"Duncan Heenan" wrote in message
...

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in message
anews.com...
snip
Don't be so pessimistic. Producing RF takes very little energy. The
system could be the salvation of mankind. It could be an infinite
supply of almost free energy. If enough hydrogen is produced it can
be burned to produce plenty enough electricity to produce the RF. All
it would take is just a little surplus hydrogen energy and you could
have extra electricity. The perpetual motion machine we all fantasize
about.

Wilbur Hubbard
What simplistic bull****! Getting more energy out than goes in?? This
sums up Wilma's level of understanding of the world. Don't bother to
read any further.


You never heard of nuclear fusion? That's more energy out than in. It's
not so far-fetched to believe if it can be done at an atomic level then
why not at a molecular level.

Wilbur Hubbard

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

"Duncan Heenan" wrote in message
...

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in message
anews.com...
snip
Don't be so pessimistic. Producing RF takes very little energy. The
system could be the salvation of mankind. It could be an infinite
supply of almost free energy. If enough hydrogen is produced it can
be burned to produce plenty enough electricity to produce the RF. All
it would take is just a little surplus hydrogen energy and you could
have extra electricity. The perpetual motion machine we all fantasize
about.

Wilbur Hubbard
What simplistic bull****! Getting more energy out than goes in?? This
sums up Wilma's level of understanding of the world. Don't bother to
read any further.


You never heard of nuclear fusion? That's more energy out than in. It's
not so far-fetched to believe if it can be done at an atomic level then
why not at a molecular level.

Its clear why you were a English major.

"jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

"Duncan Heenan" wrote in message
...

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in message
anews.com...
snip
Don't be so pessimistic. Producing RF takes very little energy. The
system could be the salvation of mankind. It could be an infinite
supply of almost free energy. If enough hydrogen is produced it can
be burned to produce plenty enough electricity to produce the RF.
All it would take is just a little surplus hydrogen energy and you
could have extra electricity. The perpetual motion machine we all
fantasize about.

Wilbur Hubbard
What simplistic bull****! Getting more energy out than goes in??
This sums up Wilma's level of understanding of the world. Don't
bother to read any further.


You never heard of nuclear fusion? That's more energy out than in.
It's not so far-fetched to believe if it can be done at an atomic
level then why not at a molecular level.

Its clear why you were a English major.

And, it's even more clear that your attempt to avoid addressing the
issue did not go unnoticed.

Why not at the molecular level? Just because, to date, it hasn't been
done does not validate the idea that it can never be done. If molecules
can be arranged in a more efficient form then energy can be obtained. If
the arrangement can be done in an energy efficient manner than there can
be energy gained at the expense of a more compact or stable molecule.
Same thing as in fusion but on a molecular level.

Wilbur Hubbard

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

"jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

"Duncan Heenan" wrote in message
...

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in message
anews.com...
snip
Don't be so pessimistic. Producing RF takes very little energy. The
system could be the salvation of mankind. It could be an infinite
supply of almost free energy. If enough hydrogen is produced it can
be burned to produce plenty enough electricity to produce the RF.
All it would take is just a little surplus hydrogen energy and you
could have extra electricity. The perpetual motion machine we all
fantasize about.

Wilbur Hubbard
What simplistic bull****! Getting more energy out than goes in??
This sums up Wilma's level of understanding of the world. Don't
bother to read any further.


You never heard of nuclear fusion? That's more energy out than in.
It's not so far-fetched to believe if it can be done at an atomic
level then why not at a molecular level.

Its clear why you were a English major.

And, it's even more clear that your attempt to avoid addressing the
issue did not go unnoticed.

Avoid addressing? It isn't my job to "address the issue." It is the
job of the scientist involved to propose a source for the energy
required to release the hydrogen from its bond with oxygen.

On the surface of it, the energy comes from the RF, so there is no magic
source. Although the burning has been verified, there has been little
disclosed about the energy efficiency. However, Kanzius has already
admitted (contrary to an early statement) that the efficiency is really
less than one so this is very unlikely to be useful as an "energy source."


Why not at the molecular level? Just because, to date, it hasn't been
done does not validate the idea that it can never be done. If molecules
can be arranged in a more efficient form then energy can be obtained. If
the arrangement can be done in an energy efficient manner than there can
be energy gained at the expense of a more compact or stable molecule.
Same thing as in fusion but on a molecular level.

Yes, its called chemistry. And while it was considered magic 500 years
ago, its fairly well understood nowadays, and the Supreme Court even
allows it to be taught in public schools.

It is possible that Kanzius has discovered a new phenomenon that could
lead to interesting applications. In that context, this could be really
big news. But he did not solve the world's energy problem.

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 12:24:05 -0400, jeff wrote:



It is possible that Kanzius has discovered a new phenomenon that could
lead to interesting applications. In that context, this could be really
big news. But he did not solve the world's energy problem.

Remember "cold fusion?"
Platinum prices took off like a rocket.
The rocket soon crashed.

--Vic

Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
You never heard of nuclear fusion? That's more energy out than in. It's
not so far-fetched to believe if it can be done at an atomic level then
why not at a molecular level.


jeff wrote:
Its clear why you were a English major.


I love it.... "Nuclear fusion at a molecular level"
Funniest thing I've seen in a while.

DSK

wrote in message
oups.com...
Wilbur Hubbard wrote:
You never heard of nuclear fusion? That's more energy out than in. It's
not so far-fetched to believe if it can be done at an atomic level then
why not at a molecular level.


jeff wrote:
Its clear why you were a English major.


I love it.... "Nuclear fusion at a molecular level"
Funniest thing I've seen in a while.

DSK




Hey, there's nuclear fusion on a much larger scale than molecular... family
bonding for example, something of which Neal has no clew.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
I love it.... "Nuclear fusion at a molecular level"
Funniest thing I've seen in a while.

DSK




Hey, there's nuclear fusion on a much larger scale than molecular...
family bonding for example, something of which Neal has no clew.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com


You are right-that can produce a lot of heat...

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:37:28 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote this crap:

I love it.... "Nuclear fusion at a molecular level"
Funniest thing I've seen in a while.


Hey, there's nuclear fusion on a much larger scale than molecular... family
bonding for example, something of which Neal has no clew.


Hey, Jon-boy. Nuclear fusion happens at the stellar level. Without
nuclear power the Earth would be just another frozen ball of ice.

I know because I have a degree from M.I.T.




I'm Horvath and I approve of this post.

"Bloody Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:37:28 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote this crap:

I love it.... "Nuclear fusion at a molecular level"
Funniest thing I've seen in a while.


Hey, there's nuclear fusion on a much larger scale than molecular...
family
bonding for example, something of which Neal has no clew.


Hey, Jon-boy. Nuclear fusion happens at the stellar level. Without
nuclear power the Earth would be just another frozen ball of ice.

I know because I have a degree from M.I.T.


But you're nowheres as smart as JAXAshby. He's in Mensa. He's got
honorary doctorates from several different Ivy League schools.

Wilbur Hubbard