@BadRepublican i have re worked the idea with fiber optic cables and fresnel lenses. I have also come to the conclusion that this will be far to large with a minimal energy output. i now believe that hydrogen is not the way to go. magnet appear to have a better chance.
if you use a sealed container it would work because the outside pressures would not be inside the container and the water being electrolized would not require any extra energy to produce the HHO , thenyou have the HHO and the buyoancy of the emptied container.
In all honesty I have set this idea to the side to work on ideas involving sterling engines to power cars.
jwhong After re reading your comment you could be correct but that is something that can only be stated in the event of an actual test of the concept or looking over the proper math. Btw the energy gained is supplied by the water forcing the gas to the surface. Buoyancy is the only mechanical way we currently know of to reverse the direction of the force of gravity.
This will not work. It violates conservation of energy.
You will find that the amount of energy that can be extracted from the buoyant force of the rising gas is not enough to replace the gas in the next cycle of the system.
You are not taking into account the chemical reaction and the loss of water over time; this is not a perpetual motion machine. There is entropy within the system so this is not over unity. The hydrogen and oxygen released from the water depletes the water supply. In other words you are wrong! Look over the design again and you will notice your mistake.
From what I can tell the volume of oxygen created is approximately ½ the volume of the hydrogen if this is correct, the numbers below show the correct forces at depth.
68,921.208 lbs. at the surface
34,460.604 lbs at ten feet
17,230.302 lbs at twenty feet
8,615.151 lbs at thirty feet
4,307.5755 lbs at forty feet
2,153.78775 lbs at fifty feet.
I was off by more then just a little but oh well. Far better to drastically underestimate then overestimate
ya this came up some time ago, and so we did some testing. The amount of electricity needed to make 8 litres of hho at the surface is the same amount it takes to make 1litre at 30 feet, then find the work function of the lifting force, and you'll find there is a deficeit, at least for now, until hho is produced in a more eff. manor. We were thinking more around 3atms down to get a fair amount of work out of it. The good thing is you can still burn the gas once its at the top to make electricity.
mielectric1 once the hydrogen has been removed from the water how dose that effect the water and will the hydrogen be replaced somehow for the same process to happen again at a later date
it changes h20 into h, h, o, all separate, to get h20 again just ignite it. so if you had 10cc of water and ran it in an electrolyzer, there would be no water after a while, just hydrogen and oxygen gas, burn it and get back water, electrolyze it and get gas again.
well if it does, it is the half life of the subatomic particles, So I would have to ask what is the lifespan of hydrogen. If an electron breaks down, what does it breakdown into? Energy? And if that energy is the same as the electron, then how do you get the electron back, If we are not able to do that, then something was lost, and that violates conservation. So is conservation correct, or energy form nothing? Or at least nothing we observe right now.
Youtube and other video sharing websites have removed the multiple reposting of my video. Total view count over 1000. (I did not repost them; others did, to share the idea) Getting people to watch and understand this concept was and is paramount. So. I the original creator of this video give anyone the full permission that I am legally capable of giving, to repost this anywhere you wish. If that was the problem that was encountered. If not can someone explain to me why they removed the copies?
The first question you should try to answer is - does it take more electricity to boil water to obtain high-pressure steam than to use electrolysis to get high-pressure hydrogen gas? If the answer is No, then you are better off just using a steam engine. If the answer is Yes, then you are really onto something!!! Keep in mind that with high-pressure hydrogen you can use pressure force to generate motion, and then you can still ignite the HHO gas and get more energy from it ;-)
Good idea. That is one of the reasons that I posted the concept instead of building it myself. I believe that a collaborative effort can accomplish the task of getting the overall concept working faster then an individual. Second hydrogen is 4 times lighter then air and I did not include that into the calculations. Third I actually have no type of engineering degree whatsoever so I can only guess at where to start when it comes to doing those calculations.
the water outside the container wll not affect the water inside the container and thee will be no extra energy needed to make the HHO
BadRepublican 1 year ago
@BadRepublican i have re worked the idea with fiber optic cables and fresnel lenses. I have also come to the conclusion that this will be far to large with a minimal energy output. i now believe that hydrogen is not the way to go. magnet appear to have a better chance.
WhatIsGod 1 year ago
i cant write a long responce so ill keep them short , for some reason the long replies dont get published
BadRepublican 1 year ago
if you use a sealed container it would work because the outside pressures would not be inside the container and the water being electrolized would not require any extra energy to produce the HHO , thenyou have the HHO and the buyoancy of the emptied container.
BadRepublican 1 year ago
if you use a sealed container it would work
BadRepublican 1 year ago
cant reply to this video
BadRepublican 1 year ago
In all honesty I have set this idea to the side to work on ideas involving sterling engines to power cars.
jwhong After re reading your comment you could be correct but that is something that can only be stated in the event of an actual test of the concept or looking over the proper math. Btw the energy gained is supplied by the water forcing the gas to the surface. Buoyancy is the only mechanical way we currently know of to reverse the direction of the force of gravity.
WhatIsGod 3 years ago
This will not work. It violates conservation of energy.
You will find that the amount of energy that can be extracted from the buoyant force of the rising gas is not enough to replace the gas in the next cycle of the system.
jwhong 3 years ago
You are not taking into account the chemical reaction and the loss of water over time; this is not a perpetual motion machine. There is entropy within the system so this is not over unity. The hydrogen and oxygen released from the water depletes the water supply. In other words you are wrong! Look over the design again and you will notice your mistake.
WhatIsGod 3 years ago
From what I can tell the volume of oxygen created is approximately ½ the volume of the hydrogen if this is correct, the numbers below show the correct forces at depth.
68,921.208 lbs. at the surface
34,460.604 lbs at ten feet
17,230.302 lbs at twenty feet
8,615.151 lbs at thirty feet
4,307.5755 lbs at forty feet
2,153.78775 lbs at fifty feet.
I was off by more then just a little but oh well. Far better to drastically underestimate then overestimate
WhatIsGod 3 years ago
ya this came up some time ago, and so we did some testing. The amount of electricity needed to make 8 litres of hho at the surface is the same amount it takes to make 1litre at 30 feet, then find the work function of the lifting force, and you'll find there is a deficeit, at least for now, until hho is produced in a more eff. manor. We were thinking more around 3atms down to get a fair amount of work out of it. The good thing is you can still burn the gas once its at the top to make electricity.
mielectric1 3 years ago
mielectric1 once the hydrogen has been removed from the water how dose that effect the water and will the hydrogen be replaced somehow for the same process to happen again at a later date
captn1pugwash 3 years ago
it changes h20 into h, h, o, all separate, to get h20 again just ignite it. so if you had 10cc of water and ran it in an electrolyzer, there would be no water after a while, just hydrogen and oxygen gas, burn it and get back water, electrolyze it and get gas again.
mielectric1 3 years ago
right i see thankyou for that much appriciated
captn1pugwash 3 years ago
What is the life span of this cycle? Entropy has to kick in sometime.
WhatIsGod 3 years ago
well if it does, it is the half life of the subatomic particles, So I would have to ask what is the lifespan of hydrogen. If an electron breaks down, what does it breakdown into? Energy? And if that energy is the same as the electron, then how do you get the electron back, If we are not able to do that, then something was lost, and that violates conservation. So is conservation correct, or energy form nothing? Or at least nothing we observe right now.
mielectric1 3 years ago
Youtube and other video sharing websites have removed the multiple reposting of my video. Total view count over 1000. (I did not repost them; others did, to share the idea) Getting people to watch and understand this concept was and is paramount. So. I the original creator of this video give anyone the full permission that I am legally capable of giving, to repost this anywhere you wish. If that was the problem that was encountered. If not can someone explain to me why they removed the copies?
WhatIsGod 3 years ago
Great Idea
Thanks
Jack
dulcajack 3 years ago
The first question you should try to answer is - does it take more electricity to boil water to obtain high-pressure steam than to use electrolysis to get high-pressure hydrogen gas? If the answer is No, then you are better off just using a steam engine. If the answer is Yes, then you are really onto something!!! Keep in mind that with high-pressure hydrogen you can use pressure force to generate motion, and then you can still ignite the HHO gas and get more energy from it ;-)
h2generation 3 years ago
Good idea. That is one of the reasons that I posted the concept instead of building it myself. I believe that a collaborative effort can accomplish the task of getting the overall concept working faster then an individual. Second hydrogen is 4 times lighter then air and I did not include that into the calculations. Third I actually have no type of engineering degree whatsoever so I can only guess at where to start when it comes to doing those calculations.
WhatIsGod 3 years ago
interesting idea
m3sca1 3 years ago