:
...
Hi all you head in the sands ,
cannot believe how you are quick to spit at someone how was just
trying to give info he found and thought it was worth letting you all
know , before you make your self look silly have you spitters tried
it or is your brain programed to only listen to the multi corrupt and
your fat arses are stuck to your seats , never knock what you have not
tried as you have no knowledge to give , but if it is true you would
all want it probably for free as long as someone else does the work ,
well I'm going to experement with this myself ,
Jan do not take the spitters to heart as they sound like the sort of
people how think there offroading when they park on a grass verge and
call the garage if it gets splashed with mud ,
Well said my bit here in wet Scotland ,
Callum, thanks for the moral support. I also believe that these
spitters and mud throwers act as you described - just try to show how
high IQ they have by tramping on everything that is good around them.
Physics has proved to be a very accurate predictor of what will and
won't work. The laws of thermodynamics in particular are very robust.
Many people have claimed to have made machines that violate these laws,
but none has been able to demonstrate such a machine in a controlled
environment. The absence of mass-produced free energy machines is
powerful evidence that none of these things have really worked.
So when someone purports to have produced yet another device that
violates the laws of thermodynamics, people who prefer not to waste
their time and money tend to want more evidence than just a TV report
before giving any credence at all to the claims.
If these teens had really produced what they claim, they would have no
difficulty in demonstrating it in a way that would convince sceptics,
and turn our current understanding of physics on its head. It doesn't
seem to have happened.
Sylvia. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:43 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 20, 9:39 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati... at (no spam) hotmail.com>
wrote:
...
Quote: http://au.video.yahoo.com/network/100000095?v=2865566
I see the kid reckons his ancient wreck only burns 70% of the fuel going in
the engine but adding hydrogen increases it to 80-90 %.
So even if there were any truth in it, it only makes it ~ 25% more efficient
not 400%.
He says "I'm saving about 20% on the fuel bill". OK. And then they show an
uncalibrated comparison with *another car* !
Graham
Paper (or a computer screen) is patient and takes everything that you
write on it. But it does NOT make it true in the real life. So we can
admire the skill of turning aruments around from "pro" into "contra",
but we cannot admire moral consequences that your arguing causes.
If humans could put the same energy into implementing new ideas and
inventions as they put into criticising these inventions and into
preventing everything new from the completion, our planet would look
completely different. I call this kind of human destructiveness the
"curse of inventors". But in reality this is NOT a curse, but just
specific people acting in specific way. One may wonder what kind of
interest they have in stopping the progress. Perhaps the answer for
this I provided on the web pahe "boiler.htm" which can be run if one
types in www.google.com the key words "Jan Pajak boiler.htm" (but
without quotes). Similar people and similar actions appeared also on
the thread http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/1ec304a0b8533c5a/1bcfda7cc9e40aa6
about mechanical everlasting motion. Is it possible that these kind of
individuals especially targed and criticise a specific kind of
inventions which they consider to be the most dangerous?
With the totaliztic salute,
Jan Pajak |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Eeyore... |
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:13 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Atheist Chaplain wrote:
Quote: Geez Eeyore sounds more and more like aus.cars very own Ozone every time he
posts 
MORON.
Or maybe I simply over-estimated the native intelligence of the Antipodeans .
Graham |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Eeyore... |
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:14 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Atheist Chaplain wrote:
Quote: Geez Eeyore sounds more and more like aus.cars very own Ozone every time he
posts
MORON.
Or maybe I simply over-estimated the native intelligence of the Antipodeans .
Graham |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Eeyore... |
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:22 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Atheist Chaplain wrote:
Quote: "Eeyore" wrote
jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
In sci.physics Eeyore wrote:
jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
and the name is "Traveler".
That's only because Americans can't spell properly.
It is an American airplane with an American name.
Someone from the UK has no room to talk about funny airplane names.
Which country made the first jet airliner ? Made just down the road from
me in fact.(yeah shame about the microfractures) The same basic airframe
is noe the hub of our ESIGINT prowess that beats yours hands down.
ahh a pissing contest over the pond, this should be good
Piss being the appropriate word.
We bought some Boeing AWACS but do we use them there ? NO WAY
Our own kit is best by an arm and a led and US forces rely on it.
You guys also had to borrow some of our ancient Canberra PRs to get decent
photos too.
Graham |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:55 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In sci.physics Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
In sci.physics Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
and the name is "Traveler".
That's only because Americans can't spell properly.
It is an American airplane with an American name.
Someone from the UK has no room to talk about funny airplane names.
Which country made the first jet airliner ? Made just down the road from
me in fact.(yeah shame about the microfractures) The same basic airframe
is noe the hub of our ESIGINT prowess that beats yours hands down.
Didn't someone in the UK government just declare that thing a national
disgrass because they keep falling out of the air or is that another
great UK design?
Anyway, not the same country that made the first successful jet airliner
which is actually decended from the KC-135 which predates the Comet.
Nor the first transcontinental capable bomber nor the first powered
airplane for that matter.
I will concede the UK had the first working jet engine (ignoring the Axis)
and magnetron, but in both cases it took US engineering to make them
practical.
The UK can proudly lay claim to spotted jack and bangers and mash but
only because no one else wants them.
I always thought the Vulcan was pretty cool though.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In sci.physics Atheist Chaplain <abused at (no spam) cia.gov> wrote:
Quote: ahh a pissing contest over the pond, this should be good
Always good stuff especially with the UK as they are always pissed because
they have no food worth eating and hence always on edge.
But at least they aren't eating German food.
Both world wars can be traced to the Germans smelling something worth
eating drifting across the French border.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In sci.physics Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
In sci.physics Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Since I'm a member of the AYA (The International Grumman American Pilots
Association www.aya.org ), own a Grumman, last saw it yesterday, and
have the POH at my fingertips, I have no need for those references.
Which model ?
http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/N451CD.html
Nice. Congrats. Wouldn't mind one myself.
Thanks.
You need to learn a lot about how airplanes work first.
I say that not to dump on you but because a safe pilot needs to know
a lot of things to be a safe pilot and if you are not a safe pilot,
sooner or later (most likely sooner) you will be a dead pilot.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In sci.physics Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: Atheist Chaplain wrote:
Geez Eeyore sounds more and more like aus.cars very own Ozone every time he
posts :-)
MORON.
Or maybe I simply over-estimated the native intelligence of the Antipodeans .
Glad to see the US isn't the only former colony that threw off the
British yoke you have a problem with.
How are you with Canadians?
Though most Canadians seem so polite and inoffensive that they wouldn't
say shit if they had a mouthfull so I doubt they would get your dander
up.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| jonz... |
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:50 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Eeyore wrote:
Quote:
jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
jimp at (no spam) specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
And simplicity, reliablility, weight, and cost are good reasons to use
a carburetor.
Funny you won't find them in a car any more, along with carb icing problerms.
Simplicity, weight, and cost (mostly in certification these days) are
not a concern in car design.
But fuel efficiency and reliability is.
Spoken like a true non-pilot that knows nothing about flying.
Funny that I have flown as a PPL then !
You sure don't sound like one.
Piston aircraft have a knob labled "mixture".
Because they're based on decades old technology. In the UK (and elsewhere AIUI) the
mixture knob has to be hard wired into the 'rich' position. I'll leave YOU to work out
out why that is.
Nonsense.
Right. You're a MORON. Maybe the FAA still lets you do it but I'd doubt JAR regs will allow
it much longer.
This is of course why carbs NEED to be replaced by EFI and ECUs.
weell, got yer arse kicked there, eh donkey......no amount of
snippage will save you now....oh, mighty mensa man. whoo-hoo..
--
Don`t be sexist...........Broads hate that. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 6:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
janpa... at (no spam) gmail.com wrote:
Quote: such phenomena include "telekinesis" - which is actually a
reversal of mechnical friction.
On Jun 22, 2:07 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati... at (no spam) hotmail.com>
wrote:
Quote: Brain dead CUNT.
Do us a favour - grab a tape measure and less us know how far that dummy
went... just as long as it doesn't tax that immense I.Q of yours, lol.
....
Well, you can spit, throw mud, and yell, but the fact is that the
phenomenon of telekinesis does exist, and also telekinetic devices can
be build. The "telekinetic heater" which I described on the web page
"boiler.htm" can actually be build and examined by almost everyone who
has a prototyping workshop.
Similarly as friction converts spontaneously mechanical motion into
heat, telekinesis and telekinetic devices convert spontaneously heat
into motion. When this motion is applied to numerous electrons being
telekinetically moved along a wire, we receive telekinetic free energy
generators which display over 100% efficiency. Three prototypes of
such generators already exists in the Swiss community Methernitha. The
most famoust of them is called the "Thesta-Distatica". It was seen by
thousands of people already.
Your anger against telekinetic devices does NOT seem to be just an
ignorance. You clearly have a goal in your actions. Is this goal to
prevent the progress on the Earth and to discourage internet readers
from being interested in this futuristic idea. Are you one amongst
these cretures about which I wrote on the therad
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/f43b7ee2d9d8e837/ecabc492dd893a64#ecabc492dd893a64
?
With the totaliztic salute,
Jan Pajak |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Sylvia Else... |
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
News wrote:
Quote:
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:485f97b9$0$30466$afc38c87 at (no spam) news.optusnet.com.au...
Jan is trying to find out who these boys are and look into it
further. He never said it actually worked, but believed the TV crew
were honest inn their testing.
Perhaps they were, but were totally incompetent when it came to
testing. What they showed as a test proved nothing.
I didn't see it. However have two identical cars and seeing how much
fuel they consume doing the same mileage is a very good test. The [proof
of the pudding is in the easting.
They weren't identical, and the show's approach to measuring the fuel
consumption was vulnerable to error.
But the main problem is that they were not looking for fraud. In all
walks of life, any too-good-to-be-true claim must be met with acute
scepticism. An open mind is a good thing, but it must be open to all
possibilities, not just some of them. Fraud in situations such as this
is a clear possibility.
Quote: Yes, he was a bright guy but he got onto gyroscopes if I remember.
Well, his field of expertise was electrical engineering. He was wrong
about the gyroscope. Their behaviour is counter-intuitive, but
entirely understandable interms of ordinary mechanics.
He was right and his assistant took it up after his death.
The Wikipedia article says he recanted. As for his being right, if
gyroscopes violated Newton's laws, I think by now it would be
established knowledge.
Sylvia. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:37 am
|
|