Posted on 08/01/2007 8:46:09 AM PDT by Para-Ord.45
The interesting thing about the water tank, is that you may be able to dual-use the tank.
The water tank may be designed in as a part of the car’s ability to sustain a collision.
Yes, with an education that includes thermodynamics, so i know why to dismiss this foolishness. Beat up the issue all you want, clearly you can't comprehend why this won't work but, I and many others here, do.
Good point. Also could help with cooling, reducing the electric demand on the alternator. The warmer the water, the more complete the emuslification and combustion, too.
Point to where I was beating up the issue. I merely wondered whether or not it would work. Climb off your high horse and maybe you can read what people post mr “educated”
Your education leaves you just as arrogant as other educated jerks I’ve know.
Point to where I was beating up the issue. I merely wondered whether or not it would work. Climb off your high horse and maybe you can read what people post mr “educated”
Your education leaves you just as arrogant as other educated jerks I’ve known.
Well, thermodynamics is only a hypothesis after all. Sterling cycle and probability and statistics and all that. They don’t thank Michelson and Morley and they won’t thank the old guy, he’s dead now anyway,
One aspect of it that would require some design is performance in cold climates.
This sort of car would do well below 45 degrees latitude, but inland US, Canada, Alaska, etc.
You’d have to figure out how to at least keep it slushy.
I’m not “arrogant”, I’m just not ignorant. I don’t have a horse either.
When i don’t know about something, I admit it, and don’t try to rag on the people who understand the issue, i try to learn from them.
I’m not “arrogant”, I’m just not ignorant. I don’t have a horse either.
When i don’t know about something, I admit it, and don’t try to rag on the people who understand the issue, i try to learn from them.
asking questions means I don’t know, if you read then you’ll understand. That’s why I was asking. Now if you don’t have anything constructive to add then we have nothing more to talk about.
The things I made negative comments about were the people who come on to threads like this and all they offer is ridicule and BS in order to make themselves look smarter.
Ok I give, you’re smarter.
Next
When hydrogen and oxygen combine, energy is released in some form. We call this energy fire or, if fast enough, an explosion. The ash that is left after the fire or explosion (the energy release) is called water. To separate the ash (i.e., water) into hydrogen and oxygen again requires as much energy (an a little bit more actually) as was release when the water was created.
I will NEVER (OK, almost never) try to make that claim. Most of the truly smart people I know don't have the education I have. I know lot of well educaed people who are REALLY stupid. It goes both ways.
negative comments about were the people who come on to threads like this and all they offer is ridicule and BS
Because they've seen this kind of crap before. It's pretty readily dismissed.
When hydrogen is oxidized heat is released as the molecules
of 2 H2O (water) has less Gibbs Free Energy than a molecules of 2 H2 and O2
2H2 +02 = 2 H2O +release of energy as heat. To break the bond between the Oxygen and Hydrogen will require the same amount of energy as was released in the original reaction. That is if you were 100% efficient, which the process can not be. There “aint nothing” for free in thermodynamics and chemical reactions.
This whole idea is crap.
lol ok THAT I understand. Thank you.
So make your arguments without the snide comments. It goes over alot better and I assure you will win more people to your side.
People that come in with just “oh that won’t work LOL” I tend to tune out because they are acting like children.
Might I point out to you that others have tried to explain it to me and I did finally understand what one was saying.
Sorry if I didn’t get an education in thermodynamics. I spent most of my early adulthood learning how to blow things up not turn it into energy.
Applied science.
Yes it was explained in an earlier response by someone else, thank you.
Exactly
I went to a military college, we did both.
The laws of thermo are more than hypotheses. They are proven fact and cannot be violated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.