On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:06:13 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:


"toad" wrote in message
oups.com...
On 11 Sep, 18:42, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:
Burn salt water instead . . .

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

Perpetual motion machines are possible. I know, I read it in the Mail:

http://tinyurl.com/ypgqqw

"we were getting 150 to 200 per cent more energy out than we put in"


Kool! I just know technology is on the verge of a major energy
breakthrough. Scientists always give us this "laws of thermodynamics"
crap when it isn't law at all but theory waiting to be modified.

Agree that "laws" can inhibit new thought.
I read a SciFi story long ago where a defense contractor set his
engineers to develop an anti-grav vehicle real quick.
They protested that it was against scientific law.
He took them into a screening room where he showed them a secretly
taken film of a Soviet anti-grav vehicle.
They got busy and had a working prototype in a couple weeks.
Of course the boss had shown them a faked film to break the bonds of
their minds.
And of course it was SciFi.
But some SciFi becomes reality.
Hell, who would have ever thought a beer can pull tab would be
possible? I can't remember the last time I saw a church key.

--Vic

On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:26:32 -0400, Gogarty
wrote:

He was the most down to earth person I havever met and the very best
advertisement for getting rich. He made bundles and earned it, not like
these Wall St. parasites.

Yep, millionaires sure ain't what they used to be.

--Vic

On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:06:13 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote this crap:



I envision one day soon a device about the size of a laptop computer
that will allow us to communicate with anybody else anywhere in the
world


Naw! If that happens, people will use it for porn.





I'm Horvath and I approve of this post.

"Gogarty" wrote in message
...
In article s.com,
llid says...


Burn salt water instead . . .

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

Wilbur Hubbard


Hmmm. He's using radio frequencies to dissociate water into its
elements, hydrogen and oxygen. What becomes of the sodiumn and
chlorine
ions?

The salt just stays in the water and maybe makes it a little saltier.

Not to mention the other elements and compounds found in sea
water. The only thing that's burning here is the hydrogen, either
recombining with the oxygen or after being piped away. And then
there's
the chlorine. Does it recombine with hydrogen instead of sodium and
become HCl aka hydrochloric acid?

The sodium chloride molecules aren't disassociated. Why should they be
unless the RF breaks them up too but they're probably more stable. Most
salts are very stable.


We'll be buring diesel for quite some time, I'm afraid.


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

"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.

"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:
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

On Sep 12, 8:05 am, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:
"Duncan Heenan" wrote in message

...







"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in message
tanews.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- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Wilbur, Duncan lacks the ability to think out of the box. Exactly why
the Brit's gave up the right to bear arms.

Which do you think would be more important to mankind. Curing cancer
or unlimited fuel? This guy could do both.

Joe