The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???  (Read 27837 times)

lyner

  • Guest
Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???
« Reply #50 on: 22/01/2009 12:58:22 »
FD
I see your problem with electron availability but an E field can produce ionisation.  There is no information as to the expected electric field inside the diathermy machine but I guess it's safe to assume that it is enough. Electrolytic cells can work with very low applied voltages and, if the impedance of the gap / cavity were in the region of 50ohms, the voltage, for a dissipated 300W, would be just under 40V. The gap appears to be about 0.2m so the field gradient would be in the region of 200V/m. I should imagine that would be enough to provide the sort of gradient you'd find right next to a conventional electrode. That's a bit glib, I realise, bearing in mind the conductivity of the salt solution, which only occupies a small fraction of the 'gap' in the machine.
RF fields produce ionisation  of gases very easily - see the movie - which may or may not have relevance to the situation in solutions.
 

Offline Farrah Day

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???
« Reply #51 on: 22/01/2009 13:54:36 »
Hi Sophie

I'm at a bit of a loss as of what to make of your last post. You seem to acknowledge my problem with the electron availability, but then say,

Quote
but an E field can produce ionisation
.

I don't see how saying this provides any kind of an answer to the lack of electrons, or how it relates to the first part of your sentence. Please elaborate.

Maybe it's my fault, perhaps I'm failing miserably to make myself clear on this point.

I have no problem with RF EMR ionising the water molecule, but for the resulting ions to become atoms of oxygen and hydrogen and hence liberated from the liquid medium, charges do need to be collected and dropped somewhere. This normally happens at the electrodes in a standard electrolyser, but where can an H+ ion pick up an electron in this process, there simply is no supply of electrons.

It is not the ionisation that is the problem, but it is one thing ionising water, and quite another thing to get H2 and O2 from those resulting ions.

Do you see now what I'm getting at?

If an EM field produced 'electrons' as well as ionisation, then all would be well - but it doesn't.

« Last Edit: 22/01/2009 15:50:59 by Farrah Day »
 

Offline Farrah Day

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???
« Reply #52 on: 22/01/2009 14:25:49 »
It has occurred to me just how unlikely it is that the specific frequency of 13.56 MHz alone is responsible for the Kanzius discovery.  Don't you think that this would be one hell of a coincidence?

Water absorbs EMR at 2.4GHz, ie, the microwave oven, and though there would inevitably be some ionisation (water is continually self-ionising), the result we all know of is heat. But we are nowhere near 2.4GHz here, or even near the 500MHz sodium RF absorption frequency, which I believe is what sodium vapour lamps operate at.

Furthermore unlike water alone, a solution of salt water contains anions and cations that will be induced into movement by ANY frequency of EMR. So maybe it is not about ions and molecules absorbing the RF radiation, rather the collisions induced by the RF electromagnetic field acting on the cations and anions - the induced kinetic energy.

However, this might give us the H+ and OH- ions but still doesn't explain how we get from this stage to the liberation of oxygen and hydrogen??
 

lyner

  • Guest
Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???
« Reply #53 on: 22/01/2009 18:57:34 »
Quote
Please elaborate.

If the field is high enough then it can an polarise atom enough to separate an electron or to separate two halves of a molecule with imbalanced charges. Let's face it, it's a local field that causes any chemical reaction; it's all fields, innit?

Why these shouldn't recombine with the next spare opposite ion is probably because they're going at some speed due to the field.

Are we sure that the reaction we see in the flame is and O H reaction? Couldn't it be an H OH reaction? Not enough energy perhaps.
See. My Chemistry is not good enough, as I said.
It seems your (and my) problem is not to do with how you put the energy into the system, it's how the O gets formed.
Someone will have to tell me I'm talking b**cks and give us the right answer.
Bored Chemist or someone can probably do the decent thing and put me out of your misery.

 

Offline Farrah Day

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???
« Reply #54 on: 22/01/2009 19:56:16 »
Hi Sophie

We are obviously on quite different wavelengths here, as I'm not at all following your line of reasoning.

The thing is, irrelevant of what is causing it, when water dissociates it ionises into H+ and OH-.  If the water molecule dissociated cleanly into hydrogen and oxygen atoms (as it seems many people assume it does) then there would be no problem with four hydrogen atoms combining to 2 x H2 molecules and two oxygen atoms combining to the O2 molecule - both these would be liberated as gas.

But this is not what happens. Ionisation leaves a hydrogen ion H+ and a hydroxyl ion OH-. To become a gas this hydrogen ion must first become an atom again so needs to pick up an electron from somewhere. A H+ can't join with another H+ - like charges repel for a start, and hydrogen ions are not liberated as gas, we know this from Faradays laws.

No, we are not sure that H and O is being liberated, which of course would help.

I'm not sure anyone can yet provide a specific answer at this time.
 

lyner

  • Guest
Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???
« Reply #55 on: 22/01/2009 21:33:58 »
Quote
We are obviously on quite different wavelengths here
That's probably because, when talking Chemistry, I am very likely to be b/s-ing.

If there are spare electrons around, then you'd have no objection? Perhaps these come from the Cl ions then, which could also be shaken up by the RF. RF fields can be pretty disruptive. The frequency need not precise in the close presence of other atoms - unlike in gases.
 

Offline Farrah Day

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???
« Reply #56 on: 22/01/2009 22:18:30 »
Hi Sophie,

All electrons should be accounted for, as unlike in a metal with loosely bound outer electrons, ions are the current carriers in a liquid, not electrons. If there were free electrons pottering about in the solution they would be quickly snapped up by the sodium ions.

If the H+ ion took an electron from the Cl- ion, then the chlorine would be free to join with another chlorine atom to become a chlorine molecule and evolve as chlorine gas. A very nasty visible, smelly gas, which I really suspect someone would have noticed before their lungs started to dissolve. It may also dissolve in the water to become chlorinated water, again very smelly - think swimming baths. If chlorine gas evolved with hydrogen, when burned they would get hydrogen chloride, which would react with any moisture in the air to become hydrochloric acid - all quite nasty stuff.

At least your giving me pause for thought, and it's nice to have someone to talk to. ;)

 

lyner

  • Guest
Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???
« Reply #57 on: 22/01/2009 23:27:07 »
No idea then.
Unless it's a very dynamic thing and (atomic) hydrogen, being very light, finds its way to the surface before it can be recombined.
Actually, the effect could just be on the surface where there could be high levels of current flowing (skin effect). Could it be generating a plasma just on the surface?
I wonder if the pH of the solution changes after some time? I was thinking of NaOH - but then there would be chlorine as well. Bummer.
 

Offline curiosity is best

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???
« Reply #58 on: 30/01/2009 04:06:10 »
Hello everybody.  I've done a bit of (non-technical) research into the Kanzius experiment.  After viewing the utube video in slow motion, there are clues as to the RF generator used.  It turns out he is using a commercially available high power RF generator.  The frequency is 13.56MHz.  This is a frequency used for various things from low power RF IDs up to high power plasma etching equipment.  It turns out the generator he used is from a company called ENI.  The model number is ENI OEM-6B3 RF Generator 3 Phase 650W 13.56MHz.  As a matter of fact, a used version is available on ebay at the time I write this for $2000.  Check out the front panel the ENI generator to that on the video.  An exact match, knobs and all.  ENI has a few different models to choose from with different maximum output power (eg 200, 300, 650W).  The model number above is 650W.

So while it's interesting to speculate if what he's doing is real why not purchase the same generator and try it out?  You may need to get creative on the antenna.

Now, as to whether more energy is output from the reaction versus input energy....  Let's think about it slightly differently.  If this is a hydrogen/oxygen reaction.  The flame may likely give off pure water.... aka "desalination".  In this case, the question here is whether the experiment uses less power than current desalination plants.  If so, we have a winner, not for fusion, but rather desalination.  In addition, the desalination process could be made more efficient by converting the excess heat into recovered electricity.  If this process could be scaled up and use less energy than current desalination plants we have a winner. 

Thoughts??  And if anyone has an extra $2K plus an idea on the right antenna, why not give it a try?

 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Yet another free energy from water breakthrough???
« Reply #58 on: 30/01/2009 04:06:10 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums