TheEEStory.com

News, Reviews and Discussion of EEStor Inc.
HHO Generator? « Open Forum « News, Reviews & Misc
Tue, 28 Feb 2012, 9:47pm #31
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

Pretty sad, Prof Neilson, when Supamark can correct you on a science issue!

You need to up your game several notches here. People have been trying to fool Mother Nature for centuries or even millennia. But you can't create a perpetual motion machine, no matter how hard you try. No matter how cleverly one tries, it's impossible to get around the laws of thermodynamics.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline


Tue, 28 Feb 2012, 9:56pm #32
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

seslaprime wrote:

...H is added as a catalyst to get more combustion with less fuel.

...

Lens, with all due respect, I dont think you know enough about it

Sesla, do yourself a big favor: Quit writing as if you know what you're talking about re science and technical subjects, and go read some books on basic science.

As it is, you don't even know enough to realize how much you're embarrassing yourself. Not just here, but repeatedly, in many threads on this forum.

And you should read up on the Dunning-Kruger effect, too. The Wikipedia article is probably way over your head... uses lots of big words.

But here's a link to an article that is dumbed down a bit, so if you use a dictionary to look up the words you don't understand, perhaps you can grasp the meaning:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

Now run along and play in your sandbox, kid.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 1:16am #33
supamark
EEcclesiastical
Supa_avatar
Registered: Dec, 2009
Last visit: Sat, 17 Mar 2012
Posts: 1240

Lensman wrote:

Pretty sad, Prof Neilson, when I can't be bothered to even put a smiley face in when I'm being a douchebag about something I don't understand.

There, fixed it for you.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 2:41am #34
Prof Neilson
EESUrient
Skiracer2
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Wed, 03 Apr 2013
Posts: 1528

Synopsis: Optical Device is More Than 100% Efficient

APS/Alan Stonebraker
Thermoelectrically Pumped Light-Emitting Diodes Operating above Unity Efficiency
Parthiban Santhanam, Dodd Joseph Gray, Jr., and Rajeev J. Ram
Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 097403 (2012)
Published February 27, 2012
Physicists have known for decades that, in principle, a semiconductor device can emit more light power than it consumes electrically. Experiments published in Physical Review Letters finally demonstrate this in practice, though at a small scale.

The energy absorbed by an electron as it traverses a light-emitting diode is equal to its charge times the applied voltage. But if the electron produces light, the emitted photon energy, which is determined by the semiconductor band gap, can be much larger. Usually, however, most electrons create no photon, so the average light power is less than the electrical power consumed. Researchers aiming to increase the power efficiency have generally tried to boost the number of photons per electron. But Parthiban Santhanam and co-workers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge took a gentler approach, achieving power enhancement even though less than one electron in a thousand produced a photon.

The researchers chose a light-emitting diode with a small band gap, and applied such small voltages that it acted like a normal resistor. With each halving of the voltage, they reduced the electrical power by a factor of 4, even though the number of electrons, and thus the light power emitted, dropped by only a factor of 2. Decreasing the input power to 30 picowatts, the team detected nearly 70 picowatts of emitted light. The extra energy comes from lattice vibrations, so the device should be cooled slightly, as occurs in thermoelectric coolers.

These initial results provide too little light for most applications. However, heating the light emitters increases their output power and efficiency, meaning they are like thermodynamic heat engines, except they come with the fast electrical control of modern semiconductor devices. – Don Monroe

http://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/Phy...


All I want for Christmas is a Graphene / Ionic Liquid Electrical Generator.

PNeilson@NeilsonLabs.com

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 2:43am #35
Prof Neilson
EESUrient
Skiracer2
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Wed, 03 Apr 2013
Posts: 1528

Gee Lens

30 picowatts in 70 picowatts out - at MIT.

70 is bigger than 30

And the material got cooler.

More out than in!

I will leave out the gratuitous insult I thought up. It would be like beating a child.


All I want for Christmas is a Graphene / Ionic Liquid Electrical Generator.

PNeilson@NeilsonLabs.com

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 2:53am #36
Prof Neilson
EESUrient
Skiracer2
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Wed, 03 Apr 2013
Posts: 1528

supamark

so if the 70 picowatts were able to split water instead of making a photon .......

well you get the picture even if a picowatt is pretty small.

They got work out of no temperature differential.

Or if the 70 picowatts went to a ultra efficient solar cell of 50%

30 picowatts of electricity in producing 35 picowatts of electricity out

From MIT.

Laws of thermodynamics just broke. Like I have been saying they will break in chat for a few months now.

Energy is still conserved. But heat flowed up hill in a reverse heat engine. Work gets done and temperature decreases. And I guess entropy decreased - but that needs a bit more study on my part. I forget what happens to the entropy of a cooling material.


All I want for Christmas is a Graphene / Ionic Liquid Electrical Generator.

PNeilson@NeilsonLabs.com

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 8:05am #37
seslaprime
EESUrient
Eagle
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Tue, 27 Nov 2012
Posts: 2256

Lensman wrote:

seslaprime wrote:

...H is added as a catalyst to get more combustion with less fuel.

...

Lens, with all due respect, I dont think you know enough about it

Sesla, do yourself a big favor: Quit writing as if you know what you're talking about re science and technical subjects, and go read some books on basic science.

As it is, you don't even know enough to realize how much you're embarrassing yourself. Not just here, but repeatedly, in many threads on this forum.

And you should read up on the Dunning-Kruger effect, too. The Wikipedia article is probably way over your head... uses lots of big words.

But here's a link to an article that is dumbed down a bit, so if you use a dictionary to look up the words you don't understand, perhaps you can grasp the meaning:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

Now run along and play in your sandbox, kid.

Lol, Dude, I am probably twice your age. And you are the one who does not understand any science. And you do not even have a clue as to the point I was making.

I will forgo the normal insult as well, since I am above that mentality.

good luck with your newly found brilliance.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 8:34am #38
seslaprime
EESUrient
Eagle
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Tue, 27 Nov 2012
Posts: 2256

Lensman wrote:

Pretty sad, Prof Neilson, when Supamark can correct you on a science issue!

You need to up your game several notches here. People have been trying to fool Mother Nature for centuries or even millennia. But you can't create a perpetual motion machine, no matter how hard you try. No matter how cleverly one tries, it's impossible to get around the laws of thermodynamics.

No, what is sad is you being in a science thread but cant comment on any science theories of your own. The only time I ever see you comment is with someone elses explanation, and it is clear you do not comprehend half of it.

It is you lensman, who needs to "up your Game" as you put it.

calling names and insulting people on topics you couldnt possibly know anything about is how child minded people act.

You need to seriously Think before you speak. Your ego is overpowering your mind.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 8:52am #39
cechilders
EESUrient
Registered: Dec, 2008
Last visit: Mon, 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 1815

Prof Neilson wrote:

Gee Lens

30 picowatts in 70 picowatts out - at MIT.

70 is bigger than 30

And the material got cooler.

More out than in!

I will leave out the gratuitous insult I thought up. It would be like beating a child.

Explain please, isn't this s little simplistic? Based on simple in/out power would not atom bombs be considered over unity? There is much more power out than in. Is this a case of true over unity or we do not yet understand what is happening? There was a temperature change. Maybe the power difference has to do with the temp change not over unity. I'm a little reluctant to call over unity without a complete understanding of what is happening.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 10:23am #40
Prof Neilson
EESUrient
Skiracer2
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Wed, 03 Apr 2013
Posts: 1528

cechilders - the temperature dropped.

So its not overunity in the free energy sense. The cycle will halt when the temp hits 0K.

But it is overunity in a heat flow sense. Its not hot to cold extracting work. Its cold to hot extracting work.

So the first law of thermo holds. The other laws are inoperative.


All I want for Christmas is a Graphene / Ionic Liquid Electrical Generator.

PNeilson@NeilsonLabs.com

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 10:43am #41
supamark
EEcclesiastical
Supa_avatar
Registered: Dec, 2009
Last visit: Sat, 17 Mar 2012
Posts: 1240

Prof Neilson wrote:

supamark

so if the 70 picowatts were able to split water instead of making a photon .......

well you get the picture even if a picowatt is pretty small.

They got work out of no temperature differential.

Or if the 70 picowatts went to a ultra efficient solar cell of 50%

30 picowatts of electricity in producing 35 picowatts of electricity out

From MIT.

Laws of thermodynamics just broke. Like I have been saying they will break in chat for a few months now.

Energy is still conserved. But heat flowed up hill in a reverse heat engine. Work gets done and temperature decreases. And I guess entropy decreased - but that needs a bit more study on my part. I forget what happens to the entropy of a cooling material.

You appear to have missed the part where they said the LED was run in an environment of 135 deg. C. so, it's over unity for the electrical input but not for the total energy put into the system. That heat energy "pushed" electrons according to a discussion I read about this experiment (the paper is behind a pay wall). Like I said before, what happened is not what you think happened.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 3:20pm #42
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

Prof Neilson wrote:

Gee Lens

30 picowatts in 70 picowatts out - at MIT.

70 is bigger than 30

And the material got cooler.

More out than in!

When I joined this forum, I was impressed by the level of scientific and technical/engineering knowledge displayed. I'm quite good at science in general, but there are people here who are even better than I.

So it's been rather shocking and depressing lately to see that some of those who I respected have demonstrated a tendency to believe any claim for perpetual motion in its various forms... including "over unity" power.

The credulous acceptance of various claims for various types of perpetual motion, including "over unity" power and LENR, have been a rather huge disillusionment.

That doesn't mean you and a few others here aren't smart, Prof N. But it does mean you have a rather large hole in your understanding of how the universe works.

Prof Neilson wrote:

I will leave out the gratuitous insult I thought up. It would be like beating a child.

Obviously you decided to leave it in. Or maybe you're just getting senile, grandpa. http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g194/Lensman03/Smileys/SmileySmlWink.gif


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 3:22pm #43
Prof Neilson
EESUrient
Skiracer2
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Wed, 03 Apr 2013
Posts: 1528

Sorry supamark - you have missed the point.

Its in the sentence you quoted above. How to make it plainer.

"Energy is still conserved". Overunity from a total energy standpoint is a wrong word to use. I retracted the use of that word in post 40 above.

This is the first heat engine where the ambient temperature in the box is reduced as work is done. With all other heat engines known to date the temperature would increase to get work.

So you don't need to have a heat source to get this to run other than to initiate the process. After the process is initiated the temperature of the system decreases.


All I want for Christmas is a Graphene / Ionic Liquid Electrical Generator.

PNeilson@NeilsonLabs.com

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 3:28pm #44
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

Prof Neilson wrote:

Sorry supamark - you have missed the point.

No, I think that for once, Supamark nailed what the rest of us missed.

Sorry, Prof N. Still no perpetual motion.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 3:29pm #45
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

seslaprime wrote:

Lol, Dude, I am probably twice your age.

You're older than 111? Then perhaps your posts are a result of senility, not-- as they appear-- simple cluelessness.

Once again, Sesla, that's "Dunning-Kruger effect":

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

Try learning something. It will be a new experience for you.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 3:30pm #46
supamark
EEcclesiastical
Supa_avatar
Registered: Dec, 2009
Last visit: Sat, 17 Mar 2012
Posts: 1240

Prof Neilson wrote:

Sorry supamark - you have missed the point.

Its in the sentence you quoted above. How to make it plainer.

"Energy is still conserved". Overunity from a total energy standpoint is a wrong word to use. I retracted the use of that word in post 40 above.

This is the first heat engine where the ambient temperature in the box is reduced as work is done. With all other heat engines known to date the temperature would increase to get work.

So you don't need to have a heat source to get this to run other than to initiate the process. After the process is initiated the temperature of the system decreases.

That's not the song you were singing in the post that I was actually replying to. In that post you were straight up claiming over unity for energy input vs. output. Until you show that you understand the basic laws of physics, you're going to keep getting these corrective responses.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 3:47pm #47
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

For anyone following this thread who might have trouble understanding the disagreement:

This is the same basic argument that we had not so long ago over whether or not the sun energizing a solar cell qualifies as a "heat engine".

Whether or not you think the "heat engine" label applies, the point is that the emitter (the sun, or the heated emitter) is hotter than what receives the radiation (the solar cell, or the surrounding environment).

So it is not, in any way, shape, or form, a violation of thermodynamics. Whether or not the energy is heat, it's still running downhill into what can be thought of as a heat sink, or an area of less intense energy. In either case, entropy is increasing.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 6:40pm #48
seslaprime
EESUrient
Eagle
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Tue, 27 Nov 2012
Posts: 2256

Lensman wrote:

seslaprime wrote:

Lol, Dude, I am probably twice your age.

You're older than 111? Then perhaps your posts are a result of senility, not-- as they appear-- simple cluelessness.

Once again, Sesla, that's "Dunning-Kruger effect":

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

Try learning something. It will be a new experience for you.

There is no way you are 55 years old. 25 max. with a mind of a fifteen year old. you are dreamin dude.

you should take your own advice again. instead of learning something, you should make just one intelligent comment. show everyone here that you actually can think for yourself. instead of silly cartoon characters and massive links to other peoples thoughts.

Oh and your stupid attempts to piss me off? are not working. Everyone here knows my posts and my knowledge based on those posts. you on the other hand, have been pounded by at least half the old timers on this blog for being Stupid.

whats up with that? are you stupid by choice? or is it natural? go figure..

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 6:47pm #49
seslaprime
EESUrient
Eagle
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Tue, 27 Nov 2012
Posts: 2256

Lensman wrote:

When I joined this forum, I was impressed by the level of scientific and technical/engineering knowledge displayed. I'm quite good at science in general, but there are people here who are even better than I.

OMG Dude, you have never showed ANY knowledge of science. you are dumb as a rock. I cant believe you are saying this shit. Must be for the newbies.

further, you have no idea what is Perpetual motion. and on top of that, when people try to teach you, you refuse to learn.

there is no hope for you.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 6:51pm #50
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

seslaprime wrote:

Lensman wrote:

seslaprime wrote:

Lol, Dude, I am probably twice your age.

You're older than 111?

There is no way you are 55 years old.

Correct. Your math is off by one year, which I suppose for you is an improvement.

seslaprime wrote:

Everyone here knows my posts and my knowledge based on those posts.

On that, we agree.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 7:20pm #51
seslaprime
EESUrient
Eagle
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Tue, 27 Nov 2012
Posts: 2256

Lensman wrote:

seslaprime wrote:

Lensman wrote:

seslaprime wrote:

Lol, Dude, I am probably twice your age.

You're older than 111?

There is no way you are 55 years old.

Correct. Your math is off by one year, which I suppose for you is an improvement.

I think you better redue your math, because half of 111 is 55.5.

Which again shows your inability to see reality.

I really dont need to say anything because everyone with intelligence on this blog knows all too well your fallcies.

but seriously lensman, you dont need to lie to make friends. we all can judge your age based on the content of your posts and your projected personality.

definately a youngster, or maybe you were just sheltered your whole life and didnt mentally develope correctly. whatever the case may be, it is clear you are lacking in your mental capacity.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 8:02pm #52
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

seslaprime wrote:

I think you better redue your math, because half of 111 is 55.5.

You've almost got it, Sesla. "Older than" 55.5 would be...

C'mon, even a "short bus" guy like you should be able to do this one...

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g194/Lensman03/Smileys/SmileySmlGiggle.gif

Sad, really. Shooting fish in a barrel.


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Wed, 29 Feb 2012, 8:11pm #53
seslaprime
EESUrient
Eagle
Registered: Aug, 2008
Last visit: Tue, 27 Nov 2012
Posts: 2256

Lensman wrote:

seslaprime wrote:

I think you better redue your math, because half of 111 is 55.5.

You've almost got it, Sesla. "Older than" 55.5 would be...

C'mon, even a "short bus" guy like you should be able to do this one...

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g194/Lensman03/Smileys/SmileySmlGiggle.gif

Sad, really. Shooting fish in a barrel.

That all you got? c'mon, why not explain it to me in science terms? LOL

Offline
Thu, 01 Mar 2012, 2:40pm #54
Oakthicket
EESUrient
Zombatar_1
Registered: Dec, 2009
Last visit: Sat, 22 Jun 2013
Posts: 2087

Lol. You guys are entertaining... really. This is not a jab.


Cherish what is most important in your life - family and loved ones.

Offline
Fri, 02 Mar 2012, 10:37am #55
EESlicster
EEager
Registered: Apr, 2009
Last visit: Thu, 22 Mar 2012
Posts: 260

How did my thread turn into this?

I just wanted input on HHO! :P

I think both Lens and Ses are inmature and I'm only 32. I don't have any science to back it up but I have proof in the recent posts to this threat.

LOL. Shake hands and make up please.


-EESU is to Li-Ion as SSD is to HDD

Offline
Sat, 03 Mar 2012, 4:22pm #56
tomee
EExpert
Avatar2
Registered: Jun, 2009
Last visit: Wed, 10 Apr 2013
Posts: 204

Well, I have in fact had an HHO generator in my 2004 impala for the last 3 years. It worked to improve milage when it was first installed. The mechanic did include a device to overide the O2 sensor. The problem with them is that the wiring bathed in the solution (in my case baking soda in water-about 4 tbsp per gallon) deteriorates and creates sediment. The fluid is used up about every 4rth tank of gas. So.....if you are not diligent in rinsing, cleaning and refilling the reservoir, it won't work. I'm not diligent.

How did it work? Beats me, but it did. The electrical energy used is from the alternator/generator. I think the belt spinning the alt/gen is always spinning so I believe you are just recapturing some of the engine energy. I have seen papers re: research that GM did in the 70's evaluating combustion changes (these were carbuerated engines). The combustion was more complete.

It didn't work well enough to justify putting it on a newer fuel efficient car. My son drives a Yaris, gets about 40 MPG straight up which is still 10 MPG better than my best milage in the impala. The impala has about 189,000 miles on it. Currently getting about 16-20 combined HWY/City. I will clean up the HHO gen before a long trip and get 29 MPG. It is not a miracle improvement but does seem to allow the advertised new car milage rating.

Offline
Mon, 12 Mar 2012, 12:56pm #57
dvelasco68
EEluminated
Dvelasco68
Registered: Jan, 2009
Last visit: Tue, 03 Apr 2012
Posts: 720

I figured I wouldn't clog up a new thread woth stuff like this...

PlasmERG wrote:

PlasmERG Preps Factory as Patent Published
The U.S. Patent Office has published PlasmERG's "Plasmic Transition Process Motor" patent application that details the game changing Noble Gas Engine that is now being readied for production in Henderson, Nevada. Consuming little fuel and producing massive power, this engine holds the potential to revolutionize the energy landscape.

PlasmERG engine.

by Hank Mills, with Sterling D. Allan
Pure Energy Systems News

This year is turning out to be more exciting than anyone could have predicted. Multiple alternative energy technologies are emerging, and any one of them could potentially revolutionize energy production. However, one technology in particular is racing towards commercialization, and could be the first exotic energy source to reach the finish line. The company's name is PlasmERG and the technology is called the, "Plasmic Transition Process."

PlasmERG is about to launch an engine using the "Plasmic Transition Process" technology. It is about to go into production in Hendersen, Nevada. A factory is being setup to manufacture the control electronics, while local partners will fabricate the engine parts for five prototype motors. These prototype motors will demonstrate to stockholders, investors, and potential licensees what PlasmERG has so far only been able to produce in house (for security reasons). These prototype engines can then be mass produced by those companies who purchase a license to manufacture them.

A patent application detailing the process has also been posted by the U.S. Patent Office. It details how the technology works, and can be found here: US 2011/0113772 Al (pdf). The patent has not yet been granted, but the posting of the patent application does four things. Firstly, it allows PlasmERG to speak more freely about their technology. Secondly, it could be a sign the patent is in the final stages of approval. Finally, it allows all of us a closer look at the technology.


(Labels added by Hank Mills)


If you have read about Joseph Papp's "Noble Gas Engine" or "Papp Engine", then you already have a basic understanding of PlasmERG's technology. Joseph Papp was a Hungarian native who emigrated to the United States in 1968. Soon afterwards, he retrofitted an an internal combustion engine to operate using small quantities of Noble Gases. The operation of the engine was simple. A charge of noble gases including helium, neon, argon, krypton, and xenon was placed in the sealed and air tight cylinders of the engine. By producing a magnetic field around the cylinder, exciting the gases with radio frequencies, and producing a high voltage arc in the gas, a ball of plasma would be produced. This expanding ball of plasma would produce a linear force and push the piston. This force could be used to power the engine.

The most important aspects of the "Noble Gas Engine" were that it consumed very little fuel, and the output of the engine was far greater than the electrical input. A charge of noble gases could last months, and a small fraction of the mechanical output could turn an alternator to keep the batteries (that powered the electrical components) charged.

The story of Papp's efforts and the history of the engine are very interesting, but the amazing technology never reached commercialization. A more complete account of his history will be the subject of a subsequent PESN story. Until a few years ago, the technology laid dormant. Little or no progress had been made on the engine until John Rohner, the founder of PlasmERG, decided to rediscover what made the engine work, improve upon it, and develop the technology into a commercially viable state. (Other teams have also been making limited progress.) One significant improvement made by Rohner was an improved electronic control system utilizing modern components. Another improvement was the discovery of a way to make the reaction take place, without using radioactive accelerators like the original engine used. These are just a couple of many improvements that have been made. Without them, the engine would not be a ready to mass produce .

It is also important to note that many of the advancements were made using modern tools, including advanced simulation software. These software packages allow precise three dimensional simulation of engine components, the modeling of different gas mixtures, and easy design of control circuitry. Such programs and the computers to run them were not even in existence in the age of Papp. These modern tools allow for faster design and part fabrication, along with other benefits.


Game Changing Technology

Using his own capital, John Rohner has brought this technology to the point it is ready for mass manufacturing. He has now acquired the funding he needs to open up the manufacturing plant, produce five prototype engines, and take this technology to the marketplace. This is very good news, because it means the energy crisis may be over in the not too distant future.

You may be wondering, "How can one technology solve the entire energy crisis?" After reading the following benefits of the PlasmERG engine your question should be answered!

Power Density:
The PlasmERG engine produces massive amounts of mechanical power. A two cylinder engine with 1000 cc or one liter of displacement can produce hundreds of horsepower, with all the torque present even at low speed (just like an electric motor). Hence, a very small engine could power a very large vehicle, boat, or plane.

Fuel Efficiency:
The PlasmERG engine utilizes very little fuel. To fuel an engine, you simply fill the cylinders with a mix of gases, and seal them. Additional fuel does not have to be continually added, like in a traditional internal combustion engine. A single charge of fuel can last an engine for months before another charge is needed. Although some small quantity of fuel is likely burnt (through a fusion or fission process), the main reason the engine needs to be re-fueled is due to gases leaking out. As the technology advances, better sealing technology could prevent the gases from escaping, and a single charge could last for years.

Cheap, Plentiful Fuel:
The gases used as fuel are cheap and plentiful. In addition, the noble gases used as fuel can be found everywhere on the planet, because they are present in our atmosphere. No country has a monopoly on them. Also, because such small quantities are used, and the gases last so long before being consumed, the annual fuel cost for an engine would be almost nothing. Instead of spending thousands of dollars on gasoline, you could spend less than a hundred dollars a year for a continually-running genset, for example.

No Pollution:
The engine emits no pollution or exhaust. This would allow someone to operate the engine indoors (for example to power an electrical generator) without worrying about toxic gases being produced. Also, even though a "fusion" process may be occurring, no radioactive waste is created. The lack of CO2 production would also allow for a "green" running engine.

Inert Fuel:
Because the fuel is an inert gas (doesn't combust), storage canisters could be shipped safely with no regulation or hazards involved whatsoever.

Catastrophe Proof:
If the engine were damaged somehow, from a force majeure incident such as a collision, explosion, earthquake, lightning strike, landslide, asteroid, volcano, flood, or sabotage; it would not blow up in a chain reaction or go into runaway meltdown. It would simply stop running. The worst case scenario would be that the pistons might fly out and hit something.

Runs Cool:
The engine does not heat up, so there is no need for a cooling system.

Few Components:
The engine does not require many the various components of ordinary internal combustion engines. This saves space and weight. Many other components are also eliminated, such as the exhaust system, gasoline tank, and cooling system.

Few Moving Parts:
The engine uses few moving parts, so there is less complexity, and fewer parts to wear out. The 5 moving parts are: crankshaft, two connecting rods and two pistons. This allows for the engine to be quickly manufactured, and it reduces the maintenance required.

Scalable:
The technology can scale up to be used to build very large engines, or be scaled down to produce very small engines. Anything from a gigantic locomotive to a tiny model car could have one of these motors designed for it.

Optimal Versatility:
The technology can be used anywhere, because the cylinders are sealed and the reaction does not require oxygen. It could be used on land, underwater, or in space.

Governable:
The engine speed can be throttled to basically any speed up to 3,000RPMs. This allows it to have a variable output, which is vitally important for automotive and electrical applications.

Super Cheap:
The engine is expected to be very affordable. The price for a two cylinder engine producing hundreds of horsepower (and lots of torque too!) is expected to only be around $500 (five hundred dollars)! Remember, too, that the fuel cost is nearly negligible.

Quiet:
The engines are very quiet too! John Rohner has said if a running engine was placed in a box composed of one inch thick wood, you could not find it in a darkened room.
The result of all these benefits is a small, light weight, quiet, and simple engine that is very powerful. The engine runs almost for free, using very little fuel. Basically, any internal combustion engine producing mechanical power (for direct use or to turn a generator to produce electricity) can be replaced with a PlasmERG device. Rohner writes:

"It can replace any engine, electric turbine etc not just the internal combustion engine. We have air compressor manufacturers looking to replace 100 HP electric engines, Oil Companies using on Old Pumps replacing their electric and diesel engines and oil rigs using these because they will not cause what happened on that platform, no hot sparks or anything."

By converting to a PlasmERG unit, more power will be produced, but at a near zero fuel cost and near zero environmental impact (the device still requires materials mining).


The Math and Money Saved

With the PlasmERG engine (once widely adopted by the world) energy costs could go down dramatically. As an example, John Rohner communicated to me in a private email that a one liter (two cylinder) engine has turned a 300 kW electrical generator at full load. This is using an engine with an expected $500 dollar cost, and a few dollars worth of fuel every three or four months. The electricity from such a system would not just be cheap, but almost free.

Lets look at the math!

Such a system would be producing 648,000 kilowatt hours every 90 days.

300 kW x 24 hours x 90 days = 648,000 kW hours

Lets say that the cost of electricity in your area is 10 cents per kilowatt hour. That means the device would have generated $64,800 dollars worth of electricity. If we add a significant increase to the $500 dollar price tag for the engine (lets say due to high demand and short supply of units the first few months after they go on sale) and make the price $1,000, we have made almost 65 times the price of the engine and fuel, in electricity.

Once the engine has paid for itself, the only costs would be fuel and maintenance. The fuel cost of powering a generator using coal, natural gas, or diesel would be astronomically higher. At 10 cents a kilowatt hour, buying 7200 kilowatt hours (twenty four hours worth of energy production from a generator producing a constant 300 kW of power), would cost $720 dollars. Obviously, the power companies include a markup to pay for maintaining lines and paying employees, so lets say the fuel cost to produce those 7200 kilowatt hours is $360 dollars. For the price of one day's worth of conventional fuel, a PlasmERG engine could be fueled for a decade or more!

$10 (Noble Gas Fuel, when canisters are mass produced) x 40 (Number of three month periods in a decade) = $400

Four hundred dollars is much cheaper than $360 dollars (one day's worth of conventional fuel) multiplied by ten years!

To me it's clear that this technology could reduce the cost of energy by 99% or more!

Of course there would be huge savings by putting one of these engines in your vehicle. You could pay 10 dollars or less for fuel each three months (or longer) instead of $20, $40, or $60 a week!


Where Does the Energy Come From?

To address where the energy comes from, you need to understand the process used by the engine. The "Plasmic Transition Process" utilizes three primary mechanisms to create a ball of plasma (think ball lightning) that pushes the piston, and hence performs mechanical work.

One or more coils of wire around the cylinder are pulsed to create a magnetic field that pinches or compresses the gases.
A radio frequency generator connected to an antenna inside of the cylinder ionizes the gases.
Lastly, a set of electrodes produce a high voltage (300 thousand volt or more) arc of electricity in the shape of a ball. This is the final step that triggers the ball of plasma to form and expand. The arc only lasts for picoseconds.
(Other factors that help facilitate the efficiency of the process include polishing the surface of the piston, and the toroidal chamber formed when the piston head meets the cylinder head.)

When all of these factors come together and the high voltage arc is created, it is speculated that a tiny number helium atoms start to undergo a fusion reaction. Also, secondary fission reactions are thought to take place. These nuclear reactions (if they occur) do not release deadly radiation, but produce large quantities of energy.

There is some doubt if these fusion and fission reactions are the only source of energy. One reason is that according to advanced simulations, the gases should be consumed much faster than they actually are in testing. The gases are lasting much longer than they should be, without being consumed.

Jimmy Sabori, an engineer who worked on this technology many years ago (after the death of Joseph Papp), claimed the energy came from "the vacuum and the void." In addition, Ken Shoulders has stated that the plasma ball may be a giant "exotic vacuum object" tapping energy from the vacuum. Others have claimed that the energy may be from the aether or elsewhere.

A particularly interesting idea is that the reaction could be creating anti-matter in the form of positrons. A positron is the anti-matter opposite of an electron. These positrons could be coming into contact with regular matter, annihilating each other, and converting matter into pure energy. This idea is given some credibility by NASA's revelation that lighting in thunderstorms create anti-matter that sprays into the upper atmosphere.

The idea seems to be fusion and fission may be triggering the formation of the plasma and producing some energy in the PlasmERG engine, however due to the lack of fuel being consumed there could very well be energy coming into the system from elsewhere.

Perhaps we have a fusion, fission, and free energy technology all in one!


Upcoming Developments

As has been reported on the company website, PlasmERG is moving to Nevada. A factory is being setup, additional prototype engines will be produced, meetings will soon be held, and demonstrations are to come. Here is a comment from John Rohner on this issue.

We have completed the move to Las Vegas. Our new address is 1051 Olsen St, Suite 4211, Henderson, NV 89011. We will finally get power tomorrow and internet next Tuesday and offices complete next Wed. We have 4 "retired" experts joining us plus a group of Grad students from various colleges and a couple well known physicists. We expect to publish our book and several scientific papers this year. We have several Provisional patents in the works and "maybe" a few more final patents pending this year. We plan to do three or more patents a year and have the greatest lawyers for it. We have a great working relationship with a foundry and our first Manufacturer for training engine parts and even engines for OEM sale.

PlasmERG is having a meeting July 24 & 25 to get all of it's infrastructure ready and will have some prestigious board members, even one Federal Judge. PlasmERG has one of the best contract lawyers working on the licensing agreements now. Add the fact that we have a great International Airport and we B lovin it."

In correspondence he has also indicated...

The first demos will be held for stockholders, friends of the company, and licensed manufacturers. They will be held as soon as the "training engines" have been built and tested. They will be for NDA holders only.
Once a stock of motors has been built up and the manufacturers are ready to "go public", open demos of the motor will take place.
Scientists are working on the theory of how the energy is produced, and this information will be included in an upcoming book about the technology.
We should not be caught up with noble gases, because other gases such as hydrogen and nitrogen can work. They are not used in small engines, because they speed up the reaction too much. They can help in large engines that need fast reactions. Other gases are being tested.


"So long as they don't get violent, I want to let everyone say what they wish, for I myself have always said exactly what pleased me..." - Albert Einstein

Offline
Mon, 12 Mar 2012, 1:37pm #58
supamark
EEcclesiastical
Supa_avatar
Registered: Dec, 2009
Last visit: Sat, 17 Mar 2012
Posts: 1240

tomee wrote:

Well, I have in fact had an HHO generator in my 2004 impala for the last 3 years. It worked to improve milage when it was first installed. The mechanic did include a device to overide the O2 sensor. The problem with them is that the wiring bathed in the solution (in my case baking soda in water-about 4 tbsp per gallon) deteriorates and creates sediment. The fluid is used up about every 4rth tank of gas. So.....if you are not diligent in rinsing, cleaning and refilling the reservoir, it won't work. I'm not diligent.

How did it work? Beats me, but it did. The electrical energy used is from the alternator/generator. I think the belt spinning the alt/gen is always spinning so I believe you are just recapturing some of the engine energy. I have seen papers re: research that GM did in the 70's evaluating combustion changes (these were carbuerated engines). The combustion was more complete.

It didn't work well enough to justify putting it on a newer fuel efficient car. My son drives a Yaris, gets about 40 MPG straight up which is still 10 MPG better than my best milage in the impala. The impala has about 189,000 miles on it. Currently getting about 16-20 combined HWY/City. I will clean up the HHO gen before a long trip and get 29 MPG. It is not a miracle improvement but does seem to allow the advertised new car milage rating.

wow, I didn't know the Chevy Impala was able to violate the laws of thermodynamics... what you think happened, didn't. The HHO generator used more energy than it provided, that's a fact, and it did not improve your fuel economy. any "improvement" was from running a leaner mix (more air), which you could have done without the HHO gen. and gotten better milage (that add'l drag on your alternator caused by driving electrolysis lowered your milage).

Offline
Mon, 12 Mar 2012, 1:58pm #59
Lensman
EExhilarating
Illuminati_avatar
Registered: May, 2009
Last visit: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 9475

supamark wrote:

wow, I didn't know the Chevy Impala was able to violate the laws of thermodynamics... what you think happened, didn't. The HHO generator used more energy than it provided, that's a fact, and it did not improve your fuel economy. any "improvement" was from running a leaner mix (more air), which you could have done without the HHO gen. and gotten better milage (that add'l drag on your alternator caused by driving electrolysis lowered your milage).

At the risk of appearing to defend a perpetual motion scam, I have to say: Not necessarily. The alternator is run constantly, by the fan belt. That's a drag on the engine, yes, but that drag occurs whether the electricity being put out by the alternator is being used or not. So in theory, it should be possible to use the otherwise wasted power to generate some hydrogen which, again in theory, might improve your gas mileage if you had the right setup in your carburetor or fuel injection system.

[edit] It seems that I need to clarify here, that putting more of a load on the alternator does increase the drag, but that this increase is slight in proportion to the fixed amount of drag which occurs whether or not the HHO system is running. There will be X amount of drag from the fan belt, from the alternator bearings, from the pulley driving the system, and that won't change whether the alternator is powering the HHO system or not. [/edit]

But in practice, as most of us already know, tests have shown no actual improvement occurs with any of these "HHO" or "Brown's gas" systems. It's been suggested that any improvement claimed by a real customer (i.e., not a shill) is a result of the "placebo" effect. Someone who believes his gas mileage will be improved, will tend to be more aware of how his driving patterns affect his gas mileage. So he might accelerate slower, increase his following distance so he can use his brakes less... in other words, adopt hypermiling techniques which do cause an increase in actual gas mileage.

Of course, it's often a mistake to apply a general rule to a specific case. So we shouldn't say that Tomee definitely had an improvement in his gas mileage because he (consciously or unconsciously) altered his driving patterns to increase his gas mileage. But we can say that it's more likely any increase in MPG is due to such alteration in driving patterns, rather than due to any "HHO" or "Brown's gas" add-on system.

Last edited Mon, 12 Mar 2012, 4:39pm by Lensman


We are the 99%. A better world is possible.

Offline
Mon, 12 Mar 2012, 2:03pm #60
Eenigma
EExhilarating
Wales51
Registered: Apr, 2009
Last visit: Wed, 03 Apr 2013
Posts: 3124

Lensman wrote:

At the risk of appearing to defend a perpetual motion scam, I have to say: Not necessarily. The alternator is run constantly, by the fan belt. That's a drag on the engine, yes, but that drag occurs whether the electricity being put out by the alternator is being used or not.

Lens, take a course!


Front row seats with Y_No

Offline