I believe they crush technologies, but most of the things you mentioned aren’t true. There were no spaceships possible in the 1930s. Why crush that technology when they could have conquered the world with it?
It’s not possible to run cars on water. The thermodynamics just doesn’t make sense.
We have cars that run on biofuel, but mass-converting vehicles to that would drive up costs of food. Ethanol for fuel already does that by using farmland that could grow food.
I believe they crush technologies, but most of the things you mentioned aren’t true.
Beliefism and contradiction asserted.
There were no spaceships possible in the 1930s.
Foo fighters only showed up in the 1940s are you thinking? Or not even aware of those? Or the bell (“die glocke”)? Nor my earlier examples looked into? Just presuming? If so, how? By mistaking absence of evidence as evidence of absence?
Why crush that technology when they could have conquered the world with it?
LOL. Fun way to answer your own question.
It’s not possible to run cars on water.
Indeed. Any who attempt to, seem to die or disappear. … iirc, Stanley Meyers’ famous moment, running out of the restaurant from a meeting with some potential “investors”, shouting “THEY POISONED ME”, just before he died, seems to serve (intentionally or not) as a warning and disincentive to even try.
The thermodynamics just doesn’t make sense.
Have seen each of the methods of catalysis and can refute each? That’d be thoroughly educational|entertaining|enthralling to see.
[Just remembered before posting… didn’t one method use a combination of lasers and plasma… one of the cavitation methods… idk, been decades since looking into this stuff. Hazy tidbits of memories for the curious and studious to chase if they want. … (Perhaps futilely) hoping websearch not so censored as cannot find this stuff any more. ~ Had to dig 100s of pages deep into search results even back then.]
Even before learning more about the states of matter that water can get into (including recent stuff on it being two different liquid states simultaneously), the magnetic alignment method has fascinated me (~ in passing… I’ve run no tests ~ dear industry, pls leave me be. lol.). It would be great to share an exploration of the various ranges, of state conditionals; of energy levels, types, frequencies and wave shapes; of cavitation, aperture, geometry; of ortho water and para water, ratios thereof; of water isotopes; ratios thereof; of impurities, solutes, salinity, ionisation, pH; and so on. To really draw out the more complete matrix of water’s potential (~ at least in the mundane material utility sense). [/*dreamer*]
Anyways, the claims are out there. Mere nay-saying is an unsatisfactory replacement for refutation, especially amidst conflicts of interest and dogmatic world views that salaries depend upon. Closed minds are never wrong.
That was a test to see if you were for real. I have a new technology they don’t want you to know about. I just need an investor to help me build it. It recycles your feces into more food than you originally ate. If McDonalds finds out they will kill me. I can get you in on the ground floor for $10000
the last point are just the current status. there are various approaches to solve those issues, which could be explored more.
one examples that comes to mind is ethanol from algae, which live in salty water. i remember seeing a documentary about it, staying that you could just place them in big tanks in the desert. there they wouldn’t compete with food for land.
I’m not saying that this example solves everything, just that there could definitely be more research.
I wonder about coupling such with things like mycelia too, that can grow from radiant energy besides light, and can form symbiotic relationships with plants, and so, maybe (if this isn’t too simple-thinking), yeast with algae, there could likewise by biological catalysis, synergies, mutual boons, that even then produce other useful stuff too.
~ that also got me thinking of the various pond surface plants, and how prolifically efficient growers they are too. Not sure how to put that to use, besides, idk, a source of protein and b12 for vegans.
~ and, not quite sure why, but that moonpool reforestation method springs to mind too. I don’t know how yet, but put all these things (and more) together, and, … good results. ;)
Heeh! :D I’ve just had effectively the exact same thing, except for advertising. “Mind control does not exist” they said, to the face of one saying they used to be one of those doing it!
Water powered car’s been invented more than just that once with the famous Stanley Meyer story. Y’know those blow torch thingies, that use water? Yeah, same basic principle. And remember in that special episode of Top Gear (I think it was maybe the Myanmar episode), where Hammond put a little water in his engine (in with the fuel) to give it more go at altitude? Same principle as many of the "water powered car"s use, where instead of (afaiu) electromagnetic alignment catalyst, they use chemical catalysts (and other starters and combustants etc), to which some eager naysayers throw the baby out with the bathwater and proclaim it all bunk because those designs were not using pure water. … I’m not sure any use entirely pure water, do they? Didn’t even Stanley Meyers design involve some kind of other chemical in the mix too? I’m not looking into it any further than is popularly known. I don’t want to be mistaken for an inventor, attracting the attention of the ruthless unscrupulous sorts with a lot invested in their rentier ride. ;)
Amusing aside… can haz steam powered car too. ;) Too contrived to call that water powered? Hehe. Even a Stirling engine?
I’m assuming they were hoping you don’t actually believe it to be possible, not hoping that it’s impossible.
As far as I know, there’s no viable way to get water out of energy. All the different hydrocarbons we burn tend to produce water as a result of the burning process (CO2 and H2O being the results of a clean burning hydrocarbon).
The trouble is, you need energy to break bonds between atoms, and energy gets released as bonds are created. H2O has some pretty strong bonds and there’s nothing you can easily make it react with to get more or stronger bonds in there.
Water can be used in internal combustion engines to cool down the combustion chambers if you’re running super high performance, but that doesn’t meant water injection is adding energy from water, you’d still be burning more fuel to get more power.
They make cars which run on hydrogen which you can get from water but that process is so inefficient they opt to get the hydrogen from natural gas instead thus defeating the entire purpose. Overall we have better tech now than “running a car on water” and doing that doesn’t help the bigger problem of unsustainable use of energy
The only practical way to get power from water is to break it apart and then burn the hydrogen, and it takes more energy to break it apart than you’ll get back.
A lot of the replies to this, in rough grok analysis of epistemics at play, to be fair, remind me more of those who kept insisting blue LED were impossible, and their arguments remind me more of “we cannot have spaceships because the string doors won’t work in space” type arguments, more than they remind me of industry agents intentionally sowing seeds of ignorance squared. [~ Mild confidence. Generously [amidst some redherrings and moved goalposts etc.].]
… And fun to think of the contrast of those two examples. They’re [/you’re] almost certainly seeing this with blue LED, and blue LED was sought by industry, did not obsolete their industry, but enhanced the demand for their product, while augmenting the appeal and profit margins and all kinds of other features (~ radically different world where we did not yet get blue led… smart phones wouldn’t have happened, for a start). They’re [you’re] almost certainly not seeing this while sat in their [/your] own spaceship, nor even a water powered car… probably not even a car fuelled with hemp oil or ethanol (~ radically different world where we did not get any of those suppressed… far fewer incentive for resource wars, far greater self empowerment and a better educated and empowered populace, resulting in better democracy from that better informed public, with a better practical grasp of energy, utility, facility, society, health and more, on the road to becoming polymaths in the making (~ rather than single-purpose slaves in training)).
Y’know we could have had spaceships each since the 1930s, right?
Or even just running our cars on seed oils, like hempseed oil, or plant derived ethanol.
Or even just running our cars on water.
… If they’d stop killing inventors and stop abusing the patent system to secretize emancipatory technologies.
I believe they crush technologies, but most of the things you mentioned aren’t true. There were no spaceships possible in the 1930s. Why crush that technology when they could have conquered the world with it? It’s not possible to run cars on water. The thermodynamics just doesn’t make sense. We have cars that run on biofuel, but mass-converting vehicles to that would drive up costs of food. Ethanol for fuel already does that by using farmland that could grow food.
Beliefism and contradiction asserted.
Foo fighters only showed up in the 1940s are you thinking? Or not even aware of those? Or the bell (“die glocke”)? Nor my earlier examples looked into? Just presuming? If so, how? By mistaking absence of evidence as evidence of absence?
LOL. Fun way to answer your own question.
Indeed. Any who attempt to, seem to die or disappear. … iirc, Stanley Meyers’ famous moment, running out of the restaurant from a meeting with some potential “investors”, shouting “THEY POISONED ME”, just before he died, seems to serve (intentionally or not) as a warning and disincentive to even try.
Have seen each of the methods of catalysis and can refute each? That’d be thoroughly educational|entertaining|enthralling to see.
[Just remembered before posting… didn’t one method use a combination of lasers and plasma… one of the cavitation methods… idk, been decades since looking into this stuff. Hazy tidbits of memories for the curious and studious to chase if they want. … (Perhaps futilely) hoping websearch not so censored as cannot find this stuff any more. ~ Had to dig 100s of pages deep into search results even back then.]
Even before learning more about the states of matter that water can get into (including recent stuff on it being two different liquid states simultaneously), the magnetic alignment method has fascinated me (~ in passing… I’ve run no tests ~ dear industry, pls leave me be. lol.). It would be great to share an exploration of the various ranges, of state conditionals; of energy levels, types, frequencies and wave shapes; of cavitation, aperture, geometry; of ortho water and para water, ratios thereof; of water isotopes; ratios thereof; of impurities, solutes, salinity, ionisation, pH; and so on. To really draw out the more complete matrix of water’s potential (~ at least in the mundane material utility sense). [/*dreamer*]
Anyways, the claims are out there. Mere nay-saying is an unsatisfactory replacement for refutation, especially amidst conflicts of interest and dogmatic world views that salaries depend upon. Closed minds are never wrong.
That was a test to see if you were for real. I have a new technology they don’t want you to know about. I just need an investor to help me build it. It recycles your feces into more food than you originally ate. If McDonalds finds out they will kill me. I can get you in on the ground floor for $10000
the last point are just the current status. there are various approaches to solve those issues, which could be explored more.
one examples that comes to mind is ethanol from algae, which live in salty water. i remember seeing a documentary about it, staying that you could just place them in big tanks in the desert. there they wouldn’t compete with food for land.
I’m not saying that this example solves everything, just that there could definitely be more research.
Certainly a part, a potential.
I wonder about coupling such with things like mycelia too, that can grow from radiant energy besides light, and can form symbiotic relationships with plants, and so, maybe (if this isn’t too simple-thinking), yeast with algae, there could likewise by biological catalysis, synergies, mutual boons, that even then produce other useful stuff too.
~ that also got me thinking of the various pond surface plants, and how prolifically efficient growers they are too. Not sure how to put that to use, besides, idk, a source of protein and b12 for vegans.
~ and, not quite sure why, but that moonpool reforestation method springs to mind too. I don’t know how yet, but put all these things (and more) together, and, … good results. ;)
Bingo. I used to work for Shell. This is exactly what they do. And whenever I tell people I get told I’m a conspiracy theorist.
Heeh! :D I’ve just had effectively the exact same thing, except for advertising. “Mind control does not exist” they said, to the face of one saying they used to be one of those doing it!
Nah, they’d use it for themselves to build a Meth star, and blow up Earth, as they float off into space.
I hope the water thing is /s
The whole post is ridiculous. Putting cars on the water and inventing boats is pretty funny though.
Why do you want that to be sarcasm?
Wouldn’t you prefer that to be true??
You hope differently to me.
Water powered car’s been invented more than just that once with the famous Stanley Meyer story. Y’know those blow torch thingies, that use water? Yeah, same basic principle. And remember in that special episode of Top Gear (I think it was maybe the Myanmar episode), where Hammond put a little water in his engine (in with the fuel) to give it more go at altitude? Same principle as many of the "water powered car"s use, where instead of (afaiu) electromagnetic alignment catalyst, they use chemical catalysts (and other starters and combustants etc), to which some eager naysayers throw the baby out with the bathwater and proclaim it all bunk because those designs were not using pure water. … I’m not sure any use entirely pure water, do they? Didn’t even Stanley Meyers design involve some kind of other chemical in the mix too? I’m not looking into it any further than is popularly known. I don’t want to be mistaken for an inventor, attracting the attention of the ruthless unscrupulous sorts with a lot invested in their rentier ride. ;)
Amusing aside… can haz steam powered car too. ;) Too contrived to call that water powered? Hehe. Even a Stirling engine?
I’m assuming they were hoping you don’t actually believe it to be possible, not hoping that it’s impossible.
As far as I know, there’s no viable way to get water out of energy. All the different hydrocarbons we burn tend to produce water as a result of the burning process (CO2 and H2O being the results of a clean burning hydrocarbon).
The trouble is, you need energy to break bonds between atoms, and energy gets released as bonds are created. H2O has some pretty strong bonds and there’s nothing you can easily make it react with to get more or stronger bonds in there.
Water can be used in internal combustion engines to cool down the combustion chambers if you’re running super high performance, but that doesn’t meant water injection is adding energy from water, you’d still be burning more fuel to get more power.
They make cars which run on hydrogen which you can get from water but that process is so inefficient they opt to get the hydrogen from natural gas instead thus defeating the entire purpose. Overall we have better tech now than “running a car on water” and doing that doesn’t help the bigger problem of unsustainable use of energy
The only practical way to get power from water is to break it apart and then burn the hydrogen, and it takes more energy to break it apart than you’ll get back.
A lot of the replies to this, in rough grok analysis of epistemics at play, to be fair, remind me more of those who kept insisting blue LED were impossible, and their arguments remind me more of “we cannot have spaceships because the string doors won’t work in space” type arguments, more than they remind me of industry agents intentionally sowing seeds of ignorance squared. [~ Mild confidence. Generously [amidst some redherrings and moved goalposts etc.].]
… And fun to think of the contrast of those two examples. They’re [/you’re] almost certainly seeing this with blue LED, and blue LED was sought by industry, did not obsolete their industry, but enhanced the demand for their product, while augmenting the appeal and profit margins and all kinds of other features (~ radically different world where we did not yet get blue led… smart phones wouldn’t have happened, for a start). They’re [you’re] almost certainly not seeing this while sat in their [/your] own spaceship, nor even a water powered car… probably not even a car fuelled with hemp oil or ethanol (~ radically different world where we did not get any of those suppressed… far fewer incentive for resource wars, far greater self empowerment and a better educated and empowered populace, resulting in better democracy from that better informed public, with a better practical grasp of energy, utility, facility, society, health and more, on the road to becoming polymaths in the making (~ rather than single-purpose slaves in training)).