The Cold Fusion Motor
HVAC
Cough, cough (bullshit) cough, cough.
""߃-- ¹¹"" <WF...@webtv.net> wrote in message news:
536-4865...@storefull-3311.bay.webtv.net...
Rory Johnson's Magnetron Motor, as he named it, was a revolutionary
new
source of power derived from the chemical reaction / fusion of
deuterium
and gallium.
That controlled reaction results in the fusion of two atoms forming a
new atom, he says. In the process, electricity is released and that is
what powers the engine,
Johnson in the early '50s worked for the Department of Defense. He
said
he spent most of that time flying to different defense installations
around the country, but would not say what his work entailed.
He later worked in research and development at several companies,
including Motorola, which brought him to Elgin, Illinois.
The Magnatron Motor discovery occurred by accident about 11 years ago,
Johnson said. He was developing a new type of electronic circuit using
deuterium oxide and gallium when he noticed the two materials were
producing energy on their own. He said he could not figure out what
was
triggering the energy production for quite a while. He finally
discovered it was light.
That controlled reaction results in the fusion of two atoms forming a
new atom, he says. In the process, electricity is released and that is
what powers the engine,
In his Magnatron motor, the two elements are fused together by using a
diffraction prism ("Not a laser"), Johnson said.
The Magnatron is sealed, however, so 'light' is provided from photon
energy produced from coils tied directly to the motor, Johnson said.
"It's more or less a pulse-generated system", he added.
Johnson would not say how the energy is converted to electricity to
power the motor.
He said that is his secret discovery and he fears if he lets the
knowledge out it could be used for weapon production. "The Defense
Department is working on producing a missile that generates and emits
its own electrical power. I don't want to produce another weapon", he
said.
Mike E. Fullerton
> Cough, cough (bullshit) cough, cough.
Is your statement based on anything resembling fact or merely mindless
belief?
> ""߃-- ¹¹"" <WF...@webtv.net> wrote in message news:
> 536-4865...@storefull-3311.bay.webtv.net...
> Rory Johnson's Magnetron Motor, as he named it, was a revolutionary
> new
> source of power derived from the chemical reaction / fusion of
> deuterium
> and gallium.
--
Skeptopathy (pathological skepticism)
the unscientific belief that unusual phenomena are bunk.
HVAC
"Mike E. Fullerton" <infor...@spam-killer-remove-techie.com> wrote
in message news:6U7ak.44258$Jx.43096@pd7urf1no...
'Deja-Poo'... The feeling that I've heard this shit before.
George
> 'Deja-Poo'... The feeling that I've heard this shit before.
I love the out.
Oh it might be used as a munition so I won't tell any-one how it works
or actually build any...
There's a bridge somewhere out there
Bryan Olson
> HVAC wrote:
>> Cough, cough (bullshit) cough, cough.
>
> Is your statement based on anything resembling fact or merely mindless
> belief?
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.(*)
My favorite part: "He was developing a new type of electronic
circuit using deuterium oxide and gallium when he noticed..."
A new electronic circuit using heavy water? How was that
supposed to work? Where does a guy working for himself get
such stuff?
When investors asked about the results, they were told Johnson
died. He left behind many tall tails, but no working motors, no
free or nearly-free energy.
(*)Bob Dylan, "Subterranean Homesick Blues", 1965.
--
--Bryan
Richo
Yep.
Pure A-grade male bovine manure.
I love the way they use technical sounding words arranged in
completely meaningless ways.
"Well it sounds all sciency!"
Mark.
Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)
I got suspicious at the "cold-fusion" bit, but then they claimed they
extracted energy in the form of electricity but that a motor was at
the core of how it all worked. And somehow the conversion from
photons to electricity is the top secret bit.
Not to mention "Magnatron motor" seems to be a very common name for
"skyhook we want to fleece you with".
And that they can't seem to sort out the difference between chemical
and fusion reactions.
and
and
Al
MarkA
>
> "Mike E. Fullerton" <infor...@spam-killer-remove-techie.com> wrote
> in message news:6U7ak.44258$Jx.43096@pd7urf1no...
>> HVAC wrote:
>>> Cough, cough (bullshit) cough, cough.
>>
>> Is your statement based on anything resembling fact or merely mindless
>> belief?
>>
>>> ""߃-- ¹¹"" <WF...@webtv.net> wrote in message news:
>>> 536-4865...@storefull-3311.bay.webtv.net...
>>> Rory Johnson's Magnetron Motor, as he named it, was a revolutionary
>>> new
>>> source of power derived from the chemical reaction / fusion of
>>> deuterium
>>> and gallium.
..."chemical reaction / fusion of deuterium and gallium."??? Which is it?
Chemical reactions are not nuclear events. If you can't tell which you
are seeing, you don't know what you are looking at.
>>
>> --
>> Skeptopathy (pathological skepticism)
>> the unscientific belief that unusual phenomena are bunk.
>
People have been talking up "cold fusion" for *decades.* So far, no body
has been able to show that it actually exists. For a good, rational
examination, read Park's "Voodoo Science." An "unusual phenomenon" may
not be bunk, but it isn't cold fusion, either.
>
> 'Deja-Poo'... The feeling that I've heard this shit before.
About a gazillion times? Don't you think they'd have something more
convincing that hand waving by now?
--
MarkA
Keeper of Things Put There Only Just The Night Before
About eight o'clock
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
Mike E. Fullerton
> Mike E. Fullerton wrote:
>> HVAC wrote:
>>> Cough, cough (bullshit) cough, cough.
>>
>> Is your statement based on anything resembling fact or merely mindless
>> belief?
>
> You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.(*)
You can't be severely mentally retarded or insane though. Pathological
skepticism requires at least one of these qualities.
> My favorite part: "He was developing a new type of electronic
> circuit using deuterium oxide and gallium when he noticed..."
> A new electronic circuit using heavy water? How was that
> supposed to work? Where does a guy working for himself get
> such stuff?
Are those his words or the reporter's?
> When investors asked about the results, they were told Johnson
> died. He left behind many tall tails, but no working motors, no
> free or nearly-free energy.
Well that proves it!
Mike E. Fullerton
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:50:21 -0700, HVAC wrote:
>
>> "Mike E. Fullerton" <infor...@spam-killer-remove-techie.com> wrote
>> in message news:6U7ak.44258$Jx.43096@pd7urf1no...
>>> HVAC wrote:
>>>> Cough, cough (bullshit) cough, cough.
>>> Is your statement based on anything resembling fact or merely mindless
>>> belief?
>>>
>>>> ""߃-- ¹¹"" <WF...@webtv.net> wrote in message news:
>>>> 536-4865...@storefull-3311.bay.webtv.net...
>>>> Rory Johnson's Magnetron Motor, as he named it, was a revolutionary
>>>> new
>>>> source of power derived from the chemical reaction / fusion of
>>>> deuterium
>>>> and gallium.
>
> ..."chemical reaction / fusion of deuterium and gallium."??? Which is it?
> Chemical reactions are not nuclear events. If you can't tell which you
> are seeing, you don't know what you are looking at.
And this is a problem because...? If I obtain a reaction with excess
heat that can't be explained I might surmise its from a chemical or
nuclear reaction. Why should I care? I've got a bloody (heavy) water
powered car.
>>> --
>>> Skeptopathy (pathological skepticism)
>>> the unscientific belief that unusual phenomena are bunk.
>
> People have been talking up "cold fusion" for *decades.* So far, no body
> has been able to show that it actually exists. For a good, rational
> examination, read Park's "Voodoo Science." An "unusual phenomenon" may
> not be bunk, but it isn't cold fusion, either.
Competent scientists have been talking up cold fusion for decades
because it is a real phenomena. It is bizarre, difficult to replicate
and not well understood. Because of these factors incompetent
"scientists" and pathological skeptics have been ridiculing it instead
of researching or even reading about it. You can't see something if you
don't look at it.
>> 'Deja-Poo'... The feeling that I've heard this shit before.
>
> About a gazillion times? Don't you think they'd have something more
> convincing that hand waving by now?
How ironic.
george
techie.com> wrote:
> Competent scientists have been talking up cold fusion for decades
> because it is a real phenomena.
No! It's a dream and at present nonexistant.
However one day some-one just -might- produce a replicable expeiment
but personally I doubt it .
>It is bizarre, difficult to replicate
> and not well understood. Because of these factors incompetent
> "scientists" and pathological skeptics have been ridiculing it instead
> of researching or even reading about it. You can't see something if you
> don't look at it.
Or if it doesn't exist.
Mike E. Fullerton
> On Jul 2, 5:48 am, "Mike E. Fullerton" <inforequ...@spam-killer-remove-
> techie.com> wrote:
>
>> Competent scientists have been talking up cold fusion for decades
>> because it is a real phenomena.
>
> No! It's a dream and at present nonexistant.
> However one day some-one just -might- produce a replicable expeiment
> but personally I doubt it .
The dream is yours.
http://peswiki.com/energy/Directory:Cold_Fusion
>> It is bizarre, difficult to replicate
>> and not well understood. Because of these factors incompetent
>> "scientists" and pathological skeptics have been ridiculing it instead
>> of researching or even reading about it. You can't see something if you
>> don't look at it.
>
> Or if it doesn't exist.
dmaster
> >> in messagenews:6U7ak.44258$Jx.43096@pd7urf1no...
> >>> HVAC wrote:
> >>>> Cough, cough (bullshit) cough, cough.
> >>> Is your statement based on anything resembling fact or merely mindless
> >>> belief?
>
> >>>> 536-48650B38-...@storefull-3311.bay.webtv.net...
> >>>> Rory Johnson's Magnetron Motor, as he named it, was a revolutionary
> >>>> new
> >>>> source of power derived from the chemical reaction / fusion of
> >>>> deuterium
> >>>> and gallium.
>
> > ..."chemical reaction / fusion of deuterium and gallium."??? Which is it?
> > Chemical reactions are not nuclear events. If you can't tell which you
> > are seeing, you don't know what you are looking at.
>
> And this is a problem because...? If I obtain a reaction with excess
> heat that can't be explained I might surmise its from a chemical or
> nuclear reaction. Why should I care? I've got a bloody (heavy) water
> powered car.
He didn't say it produced heat. He said it produced electricity.
Nuclear reactions produce energy in the form of radiation. Chemical
reactions produce energy in the form of heat. We know of a couple of
ways to produce electricity - photo-voltaic and bi-metalic junction -
but those aren't chemical or nuclear. Still the guy does mention
light and prisms. One of his materials, gallium, has been used in a
lot of semi-conductors. Deuterium is of course hydrogen and deuterium
oxide is water. Heavy water was used in the process of developing
fission reactions, though not in the reaction itself. Fusion
reactions use hydrogen. So the whole thing sounds like a complete
mishmash of science words related to energy. I suppose if you don't
really understand any of the science and you turn off your BS
detector, you could swallow this as another wonderful free energy type
story, but I hope you don't.
>
> >>> --
> >>> Skeptopathy (pathological skepticism)
> >>> the unscientific belief that unusual phenomena are bunk.
>
> > People have been talking up "cold fusion" for *decades.* So far, no body
> > has been able to show that it actually exists. For a good, rational
> > examination, read Park's "Voodoo Science." An "unusual phenomenon" may
> > not be bunk, but it isn't cold fusion, either.
>
> Competent scientists have been talking up cold fusion for decades
> because it is a real phenomena. It is bizarre, difficult to replicate
> and not well understood. Because of these factors incompetent
> "scientists" and pathological skeptics have been ridiculing it instead
> of researching or even reading about it. You can't see something if you
> don't look at it.
>
> >> 'Deja-Poo'... The feeling that I've heard this shit before.
>
> > About a gazillion times? Don't you think they'd have something more
> > convincing that hand waving by now?
>
> How ironic.
>
> --
> Skeptopathy (pathological skepticism)
> the unscientific belief that unusual phenomena are bunk.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
george
techie.com> wrote:
> The dream is yours.
>
> http://peswiki.com/energy/Directory:Cold_Fusion
Okay.
Tell me then where the operating system is situated.
There are a lot of experiments but nothing beyond the experimental
state.
It's been about 20 years since this idea was first shot down
MarkA
> On Jul 1, 12:48 pm, "Mike E. Fullerton" <inforequ...@spam-killer-
> remove-techie.com> wrote:
>> MarkA wrote:
>> > On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:50:21 -0700, HVAC wrote:
>>
>> >> "Mike E. Fullerton" <inforequ...@spam-killer-remove-techie.com> wrote
>> >> in messagenews:6U7ak.44258$Jx.43096@pd7urf1no...
>> >>> HVAC wrote:
>> >>>> Cough, cough (bullshit) cough, cough.
>> >>> Is your statement based on anything resembling fact or merely mindless
>> >>> belief?
>>
You can tell where Mike's head is when he admits that he doesn't care if
the reaction is chemical or nuclear. If you don't know what you're
looking at, it is much easier to be scammed. So far as I know, nobody is
driving around in a "(heavy) water powered car."
--
MarkA
(This space temporarily unavailable)
MarkA
<sarcasm>
Let's not be too harsh, here. Just because an idea promises to completely
revolutionize our energy infra-structure, and would have massive
implications not only for financial gain but also in our understanding of
nuclear physics, there's no reason to expect there to be any measurable
progress towards having a working system within 20 years!
</sarcasm>
--
MarkA
(This space temporarily unavailable)
Mike E. Fullerton
You're right, the article writer mentioned chemical reaction not Johnson.
> Nuclear reactions produce energy in the form of radiation. Chemical
> reactions produce energy in the form of heat. We know of a couple of
> ways to produce electricity - photo-voltaic and bi-metalic junction -
> but those aren't chemical or nuclear. Still the guy does mention
> light and prisms. One of his materials, gallium, has been used in a
> lot of semi-conductors. Deuterium is of course hydrogen and deuterium
> oxide is water. Heavy water was used in the process of developing
> fission reactions, though not in the reaction itself. Fusion
> reactions use hydrogen. So the whole thing sounds like a complete
> mishmash of science words related to energy. I suppose if you don't
> really understand any of the science and you turn off your BS
> detector, you could swallow this as another wonderful free energy type
> story, but I hope you don't.
Many cold fusion cells use heavy water as a source of hydrogen. Liquid
gallium can theoretically be used to contain the heat involved in
plasma fusion environments due to its wide temperature range and low
chemical reactivity. Our fusion reactions typically use hydrogen but any
atoms could fuse to form a heavier nucleus. Did Johnson even call it
fusion or was that some reporter? In some accounts he described it as
blending which is not the same thing.
Mike E. Fullerton
> On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:45:32 -0700, george wrote:
>
>> On Jul 2, 5:26 pm, "Mike E. Fullerton" <inforequ...@spam-killer-remove-
>> techie.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The dream is yours.
>>>
>>> http://peswiki.com/energy/Directory:Cold_Fusion
>> Okay.
>> Tell me then where the operating system is situated.
Tell me where the economically viable hot fusion reactor is.
>> There are a lot of experiments but nothing beyond the experimental
>> state.
Same as hot fusion for a lot longer, you think its bunk too?
>> It's been about 20 years since this idea was first shot down
Yes 20 years of the raving stupidity of pathological skepticism.
> <sarcasm>
> Let's not be too harsh, here. Just because an idea promises to completely
> revolutionize our energy infra-structure, and would have massive
> implications not only for financial gain but also in our understanding of
> nuclear physics, there's no reason to expect there to be any measurable
> progress towards having a working system within 20 years!
> </sarcasm>
The same can be said of hot fusion. Obscene amounts of money have been
funneled into the hot fusion black hole for far more than 20 years yet
this technology does not attract raving hordes of pathological skeptics
that cold fusion does. Why the double standard?
MarkA
For the simple reason that we *know* that hot fusion occurs. A shining
example rises in the east every day. The technological hurdle is to slow
down the reaction enough to make it useful for something besides blowing
big holes in the ground.
Though I am not a nuclear physicist, my understanding of cold fusion is
that it would require hydrogen nuclei to behave in a way that they have
never been known to behave. We know an awful lot about the way that
hydrogen nuclei behave, and to propose that they can do something entirely
new is a bit of a stretch.
That is not a double standard, nor is it "pathological skepticism." It is
appropriate skepticism. You may want to review the definition of
"gullibility".
george
> Though I am not a nuclear physicist, my understanding of cold fusion is
> that it would require hydrogen nuclei to behave in a way that they have
> never been known to behave. We know an awful lot about the way that
> hydrogen nuclei behave, and to propose that they can do something entirely
> new is a bit of a stretch.
Hopefully the 'search' for cold fusion will open other fields of
research with more chance of success.
But I doubt it..
Bryan Olson
> dmaster wrote:
>> Mike E. Fullerton wrote:
>>> MarkA wrote:
The major energy release is in fusing the small atoms, and past
the iron peak, it's a losing game.
> Did Johnson even call it
> fusion or was that some reporter? In some accounts he described it as
> blending which is not the same thing.
Whoever came up with the story, it's quite the load. Google finds
more, and it's got the usual free-energy scam markers: nonsensical
science, bilked investors, even that powerful evil conspiracy that
keeps free energy down.
--
--Bryan
R. LaCasse
wrote:
|>
|>When investors asked about the results, they were told Johnson
|>died. He left behind many tall tails, but no working motors, no
|>free or nearly-free energy.
I had relatives with innovative power/petrol inventions, and after
they filled the copyright, the "Mibs" came over stole the plans, the working
model and smashed the warehouse to bits, leaving with their booty, saying
they worked with the Guv't of Quebec at the time and were supported by some
retarded GRCs.....
The Guvmint is doing this shot all over the place, leaving the
smaller gangs and individuals with nothing but memories of a lifetime's work
after being stomped on by the Bushite/other gangsters....
Bob Casanova
in sci.skeptic, posted by R. LaCasse
<wiz...@french-connection.info>:
I had a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, a working model of
the Dean Drive and a carburetor that allowed 200mpg at an
engine output of 500hp, but Hitler's dog ate them.
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
Dave
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:35:58 -0700, Bryan Olson <fakeaddr...@nowhere.org>
Don't you know they weren't from the Bush government, but from the
future/alternate dimensions?
Should have distributed the info. on the internet. BTW you don't file
copyright, but patents.