So long as the gas being generated didn't produce more energy than it took to create it, the laws of thermodynamics remain intact.

Those hydrogen torches, when you burn something, it creates water. That water can then be collected and guided back into the water tank. Isn't that producing more energy then it took?

I'm pretty sure it is.

Especially when the torch flame can heat water, and make a steam engine powerful enough to run a generator, which then makes the hydrogen, and then back to water, then back to the water tank, and over and over again..

You will run out of water soon enough, but I'm pretty sure there is more energy coming out then in. Heat energy can be used multiple ways.

Those hydrogen torches, when you burn something, it creates water. That water can then be collected and guided back into the water tank. Isn't that producing more energy then it took?

I'm pretty sure it is.

Only if you don't count the ELECTRICITY it took to perform the electrolysis (sigh!).  Go away, your ignorance and arrogance is starting to be annoying.

I don't know who this "xjet" dude is but .......... Mr. Simpson if this is you explain this ..............

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://news.epochtimes.com/gb/3/12/6/n424967.htm&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=2&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522aardvark.com.nz%2522%26hl%3Den

These are "OIL COUNTRIES" your in bed with or .........  so it seems ......... rockets ......... WTF..........

It looks like your web site www.aardvark.com.nz or at least I can't get on, whats with that ??

That's a very amusing (but rather incorrect) report.

My website is http://aardvark.co.nz

And my other site is: http://interestingprojects.com

Have a read.

So long as the gas being generated didn't produce more energy than it took to create it, the laws of thermodynamics remain intact.

In the Arc Atomic-Hydrogen process, a flame is generated from Hydrogen gas passing through a HV arc.   The heat of the flame in this particular effect is on the order of hundreds of times the magnitude expected from a simple Hydrogen burn.

Quoting Bearden on the Arc Atomic-Hydrogen reaction:

"The point is that any charge produces a continuous flow of real, usable EM energy from the vacuum.  Thermodynamically we are describing a nonequilibrium steady-state (NESS) system, and such a system is permitted to continuously emit energy (received from its environment). The charge also falsifies the present second law of thermodynamics to any size level and time duration desired, because the emitted photons do form deterministic EM fields and potentials as a function of radial distance.  One calculates the field intensity and potential intensity at any radial point, by a deterministic formula -- not by the use of statistics."

The information is highly available around the web, and if you don't trust Tom Bearden, there are UNLV and Cambridge researchers who've published findings that come up in the same google query.

As stated before, I've seen it, in person and it is very impressive.  Too bad this technology was essentially wiped away from modern countries 60+ years ago in favor of more energy consuming methods.  Of course, this type of reaction would probably cremate a combustion engine, so the concept is not necessarily apropos to the topic.  I was merely commenting upon your reliance on the stated laws of thermodynamics.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZllEFERJBXc

In the Arc Atomic-Hydrogen process, a flame is generated from Hydrogen gas passing through a HV arc.   The heat of the flame in this particular effect is on the order of hundreds of times the magnitude expected from a simple Hydrogen burn.

Quoting Bearden on the Arc Atomic-Hydrogen reaction:

And that's where you lost my interest.

Like so many before him, Bearden is a pseudo-scientist who has really lost touch with reality.

Here's the bottom line question you must ask yourself "Why isn't this technology being used now?"

And inevitably, when faced with such a logical and inescapable conclusion (because it doesn't actually work), those who blindly follow this pseudo-science will spout "conspiracy" or that it was "burried by the goverment/oil-companies/mafia/my-dog" or something equally as stupid).

Now I've had some rather nasty dealings with the US and NZ governments.  I know the levels they can stoop to (breaking the law) in order to achieve the results they want.  But even *I* don't believe those conspiracy theories, especially today when we have the internet.

If *any* of these crazy over-unity systems worked, then there would be people in China downloading this stuff and building it like crazy.

Instead, China remains the single largest user of oil and other fossil fuels on the planet.

Why do you think that is?

The Chinese are (and always have been) a *very* clever race of people -- they invented the rocket thousands of years before the USA put a man in space for goodness sake.

Do you really think that the US (or any other) government has the power to suppress Chinese use of over-unity power devices?

Do you really think that China would be spending billions of dollars on importing oil and coal when they could have all these wonderful over-unity devices providing more energy than they could ever need?  And surely they'd at least have all their cars fitted with jam-jars and baking soda so as to reduce pollution for the Olympic games and slash their transport fuel bill by 50% or more.

Come on people - it's wonderful to talk about over-unity and the dream of getting a free lunch by breaching the laws of thermodynamics but the reality is that it simply has never been done (despite all those hoax YouTube videos and the snake-oil merchants who claim they've done it).

Numerous challenges have been offered which could earn *anyone* with proof of over-unity energy generation a *fortune* have come and gone with no winners -- yet this stuff is published freely on the net.  So how come nobody has every claimed those prizes and the wealth that accompanies them?

Even today, if you could reliably demonstrate over-unity power generation you would undoubtedly qualify for a Nobel prize in physics, and the not inconsiderable amount of money that accompanies such an honor.

But I see not one person fronting up to claim that prize.

Wake up folks.  Enjoy the experiments, the fun, the playing around -- but don't suggest that you've defied the laws of physics unless you can deliver irrefutable evidence to prove those claims.  And so far, *nobody* has done that.  All we have are the pseudoscientific ramblings of people who claim their ideas have been suppressed or they've been subjected to death-threats or whatever - and some really lame websites that spout nothing but BS with a few links to studies that support only a very *tiny* and inconsequential part of their theories.  Yes you can get H2 from water by electrolysis - but don't use this to support your claims of over-unity energy production - that's BS.

Or have I got this wrong?

I guess now *I* am part of a government-led conspiracy to try and discredit all the over-unity discoveries that exist out there and are being covered-up by every man and his dog.

Yes, you got me wrong.  Sorry I pissed you off, you should have read past the word "Bearden," there were a few more sentences in my post.  And no, for the record, I was not stating that hydrogen electrolysis has anything to do with over-unity.

No worries.. I don't get "pissed off" - life's too short :-)

I just can't believe that so many people in the world would rather believe the unsubstantiated ramblings of those who have very little understanding of true science yet claim to have defied the laws of physics which have enabled us to fly around the globe in jet-aircraft, put a man on the moon and deliver robotic rovers to Mars.  Even when confronted with the most simple logic (such as the picture I painted in my other reply regarding the Chinese situation), they continue to ignore the obvious and hang on to the snake-oil.

Indeed, I wrote about this Faith versus Fact strangeness just recently, in respect to these HHO scams on the Net.

I really would like to hear from those here who claim that there *are* over-unity designs out there and that they believe this stuff.

Why do they believe it?

Why do they think that the creators of these devices aren't filthy-rich now?

If they say "conspiracy" then why aren't the Chinese using this technology?

And why aren't some of the USA's enemies (N.Korea for instance) using and pushing this technology in an attempt to destabilize the US economy?

How many excuses can "the faithful" come up with for avoiding the obvious implications of Occam's Razor?

Anyway, I tried to contact you via your website for more information, but after submitting my questions it simply hangs.

Shouldn't do -- I get several emails an hour through that contact form.  You can always email me direct at dontspam at yahoo.com

And why aren't some of the USA's enemies (N.Korea for instance) using and pushing this technology in an attempt to destabilize the US economy?

Media and government are, by your own admission, often capable of sinking to the lowest of levels to suppress information for their own benefit/agenda.  Who says China, Iran, N. Korea or other "axis of evil" nations (pun, not my words) are not developing/using this type of technology?  If it's merely a quest for truth, I'd lay money that every modern government on earth is actively involved in alternate energy research these days.

I believe we are all trying to be a bit too deterministic here, whilst forgetting that Occam's razor is equally sharp in both directions.  And if Occam decides not to weigh in, Damocles and his sword will.  You are of one opinion; HHO fuel advocates are of another.  Let's put our collective passion toward solving what is easily a crisis of epic proportions in our energy economies in order that our children not needlessly suffer.  If the HHO expirementers want to test toward this end, more power to them.

The questions I attempted to submit to your site were:

1.  In what country will the challenge occur?  Preferably North America or proximal.

2.  Would the challenger be open to performing the tests in a closed lab environment instead of in the "real world" open air?  Specifically, vehicles placed on stands, left running, side by side with dynamometers attached.  Guards on site, 24x7, entire duration of tests videotaped for posterity?

3.  Can the vehicle be an older model using a distributor (points, rotor) instead of electronic ignition?

4.  Would the challenger be willing to do side-by-side tests with two exact copies of the same vehicle, one fitted with HHO apparatus, one stock?

5.  Would the challenger be willing to place the $1m USD in escrow account for the benefit of the participant(s) upon receipt of the entry fee?  If you're going to challenge, might as well be willing to show the cash.

6.  What is your definition of 'engine wear' as applicable to the challenge?  Will both test vehicle engines be allowed an application of silicone or comparable sealant prior to the test.  Will the term 'engine wear' be agreed upon by all parties to the challenge prior to introduction of money by either party?

Regards and good evening.