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

So, what about eliminating the tanks by on board production of
electrolytic hydrogen from water. Is there anything in the laws of
thermodynamics to prevent this . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xb6OQ...eature=related

.. . . from going fully to hydrogen, with no other fuel, or would that
come to something so hairy as this . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFrkH...eature=related

Can a 12-volt system be sufficient to produce enough hydrogen to run
an engine and alternator plus keep the battery charged--or would that
violate the no perpetuum mobile doctrine?
--
JM http://bobbisoxsnatchers.blogspot.com
http://whosenose.blogspot.com

On Oct 10, 1:16*pm, Uncle Al wrote:
Just Me wrote:

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

So, what about eliminating the tanks by on board production of
electrolytic hydrogen from water. Is there anything in the laws of
thermodynamics to prevent this . . .

[snip crap]

I'd hate to see his scissors.



Hey ****ing stooopid...

Cordial sort, what?


If you have the juice drive an electric car
and avoid further Second Law losses.

That is not an answer, Alphonso. We want to go cordless, here. Get it?
We want automotive steam engines powered by hydrogen-fired, state of
the art heat-exchangers (for boilers) and we want on-board
electrolytic production of hydrogen, if that can be done.

Now step aside you useless Tub o' Guts if you can't answer the
question and let someone with the skinny on it step in.
--
JM http://bobbisoxsnatchers.blogspot.com
http://whosenose.blogspot.com
http://doo-dads.blogspot.com

On Oct 10, 1:47*pm, "
wrote:

Can a 12-volt system be sufficient to produce enough hydrogen to run
an engine and alternator plus keep the battery charged--or would that
violate the no perpetuum mobile doctrine?

* *Yes if you wait a thousand years, since the problem with 12 Volt
systems
* *is that Ford owns all the patents.

Somebody always owns the patents. They don't always (or hardly ever)
own the insight needed to put the thing into development, but if you
do, then you hire a lawyer and make a deal with the *******s.

That's business life.

You say "yes". But you don't justify your answer. Why would it not
amount to perpetuum mobile?

Say you've got a small, absolutely crash-proof tank of hydrogen to get
the motor running and the electrolysis started--now: Will a 12 volt
system produce sufficient hydrogen to run the engine and charging
system, given that the "water" has non-polluting additives to make it
an efficient electrolyte?

Let's get some damn answers here! There is no further time for
messing around with clueless, ordinary, small-stuff non-solutions like
electric cars (which depend on fossil fueled house current for a
charge) and ethanol/bio-deisel which depend on fossil deisel for
farmers' tractors and trucks, and so on up the line to the refineries.

Let's get smart before it's too late.
--
JM http://bobbisoxsnatchers.blogspot.com
http://whosenose.blogspot.com
http://doo-dads.blogspot.com

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 13:50:45 -0700 (PDT), Just Me
wrote:

On Oct 10, 1:16Â*pm, Uncle Al wrote:
Just Me wrote:

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

So, what about eliminating the tanks by on board production of
electrolytic hydrogen from water. Is there anything in the laws of
thermodynamics to prevent this . . .

[snip crap]

I'd hate to see his scissors.



Hey ****ing stooopid...

Cordial sort, what?


If you have the juice drive an electric car
and avoid further Second Law losses.

That is not an answer, Alphonso. We want to go cordless, here. Get it?
We want automotive steam engines powered by hydrogen-fired, state of
the art heat-exchangers (for boilers) and we want on-board
electrolytic production of hydrogen, if that can be done.

Now step aside you useless Tub o' Guts if you can't answer the
question and let someone with the skinny on it step in.

He did answer it; he just didn't give the answer you wanted to
hear. The idea is somewhere between incredibly stupid and insane.
Even in theory, the Second Law guarantees you'll get less energy
from the engine than it takes to electrolyze the water in the
first place. And in practice, the energy-efficiency of
electrolysis is so low that, combined with burner/boiler/engine
inefficiency, you'd do at least an order of magnitude better by
just hooking the battery to an electric motor and running the car
with that.

--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]

"Just Me" wrote in message
...
On Oct 10, 1:16 pm, Uncle Al wrote:
Just Me wrote:

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

So, what about eliminating the tanks by on board production of
electrolytic hydrogen from water. Is there anything in the laws of
thermodynamics to prevent this . . .

[snip crap]

I'd hate to see his scissors.



Hey ****ing stooopid...

Cordial sort, what?


If you have the juice drive an electric car
and avoid further Second Law losses.

That is not an answer, Alphonso. We want to go cordless, here. Get it?
We want automotive steam engines powered by hydrogen-fired, state of
the art heat-exchangers (for boilers) and we want on-board
electrolytic production of hydrogen, if that can be done.

Now step aside you useless Tub o' Guts if you can't answer the
question and let someone with the skinny on it step in.

Al answered it, you're just unwilling to see the answer. To spell it out:
You want to produce hydrogen by electrolysis of water. This involves passing
an electric current through the water. This current comes from a battery or
fuel cell which must be carried on board and takes a certain amount of
energy. Having produced the hydrogen, you want to burn it, releasing the
energy to boil water to drive steam pistons. What is wrong with using the
battery to drive an electric motor directly? All the additional processes
have low efficiency, so that in your suggested technology only a small
percentage of the energy in the battery will end up driving the car.
Electric motors are relatively efficient.

john

On Oct 10, 4:23*pm, Bill Snyder wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 13:50:45 -0700 (PDT), Just Me
Now step aside you useless Tub o' Guts if you can't answer the
question and let someone with the skinny on it step in.

He did answer it; he just didn't give the answer you wanted to
hear. *The idea is somewhere between incredibly stupid and insane.

Poke one Tub o' Guts and whaddaya get? I'll tellya once the '05
Sutter Home Zinfandel wears off enough so I should not be so
intoxicated by a sense of my own 'knowledge' that it makes me think
I'm Machine Gun Kelly or somebody with a degree in physics . . .

Even in theory, the Second Law guarantees you'll get less energy
from the engine than it takes to electrolyze the water in the
first place. *And in practice, the energy-efficiency of
electrolysis is so low that, combined with burner/boiler/engine
inefficiency, you'd do at least an order of magnitude better by
just hooking the battery to an electric motor and running the car
with that.

--
Bill Snyder *[This space unintentionally left blank]

The space between his ears, he means.

P.S. Let this response apply to any other or further replies of a
similar air of gentile 'scientific' cordiality. :-)

Damn this is a good Zinfandel! I am now fully convinced that there is
no red California wine other than this (with exception of the
"Mission" variety found here and there at some old Southern California
vineyards) worth the price of purchase. It's been on the vine long
enough (since the middle of the 19th century) to adapt and get
healthy.

I feel very healthy! That's thanx to Count Haraszthy, of course.

Mortal Zin Rules!
--
JM http://bobbisoxsnatchers.blogspot.com
http://whosenose.blogspot.com
http://doo-dads.blogspot.com
http://jesusexegesis.blogspot.com

On Oct 10, 4:36 pm, "John Ashby" wrote:
Al answered it, you're just unwilling to see the answer.

Dig this . . .

On Oct 10, 4:23 pm, Bill Snyder wrote:

He did answer it; he just didn't give the answer you wanted to
hear.

NOTE THE TIME STAMPS . . .

On Oct 10, 4:23 pm, "Bill Snyder"
On Oct 10, 4:36 pm, "John Ashby"

I should waste my time talking to a copycat ASSHOLE of a drive-by
Internet ****-shot from the lip like this?

You see precisely what is WRONG with these ASSHOLES, who not only
cannot talk for themselves, per force! Neither can they so FART and
try to pass the gas off as their own. The ASSHOLE hasn't even the
conscious good sense of SHAME to see that he is saying the SAME THING
the other ASSHOLE already said.

Holy ****!

As to the totally brainless absurdities contained hereafter, if they
are not already obvious to the masses of ASSHOLES--just ask, and I
will try to translate and interpret to ASSHOLESE.

From under which ROCK of petrified, fossilized ASSHOLES do such
squares actually creep!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![?]

Dig it, if you can stand it . . .

To spell it out:

Listen to this schmuck who presumes (in his snot] to be 'spelling'
something out to somebody . . .

You want to produce hydrogen by electrolysis of water. This involves passing
an electric current through the water. This current comes from a battery or
fuel cell which must be carried on board and takes a certain amount of
energy. Having produced the hydrogen, you want to burn it, releasing the
energy to boil water to drive steam pistons. What is wrong with using the
battery to drive an electric motor directly? All the additional processes
have low efficiency, so that in your suggested technology only a small
percentage of the energy in the battery will end up driving the car.
Electric motors are relatively efficient.

The news from ANUS MUNDI.

But sincerely! Just ask, if you can't see how clueless that is, and
I'll run it down, what the deal is there, with Jack Nicholson's CAR.

[Christ! How dense can these ASSHOLES actually get?]
--
JM http://bobbisoxsnatchers.blogspot.com
"Are YOU still human, like me?"

On Oct 11, 2:51*am, Just Me wrote:
On Oct 10, 4:36 pm, "John Ashby" wrote:

Al answered it, you're just unwilling to see the answer.

Dig this . . .

On Oct 10, 4:23 pm, Bill Snyder *wrote:

He did answer it; he just didn't give the answer you wanted to
hear.

NOTE THE TIME STAMPS . . .

On Oct 10, 4:23 pm, "Bill Snyder"
On Oct 10, 4:36 pm, "John Ashby"

I should waste my time talking to a copycat ASSHOLE of a *drive-by
Internet ****-shot from the lip like this?

You see precisely what is WRONG with these ASSHOLES, who not only
cannot talk for themselves, per force! Neither can they so FART and
try to pass the gas off as their own. The ASSHOLE hasn't even the
conscious good sense of SHAME to see that he is saying the SAME THING
the other ASSHOLE already said.

Holy ****!


hahaha yes,

Look everyone!

It's the petroapologists with their pathetic lies and childish insults
again!

Teh maggots of the internets!


As to the totally brainless absurdities contained hereafter, if they
are not already obvious to the masses of ASSHOLES--just ask, and I
will try to translate and interpret to ASSHOLESE.

From under which ROCK of petrified, fossilized ASSHOLES do such
squares actually creep!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![?]

Dig it, if you can stand it . . .


hahaha

To spell it out:

Listen to this schmuck who presumes (in his snot] to be 'spelling'
something out to somebody . . .


Yes! Here we go!

You want to produce hydrogen by electrolysis of water.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This involves passing an electric current through the water.

MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

This current comes from a battery

WHA HA HAHA HAHAHHAHAHHA

or fuel cell

Ha HaAHHAhHAAa

which must be carried on board

HUAHUAHAHAHAHAHAHA

and takes a certain amount of energy.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Having produced the hydrogen, you want to burn it,

OHOHAOHAHOHAHAOHOAHA !!!

releasing the energy to boil water to drive steam pistons.

HAHaaaaa HAHAHAHAHA

What is wrong with using the battery to drive an electric motor directly?

No that woudn't work because neoconversation of energy moments.

HAHAHAHAHAAHA

All the additional processes have low efficiency,

Oh,

but I'm pretty sure there isn't any electric motor in this car.

Please explain.

so that in your suggested technology

It was Jack Nicholson himself.

The Holiwood sleberties are sick of your kind.

Hazent you figured it out jetz?

only a small percentage of the energy
in the battery will end up driving the car.

You pressed the wrong button in the debunkor generator here.

Time to get fired.

Electric motors are relatively efficient.


Have you build it already?

The news from ANUS MUNDI.

But sincerely! *Just ask, if you can't see how clueless that is, and
I'll run it down, what the deal is there, with Jack Nicholson's CAR.


It's priceless actually.

[Christ! How dense can these ASSHOLES actually get?]

Just enough to hold the poop inside.

--
JM
http://bobbisoxsnatchers.blogspot.com
"Are YOU still human, like me?"

It's been fun. I thought this topic wouldn't involve any acting.

My compliments to CBC news for finally putting it on the air.

Jack Nicholson only had to call them every night to make it happen.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Priceless....

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/factuurexpress

On Oct 10, 9:11*pm, gabydewilde wrote:
On Oct 11, 2:51*am, Just Me wrote:

*What is wrong with using the battery to drive an electric motor directly?

No that woudn't work because neoconversation of energy moments.

HAHAHAHAHAAHA

All the additional processes have low efficiency,

Oh,

but I'm pretty sure there isn't any electric motor in this car.

Please explain.

so that in your suggested technology

It was Jack Nicholson himself.

The Holiwood sleberties are sick of your kind.

Hazent you figured it out jetz?

Ha-haaaaaaaaah! Gaby DeWilde, you are priceless.

Can't wait till I'm sober so I can respond as is only fit, meet and
proper with all due sobriety, in kind.

Thank you.
--
JM http://bobbisoxsnatchers.blogspot.com

"What about the macaroni & cheese?"




only a small percentage of the energy
in the battery will end up driving the car.

You pressed the wrong button in the debunkor generator here.

Time to get fired.

Electric motors are relatively efficient.

Have you build it already?

The news from ANUS MUNDI.

But sincerely! *Just ask, if you can't see how clueless that is, and
I'll run it down, what the deal is there, with Jack Nicholson's CAR.

It's priceless actually.

[Christ! How dense can these ASSHOLES actually get?]

Just enough to hold the poop inside.

--
JM
http://bobbisoxsnatchers.blogspot.com
"Are YOU still human, like me?"

It's been fun. I thought this topic wouldn't involve any acting.

My compliments to CBC news for finally putting it on the air.

Jack Nicholson only had to call them every night to make it happen.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Priceless....

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/factuurexpress- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Oct 10, 5:11*pm, Just Me wrote:
On Oct 10, 1:47*pm, "
wrote:

Can a 12-volt system be sufficient to produce enough hydrogen to run
an engine and alternator plus keep the battery charged--or would that
violate the no perpetuum mobile doctrine?

* *Yes if you wait a thousand years, since the problem with 12 Volt
systems
* *is that Ford owns all the patents.

Somebody always owns the patents. They don't always (or hardly ever)
own the insight needed to put the thing into development, but if you
do, then you hire a lawyer and make a deal with the *******s.

That's business life.

That's known. That's why the Ford buisness idiots invented 12V, and
the engineers invented PV Cells, lasers, masers, robots, On-Line-
Banking, and AAVs.
And the Chrysler buisness idiots invented transmissions, and the
engineers
invented computers HDTV, satellites, life, and cars,
And the GM buisness idiots invented Detroit, and the engineers
invented AUVs, holograms, cashflow, CD, DVD,
fiber optics, Elibraries, USB, GPS, Optcal Computers, Telephones
that work,
logic, paint, On-Line-Publishing, left-handed wrenches guns, and
success.