/diy/ - Do It Yourself

[how No.719513]

A bike working on water? how can it be?


http://www.bannjongg.com/cgi-bin/sbb/sbb.cgi?&a=print&forum=95&beitrag=38

does this actually work?

we need a german for translate please and a spanish too!

[Anonymous No.719515]

>>719513
german here. The first part is basically just something like
"OMG he built a motor that runs on water. Blahblah the oil industry will collapse but before that the NSA will tell the Mossad to tell the illuminati to have him killed by a time traveller."
Basic conspiracy theory shit...

[span No.719516]

>>719515
spanish here and I see this can actually work, the inventor was a guy from Paraguay, still alive. This is form the news.

[Anonymous No.719517]

>>719513
Well.
If you look at the diagram, it just looks like it's doing electrolysis of the water for H2 and O2 and then combusting that. This really isn't anything new, but it also isn't anything terrible efficient.

[Anonymous No.719518]

>>719517
>it also isn't anything terrible efficient.
This. Use 1.21 gigawatts to make hydrogen via electrolysis, power a shitty motorbike with it. He'd be a million times better off charging a battery pack for an electric motorcycle with all the power needed to perform the electrolysis.

[edoryac No.719519]

>>719518
you don't need so much power, it can be achieved with high frequency resonance to split the water into the elements

[Anonymous No.719526]

>>719519
>high frequency resonance
Are you suggesting sound/vibrations as a serious method for this? I'm not really sure where a tuning fork would fit into this

[Anonymous No.719540]

>>719513
>A bike working on water? how can it be?
Oh for fuck's sake..

YES, you can put a device on a motorcycle that breaks water down into hydrogen and oxygen.
But, NO, it's not in any way efficient. You use more energy breaking the molecular bonds than you get out of burning the hydrogen. Don't waste your time.

[Anonymous No.719564]

>>719540
>But, NO, it's not in any way efficient. You use more energy breaking the molecular bonds than you get out of burning the hydrogen. Don't waste your time.

This

[Anonymous No.719571]

>>719526

I think he's implying you can used pulsed DC to make the process more efficient.

As a side note, I thought the resonant frequency of water was close to 2.4GHz, but apparently that's wrong and it's actually above 1THz. Good luck with that one. Either way and unsurprisingly, this thing does not "run on water". It runs on hydrogen. Novel, but not practical.

[Anonymous No.719593]

>throw some calcium carbide in the gas tank
>add a little water
>CaC2 + 2 H2O → C2H2 + Ca(OH)2
>car runs on acetylene

HURR IT RUNS ON WATER

[Anonymous No.719594]

>>719519
Can anyone actually explain what "high frequency resonance" even means? I get the feeling that conspiracy theorists believe this stupid shit because they have no idea what they are talking about.

[Anonymous No.719598]

>>719571
water, like every molecule, has different modes of excitation. Generally, microwave radiation (GHz range, like you mentioned) corresponds to rotational excitation of molecules, ie. you excite it and it spins. Higher energy corresponds to molecular vibrations between the atoms, ie. infrared light or THz-PHz range. Going higher than that gets to electronic excitations, which don't really have a physical representation corresponding to the motion of atoms in a molecule.

So you can't just say water's "resonant frequency" is one number. There are an infinite number of frequencies which will actually interact with a molecule and cause it to heat up or be electronically excited (which can also lead to bond breakage).

And pulsing DC doesn't change the fact that the processes of breaking bonds (electrolysis), and forming bonds (burning H2 and O2) have the same energetic requirements *theoretically.* In a best case scenario you break even. There is no way to split water and burn the resulting gas and gain energy from it. The best anyone can do is figure out how to split water cheaply; make it cost less than it costs to mine oil out of the ground. Electrolysis is NOT cheap, by the way.

[Anonymous No.719632]

>>719594
I was under the impression that he was talking about finding the resonance frequency of water (the frequency of vibration at which the same level of vibration will result in increasing energy in a system. Like moving your body back and forth in the tub at the same speed/rate to make a hella wave or pumping your legs with the same energy to make the swing go higher and higher) and using that to break it down into its component atoms, oxygen and hydrogen
However, as someone who replied to me mentioned, he might have been talking about pulsing the electric current to make it more efficient.

[Anonymous No.721182]

>>719513
>esoterik forum
this is not to be taken serious

>2014
>people still think hydrogen motors work with combustion.
>thermo-fucking-dynamics
there is no such thing as a perpetuum mobile and adding hydrogen and oxygen to the combustion gasses of a gasoline-combustion motor will maybe yield a more thorough combustion but no percievable extra energy.
especially not when the motor generates the energy to electrolize the water in the first place

this is one of two hho thread in diy.
go back to /x/

[Anonymous No.721186]

>>719564
Efficiency aside, what sort of MPG are we talking here and is this some sort of "runs on water BUT needs a battery lol" bullshit?

[Anonymous No.721201]

GEET engine

[Anonymous No.721228]

>2 threads in a week

someone must be behind this

[Anonymous No.722238]

>>719513
Just why is there catalyser welded onto exhaust?

[Elusive !6Fk.zjvlFM No.723059]

>>721201
as this anon pointed out, geet has had that idea for a few years.

http://rebuilding.geetinternational.com/
http://geetinternational.com/GEET%20-%20Small%20Engine%20Conversion%20Plans%5B1%5D.pdf

[Julez No.723150]

Damn, how refreshing it would be if some of these "inventions" were actually built by people with some scientific background, or at least the ability to test things like efficiency, energy input/output etc in a scientific manner. Why are all these websites look like the unorganized sites of conspiracy theorists?

If you burn hydrogen, oxygen and hydrogen atoms get combined, and release energy. To separate them, one needs exactly the same amount of energy. It's like magnets. They pull together with the same force one needs to pull them apart. No amount of resonant frequencys or magic is going to change that. Chemical energy is chemical energy, and for every reaction which gives you energy, there is a reaction is opposite direction which needs the exact same amount of energy. These are the laws of nature, and they are called laws for a reason. Burning hydrogen can never release more energy than creating hydrogen. If you wind up a spring drive, you can't get more energy out than you put in.

Water injection does actually work:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_injection_%28engine%29

But this has nothing to do with actually burning water or hydrogen.

tldr:
You can't beat science or the laws of nature.

[Anonymous No.723190]

>>719526
I'm 95% sure the other poster is thinking of this,
Just google: 42kHz water

From the links people seem to think dc pulses, AC, sound waves, or a pulsing magnetic field at that special frequency will disassociate the covalent bonds of water.

It comes up now and then in "power your car on water lol" discussions.

[Anonymous No.723270]

>>723150
>Burning hydrogen can never release more energy than creating hydrogen.

>creating hydrogen

[Anonymous No.723283]

>>723270
Yea nigger.

[Julez No.724344]

Yeah sorry english is not my natural language. So let's replace "creating hydrogen" with "separating hydrogen from oxygen" to make everybody happy :-)

[Anonymous No.724345]

>>723270
But you can create hydrogen.

It's just a proton and an electron, and both can be created.

E=mcc, biyotch.

[Anonymous No.725891]

>>723150
>if some of these "inventions" were actually built by people with some scientific background
The reason why these "inventions" are not built by people with some scientific background is because those people have some scientific background.

If he had a cheaper source of energy and split the hydrogen using that, then use the hydrogen to fuel his bike, he'd have something that works. Nothing new, mind you, and it has some PITA parts in terms of hydrogen storage, pressurization, low energy density of hydrogen, etc, but the emissions will be nice and clean.

[Anonymous No.727495]

>>719513
>http://www.taringa.net/posts/noticias/16281675/Tandil-una-moto-funciona-con-agua-como-combustible.html

[Anonymous No.728729]

so, im a welder, does that mean i can drive my bike on fucking water?!
someone pls explain me what i need to weld to where?
if someone provide me a plan i go out and build this thing right now! will provide pics

[Anonymous No.728730]

>>728729
youre a moron

[Anonymous No.729203]

>>728730
instead you explain him why he is a moron.......
i would actually quite like to se him try

[Anonymous No.730978]

>>728730
Hey man, he's a welder; he just wants to weld. Don't beat up on him for that.

[Anonymous No.730998]

>>719519
Thermodynamics dictates that you will not get more energy by burning hydrogen and oxygen that resulted from splitting water. You're literally making the same conversion both ways, from water to the component elements and back again. There is no way to get beyond break-even, and that's pretty much unattainable as well. It doesn't matter if it's split by electrolysis or by sonochemistry.

"high frequency resonance" is some retard-tier sounding pseudoscience.

[Anonymous No.731003]

>>728729
No. It's bullshit.

As a welder, though, I can tell you that if you make a water electrolysis chamber big enough to get a decent flow of hydrogen / oxygen gas flowing, you can make a super hot pin-point torch. Hotter than oxy/acetylene by far. I don't know if that's useful for welding but it's pretty cool. It's what glassblowers working with quartz sometimes use because propane/oxygen isn't hot enough to fuse quartz glass.