It runs on water...

enkrypt3d · 16 June 2008

http://www.runyourcarwithwater.com/

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AO15VGtKZo0&hl=en"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AO15VGtKZo0&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Stanley Myer was mysteriously murdered a few years ago... This case reminds me of Tesla.

I want to buy an old civic and convert it with this sytem. Anyone heard of this? I'm serious I want to do it!

***Flame suit on***

Some other methods:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jRb5Me3rALA&hl=en"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jRb5Me3rALA&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hlrxueyulPc&hl=en"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hlrxueyulPc&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2Zn2tGyGlTw&hl=en"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2Zn2tGyGlTw&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Also if you are not mechanically proficient, you can buy the pre-made system:

http://hydrogentap.com/hydrogentap_001.htm

sptrader · 16 June 2008

Here is a video of a car running on water- separates the water into hydrogen and oxygen to be used as fuel. It's for real.

http://uk.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=84561

enkrypt3d · 16 June 2008

sptrader said:
Here is a video of a car running on water- separates the water into hydrogen and oxygen to be used as fuel. It's for real.

http://uk.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=84561

Yes I think it is real... There are certain ways to get more hydrogen out of the water and I think Stanley Myers had it right. The rods vs the steel plates work better from what I've seen.

I wonder if you put a few of these in a hybrid, how much more MPG you'd get?

da3dalus · 17 June 2008

Reminds me of the movie "chain reaction"... same concept... the inventor in that movie got murdered as well... ironic no?

Carguy! · 18 June 2008

It is relatively easy to determine the amount of power put into a device and the amount of energy released in the form of hydrogen. It seems strange to me that isn't mentioned in any of the reports I watched above.

The one that burns salt water is pretty funny, they just keep talking about how cheap and abundant salt water is, but make no mention about how much power is required to generate the radio waves needed to cause the reaction.

Would anyone think it was amazing if I built a motor that ran on straight water? All you would have to do is have a tube you put water into and then placed it in a microwave and capture the steam from it boiling as it heats up to power an engine. Of course the amount of energy produced wouldn't be nearly as much as the microwave needed to sustain the reaction.

Or you could use wood or coal to burn and heat up the water. Oh ya that has already been done for many years.

If someone truly has a device that produces more power than it take in, it would be very easy to prove by many scientists around the world.

enkrypt3d · 18 June 2008

Carguy! said:
It is relatively easy to determine the amount of power put into a device and the amount of energy released in the form of hydrogen. It seems strange to me that isn't mentioned in any of the reports I watched above.

The one that burns salt water is pretty funny, they just keep talking about how cheap and abundant salt water is, but make no mention about how much power is required to generate the radio waves needed to cause the reaction.

Would anyone think it was amazing if I built a motor that ran on straight water? All you would have to do is have a tube you put water into and then placed it in a microwave and capture the steam from it boiling as it heats up to power an engine. Of course the amount of energy produced wouldn't be nearly as much as the microwave needed to sustain the reaction.

Or you could use wood or coal to burn and heat up the water. Oh ya that has already been done for many years.

If someone truly has a device that produces more power than it take in, it would be very easy to prove by many scientists around the world.

Its not as easy as you might think to 'prove'....

Many inventors have lost their life mysteriously... If you were a big oil company, and you saw an regular combustion engine that runs on water without any major modification, wouldn't you be concerned?

The big oil companies are scared to death of new technology. These inventors' deaths prove theres something to it.

The first video shows he's only putting in half an amp @ 20K cycles (which is not a lot of power) that makes the water produce X amount of hydrogen...

If we had a Honda FCX, and hooked one or an array of these guys up to the fuel tank, you could make the car "Run" on water.

I don't find any of these technologies hard to believe. They are fairly simple.

I just wish that they would be brought to market quicker. But that doesn't seem likely any time soon. :redface: These engines are not running on the steam, they are fracturing the water into oxygen and hydrogen, then the hydrogen burns just like any other fuel. You don't need a microwave or wood to make steam to do this.

Carguy! · 18 June 2008

enkrypt3d said:
Its not as easy as you might think to 'prove'....

Many inventors have lost their life mysteriously... If you were a big oil company, and you saw an regular combustion engine that runs on water without any major modification, wouldn't you be concerned?

The big oil companies are scared to death of new technology. These inventors' deaths prove theres something to it.

The first video shows he's only putting in half an amp @ 20K cycles (which is not a lot of power) that makes the water produce X amount of hydrogen...

If we had a Honda FCX, and hooked one or an array of these guys up to the fuel tank, you could make the car "Run" on water.

I don't find any of these technologies hard to believe. They are fairly simple.

I just wish that they would be brought to market quicker. But that doesn't seem likely any time soon. :redface: These engines are not running on the steam, they are fracturing the water into oxygen and hydrogen, then the hydrogen burns just like any other fuel. You don't need a microwave or wood to make steam to do this.

They have been able to extact hydrogen from water for quite a while it isn't rocket science, the problem is it take more power than the hydrogen produces.

The reason that none of the above mentioned devices are not in the market isn't because some big oil company is killing all the inventors, or that no company wants to manufacture a device that would make them trillions of dollars, it is because the above processes don't produce more energy than they take in.

BTW .5 amps at 20,000 volts is a LOT of power and I am sure much more than the hyrdrogen produced is capable of generating. That is 10,000 watts of power enough to power an entire house.

enkrypt3d · 18 June 2008

Carguy! said:
They have been able to extact hydrogen from water for quite a while it isn't rocket science, the problem is it take more power than the hydrogen produces.

The reason that none of the above mentioned devices are not in the market isn't because some big oil company is killing all the inventors, or that no company wants to manufacture a device that would make them trillions of dollars, it is because the above processes don't produce more energy than they take in.

BTW .5 amps at 20,000 volts is a LOT of power and I am sure much more than the hyrdrogen produced is capable of generating. That is 10,000 watts of power enough to power an entire house.

I never said 20K volts...

And I never said that making hydrogen from water is new... I'm not talking about your run of the mill electrolysis... If you would have watched all those videos you would know there is more to it than that.

Even the combustion engine had its neigh sayers... Search on youtube for more videos about this. It shows people doing this with a car battery. Obviously a car battery can't generate "20,000 volts".... not sure where you got that from.

You can't tell me that over unity is not possible.

But that really isn't the topic here... To make a car run on water does not mean it has to be making more power than what is being put in...

Watch the full movie and then get back to me

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...&q=it+runs+on+water&ei=kFdYSPKGG5DeqgOkxdDbDg

Carguy! · 18 June 2008

enkrypt3d said:
I never said 20K volts...

And I never said that making hydrogen from water is new... I'm not talking about your run of the mill electrolysis... If you would have watched all those videos you would know there is more to it than that.

Even the combustion engine had its neigh sayers... Search on youtube for more videos about this. It shows people doing this with a car battery. Obviously a car battery can't generate "20,000 volts".... not sure where you got that from.

You can't tell me that over unity is not possible.

Yes, a car battery can easily produce 20K volts, it just takes a transformer. Car batteries store a lot of power, if you look at electric cars that charge overnight and have a range of 200 miles with a dozen or so batteries you can see that they can store a lot of power. It says in the first video that it requires HIGH voltage, since your 20K cycles doesn't make much sense, I thought you were referring to the voltage required.

Do you not see how crazy it is to think that there are all of these videos, people selling pamphlets and yet big oil companies are stopping people from hearing about this new technology?

If you want to believe that this is a better way of powering a vehicle, I will make you a deal. Buy the pamphlet that you have listed above and modify a car to use this new system and if you can produce more power than is put into the system I will pay you for your new car and all related costs associated with the process. If not you can post here so that others won't buy the pamphlets and waste their time.

"But that really isn't the topic here... To make a car run on water does not mean it has to be making more power than what is being put in..."

Yes, that is exactly the point. If I have to put in more power than I get out from the Hydrogen it doesn't make a lot of sense to implement this new method now does it? I could just charge batteries using the electricity I get and run without wasting all that water.

enkrypt3d · 18 June 2008

Carguy! said:
"But that really isn't the topic here... To make a car run on water does not mean it has to be making more power than what is being put in..."

Yes, that is exactly the point. If I have to put in more power than I get out from the Hydrogen it doesn't make a lot of sense to implement this new method now does it? I could just charge batteries using the electricity I get and run without wasting all that water.

Please watch the video I linked in my last post...

Now you're trying to use circular logic here. What exactly are you trying to prove? That you can't run a car on water? Its obvious that it works. Its not an argument as to if theres is over-unity occurring is it? Or do you think that its impossible to run a car on water b/c it takes too much power to do electrolysis?

And how can you surmise that there is more power going in thats coming out? have you built one of these hydrogen fuel cells and taken measurements? Didnt think so. And nor have I. I'm just trying to share the info.

All you are doing here is taking what I've said and replying with "oh thats not rocket science"... really?

My point in this thread is that you can have FREE Energy... I'm not 100% convinced that you can get more energy than you put in....... just yet. But I think we are getting there.

Carguy! · 18 June 2008

enkrypt3d said:
Please watch the video I linked in my last post...

Now you're trying to use circular logic here. What exactly are you trying to prove? That you can't run a car on water? Its obvious that it works. Its not an argument as to if theres is over-unity occurring is it? Or do you think that its impossible to run a car on water b/c it takes too much power to do electrolysis?

And how can you surmise that there is more power going in thats coming out? have you built one of these hydrogen fuel cells and taken measurements? Didnt think so. And nor have I. I'm just trying to share the info.

All you are doing here is taking what I've said and replying with "oh thats not rocket science"... really?

My point in this thread is that you can have FREE Energy... I'm not 100% convinced that you can get more energy than you put in....... just yet. But I think we are getting there.

I watched your entire video and would like to have that hour of my life back!
Why is it so difficult for you to see that all of these claims can easily be proven or disproven in a matter of minutes? Everyone that has ever been tested has been disproved. I think it would be great if they really were able to generate more power than we put in.

If someone had a device that could put out more power than was put into it, all they would have to do to dispel all doubt is have it run a generator that fed back into itself and continue running. NO ONE has ever done this, but you continue to think it is possible and that the Big oil companies are repressing this from the public.

Why is it so obvious that a car can run on water? Show me one documented case where there wasn't more power needed to extract the hydrogen to accomplish this than what would be needed to power the car directly. BTW I have generated hydrogen from water and I am very familiar with the process. How do you get FREE energy?

You want to modify a Honda Civic to use this great technology then go for it! I truly hope you prove me wrong!

Common Sense is anything but common!

Sig · 18 June 2008

Carguy! said:
If someone had a device that could put out more power than was put into it, all they would have to do to dispel all doubt is have it run a generator that fed back into itself and continue running. NO ONE has ever done this, but you continue to think it is possible and that the Big oil companies are repressing this from the public.

That's the really the key point here. If a device with those properties did exist, countless would climb over eachother to steal the technology rather than repress it. For that matter, governments would fight to steal the technology. A genie that big simply cannot be kept in the bottle.

Perhaps this technology is getting closer to being viable and I pray it does in the very near future.

enkrypt3d · 18 June 2008

Sig said:
That's the really the key point here. If a device with those properties did exist, countless would climb over eachother to steal the technology rather than repress it. For that matter, governments would fight to steal the technology. A genie that big simply cannot be kept in the bottle.

Perhaps this technology is getting closer to being viable and I pray it does in the very near future.

Exactly. that does not mean its not possible. Who knows what kind of technology the gov't is working on?

Why did all these inventors die suddenly?

To me, there is obviously something to this. There are news stories about people running cars and lawn mowers on water all over the world. Of course we cant always believe what we read / see.

Carguy, That video is not "MINE"... I'm just sharing information here. I think you're a bit too close-minded to participate in this thread. Just because you do not believe it does not mean its not possible. If you can disprove it in a matter of minutes then why don't you?

The FREE part comes in the fact that you could possibly run a car on water. You can obtain water for free from the ocean or from rain water. What part of that don't you understand?

Please go spew your nonsense on some other thread thanks.

Big_D · 18 June 2008

Sorry, I have to go with Carguy. You cannot simply convert water to Hydrogen and Oxygen. It still takes too much energy...don't believe whatever your seeing on video.

Not sure what to say about the irony of the inventors sudden passing. Perhaps inventing is hazardous to your health.

NSXrunner · 18 June 2008

Can't find it but I think they did an episode on Mythbusters where they had a similar experiment. I just remember something in the engine going poof. Had to do with Hydrogen, but cant for the life of me remember if it was a similar "extract the H from water" set up.

enkrypt3d · 18 June 2008

Big_D said:
Sorry, I have to go with Carguy. You cannot simply convert water to Hydrogen and Oxygen. It still takes too much energy...don't believe whatever your seeing on video.

Not sure what to say about the irony of the inventors sudden passing. Perhaps inventing is hazardous to your health.

Gun shots are hazardous to your health too..

Theres obviously nothing I can post here that will change the minds of stubborn people like carguy etc...

What would it take to make you believe in the possibility?

http://www.rexresearch.com/meyerhy/meyerhy.htm

Big_D · 18 June 2008

enkrypt3d said:
Gun shots are hazardous to your health too..

LOL, sorry nothing personal. Don't SHOOT!!!:smile:

This is more promising...growing algea that makes the ingredients for fuel.

http://www.valcent.net/i/misc/Vertigro/index.html

enkrypt3d · 18 June 2008

Big_D said:
LOL, sorry nothing personal. Don't SHOOT!!!:smile:

This is more promising...growing algea that makes the ingredients for fuel.

http://www.valcent.net/i/misc/Vertigro/index.html

lol i wasn't gonna shoot you i mean Stanley got shot...

And yea there are many ways to generate fuel

Also check these patents out:

"Numerous processes have been proposed for separating a water molecule into its elemental hydrogen and oxygen components. Electrolysis is one such process. Other processes are described in United States patents such as 4,344,831; 4,184,931; 4,023,545; 3,980,053; and Patent Cooperation Treaty application No. PCT/US80/1362, published 30 April, 1981. "

http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT3980053
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT4344831
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT6790324

To get patents you have to be able to demonstrate that what you are patenting actually works. Want proof? Read and do your research.

http://www.icestuff.com/~energy21/productiongas.htm
http://www.rexresearch.com/meyerhy/2067735.htm

More to read about ^

Big_D · 18 June 2008

enkrypt3d said:
lol i wasn't gonna shoot you i mean Stanley got shot...

And yea there are many ways to generate fuel

Also check these patents out:

"Numerous processes have been proposed for separating a water molecule into its elemental hydrogen and oxygen components. Electrolysis is one such process. Other processes are described in United States patents such as 4,344,831; 4,184,931; 4,023,545; 3,980,053; and Patent Cooperation Treaty application No. PCT/US80/1362, published 30 April, 1981. "

http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT3980053
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT4344831
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT6790324

To get patents you have to be able to demonstrate that what you are patenting actually works. Want proof? Read and do your research.

Okay good, I can still drive home through LA without worrying about keeping my eyes peeled for a Midnight Pearl NSX :wink:

You still need electricity for electrolysis though and the amount of energy needed for that is more than you get from the two separated components.

enkrypt3d · 18 June 2008

Big_D said:
Okay good, I can still drive home through LA without worrying about keeping my eyes peeled for a Midnight Pearl NSX :wink:

You still need electricity for electrolysis though and the amount of energy needed for that is more than you get from the two separated components.

haha yea man u dont have to worry about me

da3dalus · 18 June 2008

Yea all i was gonna say is that if it has a patent, its gotta have proven to do what it claims to do...

enkrypt3d · 18 June 2008

da3dalus said:
Yea all i was gonna say is that if it has a patent, its gotta have proven to do what it claims to do...

exactly... thanks for chiming in! :smile:

I'm very interested to see this technology power the world within the next 20 years. Face it, oil is on its way out.... :biggrin: bad habits are hard to break... especially when the oil companies are making $40B in 3 months!

Carguy! · 18 June 2008

enkrypt3d said:
Exactly. that does not mean its not possible. Who knows what kind of technology the gov't is working on?

Why did all these inventors die suddenly?

To me, there is obviously something to this. There are news stories about people running cars and lawn mowers on water all over the world. Of course we cant always believe what we read / see.

Carguy, That video is not "MINE"... I'm just sharing information here. I think you're a bit too close-minded to participate in this thread. Just because you do not believe it does not mean its not possible. If you can disprove it in a matter of minutes then why don't you?

The FREE part comes in the fact that you could possibly run a car on water. You can obtain water for free from the ocean or from rain water. What part of that don't you understand?

Please go spew your nonsense on some other thread thanks.

When you start a thread and ask others for their input, it doesn't make much sense to call others who don't share your view spewing nonsense. The funny thing is I am stating what 99.99% of the scientific community is also saying but I guess we are all spewing nonsense.

I have a very open and logical mind and I like to look at things with this in mind. You seem to believe everything you see or read even if it doesn't make any sense.

How about this I will buy the a device that will run on water and produce power without any other form of energy being added for $1,000,000. Find one and I will buy it today. If you can get it for less, just keep the rest as a finders fee.

All of the patents that you pointed to use various forms of electrolosis to create the hydrogen from the water. This involves putting in more energy than the hydrogen is able to produce. As I stated before you could just use that energy to power the car directly and it would be much more efficient.

I have a pretty reasonable reason why these guys were murdered, they probably had investors that were lied to believing that they could generate hyrdrogen from water without anything else, if you look at these patents you will see this is simply not true.

The injector idea is a neat idea, it injects water directly into the injector with an electrical pulse and then feeds the hydrogen directly into the engine. This allows you to create hydrogen as needed and you don't need to store a very flamable gas near your engine. This also allows you to use existing engines without switching over to electric motors. Theoretically this would cut back on emmisions at the car level, but you would have to add quite a few batteries to the car to generate the electricity needed and when those ran out you would have to plug it in somewhere to be able to drive again.

It is easy to test to see if these systems put out more power than they take in if you have access to them, I don't or I could quite easily measure the power in and the amount of hydrogen produced and see if they put out more power than they take in.

As I stated earlier if someone could do this, all they would have to do is use the hyrdrogen to run a generator that feeds the electricity back into the device and it would be proven. A self contained device that could run only on water would be the wholy grail and the design would be worth trillions of dollars.

Just try and use some common sense and try to read between the lines on some of these news stories.

enkrypt3d · 18 June 2008

Carguy! said:
When you start a thread and ask others for their input, it doesn't make much sense to call others who don't share your view spewing nonsense. The funny thing is I am stating what 99.99% of the scientific community is also saying but I guess we are all spewing nonsense.

I have a very open and logical mind and I like to look at things with this in mind. You seem to believe everything you see or read even if it doesn't make any sense.

How about this I will buy the a device that will run on water and produce power without any other form of energy being added for $1,000,000. Find one and I will buy it today. If you can get it for less, just keep the rest as a finders fee.

All of the patents that you pointed to use various forms of electrolosis to create the hydrogen from the water. This involves putting in more energy than the hydrogen is able to produce. As I stated before you could just use that energy to power the car directly and it would be much more efficient.

I have a pretty reasonable reason why these guys were murdered, they probably had investors that were lied to believing that they could generate hyrdrogen from water without anything else, if you look at these patents you will see this is simply not true.

The injector idea is a neat idea, it injects water directly into the injector with an electrical pulse and then feeds the hydrogen directly into the engine. This allows you to create hydrogen as needed and you don't need to store a very flamable gas near your engine. This also allows you to use existing engines without switching over to electric motors. Theoretically this would cut back on emmisions at the car level, but you would have to add quite a few batteries to the car to generate the electricity needed and when those ran out you would have to plug it in somewhere to be able to drive again.

It is easy to test to see if these systems put out more power than they take in if you have access to them, I don't or I could quite easily measure the power in and the amount of hydrogen produced and see if they put out more power than they take in.

As I stated earlier if someone could do this, all they would have to do is use the hyrdrogen to run a generator that feeds the electricity back into the device and it would be proven. A self contained device that could run only on water would be the wholy grail and the design would be worth trillions of dollars.

Just try and use some common sense and try to read between the lines on some of these news stories.

Saying that I have no common sense and saying that I believe everything I read is pure nonsense.

You're obviously not as open minded as you claim to be otherwise you wouldn't be attacking me personally.

Just b/c 99.9% of a given group of people are saying one thing, does not make it true does it? Safety in numbers right?

Again theres nothing that I can say or show you that will change your mind. I was hoping to have a constructive discussion here but unfortunately you're too bent on making me look like a fool. :frown:

"
As I stated earlier if someone could do this, all they would have to do is use the hyrdrogen to run a generator that feeds the electricity back into the device and it would be proven. A self contained device that could run only on water would be the wholy grail and the design would be worth trillions of dollars."

EXACTLY! If you were making $40B every 3 months and someone invented something that could take that away, wouldn't you have the means and the desire to suppress that as much as possible? You're all about common sense. This is pure logic here.

Carguy! · 19 June 2008

enkrypt3d said:
Saying that I have no common sense and saying that I believe everything I read is pure nonsense.

You're obviously not as open minded as you claim to be otherwise you wouldn't be attacking me personally.

Just b/c 99.9% of a given group of people are saying one thing, does not make it true does it? Safety in numbers right?

Again theres nothing that I can say or show you that will change your mind. I was hoping to have a constructive discussion here but unfortunately you're too bent on making me look like a fool. :frown:

"
As I stated earlier if someone could do this, all they would have to do is use the hyrdrogen to run a generator that feeds the electricity back into the device and it would be proven. A self contained device that could run only on water would be the wholy grail and the design would be worth trillions of dollars."

EXACTLY! If you were making $40B every 3 months and someone invented something that could take that away, wouldn't you have the means and the desire to suppress that as much as possible? You're all about common sense. This is pure logic here.

I never said you didn't have common sense, I said to try and use some. I also stated for you to not believe everything you read. These were not personal attacks, if you thought they were I am sorry. I also wasn't trying to make you look like an idiot, I was just trying to let you know if these inventions had any true value it would be easy to prove to the scientific community. Some of the inventions might be a much better way to generate hydrogen from water by using a more efficient means of hydrolysis. I was stating that this still needs electricity and that you can't run off of water without some other means of energy.

Here are some questions for you:

Do you believe that there is currently a device where you just add water and get energy output without any other energy being added?

If you answered yes to the above question, is the information available to build this type of device or puchase a completed unit?

If you answered yes to both questions, do you think that you wouldn't see thousands, if not millions of people building or buying these devices right away?

Do you really think that the oil companys or the government could stop the public from discovering about these devices?

I know I would be the first in line to buy these devices for my cars, house, etc... I love new technology and if this was available I would try it immediately.

It runs on water...

Similar threads