One more fun little fact. You want to complain about the energy loss to convert water to HHO, yet you never seemed to think about the energy and money it takes to get our gassoline ready to put in our cars. Gassoline dosen't come from the ground to your tank, it also requires energy to get it ready for your car.

Well, i know you two are tired of talking about it, i am as well. No hard feelings or anything. We may still disagree, but its a common thing. You will see what i'm talking about it when its in the news, i could have started on building the more advanced system, but i thought it was so easy i would never get it done before anyone else, but its been a year and no one has. So i will go ahead and make my prototype, i don't really see it taking longer than a year to actually build it the way i want it, really it shouldn't take near that long because i already know what needs to be done. I have all my energy saving foot notes and have maped out the best and most compact design i can. I went ahead and drew out my diagrams as well as added notes and hints to go about the actual process of building it in a professional manner. I will simply get it how i want it, get a patent for it, present and sell it. But one thing, i say if you believe in something, go for it. It dosen't matter how many people have worked on it before you, it does not mean you think you are better than others. It simply means maybe you have learned a new angle to view it, or you saw something others missed. In history we have had many time where someone comes behind another person and improves there invention. Maybe i'll make it happen again.

I'm trying to think on it, it looks like this to me.

You both said yourselfs that gasoline has energy stored in it, because of the fact that a spark sets it enegy off, or what ever, makes it blow up and release energy. So to me it looks like you are not braking the physics law because the energy was stored in the gas. So that means the same rule applies to HHO gas, you are not creating energy, you are just converting water to gas which already has lots of energy. You have to convert the water which holds tons of energy into a form that you can release it with a spark, combustable gas. No where in this process do i see me getting more energy than i'm using, all the extra energy is already in the water, i'm just converting water to gas so i can blow it up. And it woeks so great because hydrogen and oxygen are both very powerful gasses and are ofcourse all water is. Thats how it look to me.

"It may appear, according to circumstances, as motion, chemical affinity, cohesion, electricity, light and magnetism; and from any one of these forms it can be transformed into any of the others" Wiki - Conservation of energy

I still don't see how i broke this law. I used electrical energy that converts to work and heat. more work(Spliting molecules) = Less Heat(The waste of energy). So i conveted electrical energy to work energy and heat energy. Improving the generator and getting it to create less heat is more production out the energy, meaning more work done and less heat created. Gas on the ohter hand has its own stored energy, oxyhydrogen gas was produced, the energy dosen't convert from eletrical to oxyhydrogen, oxyhydrogen is not an energy it contains energy. That is were you seem to have gotten confused. So i looked it up and proved i'm not breaking this law, i can account for all the energy. Again, the water holds the energy, and way more than gasoline. In my HHO Cell i convert electrical energy to work energy(Spliting Molecules) and heat energy(Wasted Energy). I do not loose or gain energy. That law only tells me how good my design works by getting more production and less waste, it in no way tells how much energy is in the oxyhydrogen, or how efficent it is at running a car. Look up Oxygen and Hydrogen to see how much energy they hold, as far as how much electrical energy it takes to split a water molecule is unkown. You can only caculate from the device your using to split the water molecule. Different devices require different amounts of eletrical energy due to how its set up.

I guess neither of you have any other replys, so i'm just sifting through to look for more errors and correct them.

psychonaut:
Simply because you convert electrical energy to chemical energy(HHO in this case), you do NOT increase the amount of energy.


The whole time we where talking about this, you didn't know what you where talking about when it came to this conversion. Oxyhydrogen is not chemical energy. Chemical energy is the act of mixing 2 or more chemicals to get an reaction of energy. Oxyhydrogen has its own energy, spliting water molecules is not creating oxyhydrogen from electrical current, its using electrical current to split water molecules. Water molecules are made up of 1 oxygen and 2 hydrogens, you know this right? So if you know this how could you assume that eletrical energy converts to oxyhydrogen? If that where true you would not need the water, which is the source of where the oxyhydrogen is comming from. So if you are correct that means that with a power source and no other materials (like water) you can make oxyhydrogen. Call me crazy, but i don't think one argument made about the HHO generator was correct. Thats the dangers of just taking what people say as truth, you can never tell if the one your getting advice from also just took the word of some other dude. I say if you haven't personally messed with whatever, you could never say it dosen't work based on an opinion. And a big problem in this world is people holding back advancments for there own gain, and everyone just takes there word for it. Its what makes conspiracy theories about on world government seem so possible. I don't mean to cut anyone down, but in a way you are a jack ass if you accept someone's opinion as you own without proof. Didn't your mom ever tell you, you can't always believe everything you here. Look for your self, don't be another ass to join a battle about something you don't have any experience with, its alright to battle it out, but you have to know what your talking about to not be an ass. I'm not talking about laws, in this example it would be about HHO generators. If you haven't played with them then you don't know how they work or how much energy they use, and to accept someone elses opinion makes you a jack ass. Either way, i would say i proved in science talk that it works, funny though how the device its self is not proof, but then again people seem to be too trusting of there pears. If you are intelligent then you should know that Humans can be very greety for control and corrupt as shit, and it your opinion of them dosen't tell you if they are, its called deception. And for an 8th grade drop out to figure out that these things do work tells me the Government Fundded Science community is corrupt as shit, which is not much of a surprize. One thing that is funny, yet not funny, is how dumb some people can act, and try to debate instead of looking at the simple facts that make it different.

People always yell conspiracy nut, i say open your fucking eyes you idoit, its as plain as day.

Examples:

Well, i think i will start a new Topic About 911 Conspiracy.