hydrogen for nothing

Dear RichD:

.... since someone mucked with the followups ...

"RichD" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Dear David A. Smith,
> On Feb 4, "N:dlzcD:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" > wrote:

> > Dear RichD:
> > >www.nationalvapor.com

> > Electrolysis = electricity
> > Electricity =/= free
> > The amount of hydrogen liberated during electrolysis
> > represents less energy that it took to make it.

> Not so fast.
> The alternator is continually generating current,
> correct?

Correct. Some inefficiency in production and delivery, let's
pretend the losses are small.

> Some goes to the regulator, for the car's electricity.
> Some of it goes to battery charging.

*All* production is regulated, else you fry the electronics and
battery (or do nothing). Destinations are correct ...

> And when the battery reaches full charge, it dissipates
> as heat...

It is heating while charging, and when fully charged, neither
draws current, dissipates heat, nor releases hydrogen.

> suppose that energy went into electrolysis.

It does during charge, unless you have something that absorbs the
hydrogen and releases it back during discharge (nothing that I
know of does this). This is an unintended reaction, though,
since it is supposed to be *only* plating lead back on the
plates...

> Especially during braking... regenerative
> braking, anyone?

Always a good idea, if heating water with 60% of it is not.

> How much (over) charging current is lost as heat, normally?

60%

> And what about the testimonials in the newspaper story?
> 20% gain in fuel mileage.

I've seen tens to hundreds of percent advertised, yet no one but
the advertiser makes those claims outside of court. I can get
>20% out of my car by clearing the vehicles out of my way and
allowing me to do the posted speed limit.

> It's amusing to watch the 'scientists' wave their hands,
> shout 'conservation of energy, there's no free lunch!' and
> miss the target by a mile. It reminds me of the student
> who claims that a bullet fired horizontally from a gun hits
> the ground at the same time as a dropped bullet, because
> G acceleration is the same..

And it is equally amusing to see the ignorant attempt to stay so,
when so much information is at their fingertips.

David A. Smith

> wrote in message
...
> You want perpetual motion? The Foucault Pendulum in Philadelphia,Penns
> Woods.There are similar Pendulums elsewhere too.
> cuhulin
>

I guess if you believe that you've already ordered one of these hydrogen
generators?

Well,speaking of alternators,rebuilt alternators from auto parts
stores.I once read an article in a magazine about some rebuilt
alternators from Autozone not properly wired correctly or the two halves
of the cases not properly lined up.It was something pertaining to one of
those problems.
I have an idea for a ''perpetual motion'' machine.Don't we all?
cuhulin

On Feb 4, 9:47 pm, "RichD" > wrote:
> www.nationalvapor.com
>
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...2/03/MTGDKNTC8...

Remember no energy is being magically created here. It is being
transformed from one state to another and that transformation process
takes energy. A couple of two line anecdotes indicating minor
increases in mpg does not constitute proof of anything in my opinion.

However if you want to fork over hundreds of dollars for yet another
miracle milage improver feel free to do so.

In article >, Bob > wrote:
>
> wrote in message
...
>> You want perpetual motion? The Foucault Pendulum in Philadelphia,Penns
>> Woods.There are similar Pendulums elsewhere too.
>
>I guess if you believe that you've already ordered one of these hydrogen
>generators?

I hate to say it, but if you don't put it in a vacuum, the earth's movement
doesn't add enough force to overcome air resistance. Most of the Focault's
pendulums you see on display (like the one at the Museum of Natural History
in DC) either have some electrical assist or they have a human being push
them once a week or so.

If you DO put it in a vacuum, it's sort of perpetual motion, just like
solar or wind power is perpetual. As long as the earth keeps turning, it
keeps moving.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Dear David A. Smith,

N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) wrote:
> > > >www.nationalvapor.com
>
> > > Electrolysis = electricity
> > > Electricity =/= free
> > > The amount of hydrogen liberated during electrolysis
> > > represents less energy that it took to make it.
>
> > The alternator is continually generating current,
> > correct?
>
> Correct. Some inefficiency in production and delivery, let's
> pretend the losses are small.
>
> > Some goes to the regulator, for the car's electricity.
> > Some of it goes to battery charging.
>
> *All* production is regulated, else you fry the electronics and
> battery (or do nothing).
>
> > And when the battery reaches full charge, it dissipates
> > as heat...
>
> It is heating while charging, and when fully charged, neither
> draws current, dissipates heat, nor releases hydrogen.

When the battery reaches fully charge, it draws no further
current? Then where does the alternator output go?

> > Especially during braking... regenerative
> > braking, anyone?
>
> Always a good idea, if heating water with 60% of it is not.
>
> > How much (over) charging current is lost as heat, normally?
>
> 60%

oh
Well, wouldn't it be productive to do some electrolysis with that?
(where does 60% come from?)

Here's my simplistic understanding of automotive electronics:
the crankshaft turns a belt which drives a generator which
sources current proportional to the rpm. When the battery
is fully charged, the overcurrent is wasted energy. This
might power electrolysis, and explain the inventor's gadget.

--
Rich

Androcles wrote:

> > It reminds me of the student
> > who claims that a bullet fired horizontally from a gun hits
> > the ground at the same time as a dropped bullet, because
> > G acceleration is the same..
>
> At least he knew what he was talking about and was right.

hahahahaha
You're such a tool, Andro.


--
Rich

"RichD" > wrote in message ups.com...
> Androcles wrote:
>
>> > It reminds me of the student
>> > who claims that a bullet fired horizontally from a gun hits
>> > the ground at the same time as a dropped bullet, because
>> > G acceleration is the same..
>>
>> At least he knew what he was talking about and was right.
>
> hahahahaha
> You're such a tool, Andro.

You're such a dick, Fool.

Dear RichD:

On Feb 9, 12:14 pm, "RichD" > wrote:
> Dear David A. Smith,
>
> N:dlzcD:aol T:com (dlzc) wrote:
>
> > > > >www.nationalvapor.com
>
> > > > Electrolysis = electricity
> > > > Electricity =/= free
> > > > The amount of hydrogen liberated during electrolysis
> > > > represents less energy that it took to make it.
>
> > > The alternator is continually generating current,
> > > correct?
>
> > Correct. Some inefficiency in production and delivery, let's
> > pretend the losses are small.
>
> > > Some goes to the regulator, for the car's electricity.
> > > Some of it goes to battery charging.
>
> > *All* production is regulated, else you fry the electronics and
> > battery (or do nothing).
>
> > > And when the battery reaches full charge, it dissipates
> > > as heat...
>
> > It is heating while charging, and when fully charged, neither
> > draws current, dissipates heat, nor releases hydrogen.
>
> When the battery reaches fully charge, it draws no further
> current? Then where does the alternator output go?

The alternator is controlled by what you called a regulator, so that
it only outputs a commanded voltage. The alternator is not a "current
source" by the electronics definition of that term. The alternator
takes only the shaft power necessary to meet the output power demand,
plus some for internal losses. So there really is no excess
alternator output, though there may be capacity for it to power more
circuits.

> > > Especially during braking... regenerative
> > > braking, anyone?
>
> > Always a good idea, if heating water with 60% of it is not.
>
> > > How much (over) charging current is lost as heat,
> > > normally?
>
> > 60%
>
> oh
> Well, wouldn't it be productive to do some electrolysis with that?
> (where does 60% come from?)

About 40% of the energy put into charging a lead-acid battery is
recoverable on the discharge cycle. Hence the 60% figure.

> Here's my simplistic understanding of automotive
> electronics:
> the crankshaft turns a belt which drives a generator
> which sources current proportional to the rpm.

Not for some long time. Generators are quite cranky, and heavy, and
are not used in production automobiles anymore. Alternators are,
pretty wild, but are light, and are used quite extensively.
Alternators are controlled to a voltage output, and only draw shaft
power to match the current the attached circuits will allow to pass.
At low rpm, this means high internal current flows for smaller
external loads, and a potentially non-smooth DC output waveform.

> When the battery is fully charged, the overcurrent is
> wasted energy. This might power electrolysis, and
> explain the inventor's gadget.

No, the charging current naturally drops to zero, when the battery
puts out the same voltage the alternator is making. And what powers
the inventor's gadget is the suckers that don't know any better. If
they are lucky, the thing won't start the car on fire.

David A. Smith

"RichD" > wrote in message
oups.com...

> When the battery reaches fully charge, it draws no further
> current? Then where does the alternator output go?

There is only minimal output when the battery is fully charged. The
regulator
senses the voltage and decreases the output from the alternator.

Think what would happen if you ran the alternator full tilt all the
time...you
would have much more frequent failures from heat AND your gas mileage
would suffer a bit. If you generated, for example, 100 amperes of current
at 14 volts,
that is 1400 watts. Almost two horsepower...And you have to feed the
horses.