Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

sonoluminescence: sonofusion explained

4 views
Skip to first unread message

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 21, 2008, 11:13:46 PM11/21/08
to
The first to accomplish Sonofusion has to be the Pistol shrimp.

In 1874 John W. Keely described and demonstrated the acoustic
dissociation of water.

In 1970, Dr. Andrija Puharich (MD) acidentally made oxyhydrogen gas
while subjecting blood to specific freqencies. Unknowingly
reproducing Keely's work.

Punarich refined system has a barrel-shaped cavity containing water.
He introduces alternating current at 600 Hz. The cavity
resonates with the impulses. Adding additional harmonics, cause
the proton in the hydrogen atom to rotate, further forcing the
hydrogen to split from the oxygen.

Keely stated that water can be progressively dissociated at 620, 630
and 12,000 Hz (These are on the molecular, atomic and etheric levels
respectively.)

Punarich 600 cps is a harmonic of Keely's 12,000 Hz etheric level

12,000 / 20 = 600

Keely also claims that the disruption of water occurs at 42,800
cycles per second.

It is significant to note that Punarich converted his motor home to
run on water and reportedly drove it around for hundreds of thousands
of miles using water as fuel.

This of course all means nothing to the stubborn disbelievers so let
us continue the journey.

Nobel prize winner Dr. Nakamats who holds over 3000 patents and
invented the floppy disk claimed his Nostradam II engine can make free
energy from water. His patent describes the use of a resonating member
to disassociate water into hydrogen and oxygen.

The hundreds of laboratory confirmations of Pons and Fleishman's cold
fusion setup also deserves a note here.

Lets not forget Stanley Meyer, who obviously coudn't be expected to
explain everything he invented. Stan's hardware has been
experimentally examined by Dr. Eugene Antonov, Dr. Vladimir
Dresyiannikov, Dr. Tibor Nagypal, Roy Azevedo, Peter Graneau, Charles
Millet, Neal Graneau, Gary Johnson, Rea O’Neill, Prof. Mike Laughton,
Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin, Dr Keith Hindley, US military, US Patent
Office experts and the Pantent Office seconded experts.

The basic WFC was subjected to three years of testing. This raises the
granted patents to the level of independent, critical, scientific and
engineering confirmation that the devices actually perform as claimed.

Named scientists have observed the cell making gas without heating up
for many hours at a time.

Former NASA scientist Daniel Dingle has been driving around in a car
running on water since 1965. He deserves the benefit of the doubt
because not one news agency has dared to visit him.

Heavy water physicist Yull Brown has unquestionably demonstrated we
are dealing with a nuclear reaction by neutralising radioactive
materials using a brown gas torch. This is a soup made of water
droplets, steam, protonic and normal hydrogen and oxygen.

NASA scientist Herman P. Anderson has also managed to accomplish cheap
dissociation of water.

Anderson, Brown, Dingle, Punarich, Nakamats and Meyer have all build
cars running on water. A car with a Garrett carburetor drove
journalists around Texas as early as 1935 refueling at the lake. Denis
Klein also build a car running on it's own hydrogen source.

Even when one asserts all of the above to be hoaxes in the face of our
world problems, even then the pistol shrimp will be staring you in the
face.

By lack of business insight perhaps you don't want to believe in
conspiracies but....

....why is Keely's patent still not listed?

.... what business does Congress have debunking sonofusion?

http://www.dailytech.com/murky+waters+surround+purdues+latest+bubble+fusion+inquiry/article7245.htm
>Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 21:24:24 -0400
>From: "Rusi P. Taleyarkhan"
>
>I am away from campus and could not respond earlier but suffice to say
>I and several of my colleagues are apalled at the note from Rep.Miller
>for it's lack of balance and single-minded fervor to posit a
>prejudicial one-sidedness. I will be able to talk with you next
>Monday if you wish but thought I'd share my views with you here. Feel
>free to contact several of my co-authors (cc'd to this message).
>
>Basically, One must question:
>
>- Why did this memo/letter from Rep. Miller's office intentionally
>omit ANY/ALL mention of the positive findings and supporting evidence
>from the many reports from Purdue Univ. committees that ultimately
>prevailed to have Purdue's peers and administrators make it's
>February,2007 decision to issue it's Press release concluding no
>misconduct and no need for further investigations? Why this
>intentional cherry-picking of points from the written reports
>specially chosen to portray a negative image? Is this the American
>system we are to follow, or is it just politics as usual? As written,
>the memo/letter essentially presents only the accusers points of view
>and passes it's verdict on the accusations.
>
>- Why did this memo/letter completely disregard the mass of
>supporting evidence / information sent to it by me separately
>(including a statement to Congress) that essentially answered all of
>the accusations being levied with vitriolic fervor?
>
>- Why is it that the same people/detractors who openly as of last
>December eagerly awaited Purdue's verdict on my work during the
>year-long reviews and examination of facts, only to then come out to
>challenge the same once the verdict was announced because the outcome
>was not what they wanted to hear? Smacks of sour-grapes and
>reminiscent of the political knee-jerk demand for a recount during
>political season.
>
>- Fundamentally, why would Purdue administration want to side with me
>rather than the accusers, one of them who was an administrator himself
>who fell from grace for his many actions totally unrelated to bubble
>fusion? In fact, I am the one who has borne the brunt of the burden
>for extraordinary proof based on which Purdue made the Feb.2007 Press
>announcement absolving me of research misconduct.
>
>- Why is it that per rules of engagement the requirements for
>confidentiality in State of Indiana's C-22 Process being selectively
>applied to me? Why is it that the illegal actions of some go
>intentionally unpunished even when they openly are defiant of the
>admonishments from the Provost and the rules we are all expected to
>abide by?
>
>- By any stretch this transmittal represents a gross travesty of
>justice. Where are the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the Asian
>community during this episode that has caused this biased and openly
>one-sided smear campaign?
>
>Rusi Taleyarkhan

http://www.thenational.ae/article/20081026/FRONTIERS/286862798/1036/NATIONAL
"Just what does it take before a revolutionary discovery is accepted
by the world's scientific community? That's the question raised by
renewed claims by a US-based company to have found a radically new
source of energy."

http://www.blacklightpower.com/index.shtml
"BlackLight Power, Inc. is the inventor of a new primary energy source
with applications to heating, distributed power generation, central
power generation, and motive power. It is based on a new chemical
process of releasing the latent energy of the hydrogen atom, the
BlackLight Process. On October 20, 2008, BlackLight announced off-site
validation of a 50 kW reactor. Rowan Scientists confirmed BLP's 1 kW
and 50 kW power source tests corresponding to 20 kilojoules and 1.0
megajoules respectively. Chemical analysis of the reactant and
product R-Ni powder could account for less than 1% of the observed
energy from known chemistry. BlackLight's results have been published
widely and replicated by independent groups."

Archimedes Plutonium wrote the following 11 years ago:

Message from discussion Put ITER and NOVA on ice; and all-out-attack
on Sonofusion
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.fusion/msg/83b267c7a1697708?hl=en
On Aug 3 1997, 8:00 am, Archimedes.Pluton...@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes
Plutonium) wrote:
> In article <33E3E1CD.1F9DC...@ma.ultranet.com>
> Cesium-137 <g...@ma.ultranet.com> writes:
> > Fool is pushing it a little, but you have to realize lack of creativity
> > isn't what is going to kill sono (I do happen to believe sono
> > experiments will be continuing for a very very long time). What is going
> > to be sono's down fall is the fact that in opaque liquids one cannot
> > make the needed observations required for cell adjustment. Now, I am
> > sure there will be many experments with sono in cryo liquids; so, keep
> > your eyes peeled.
>
> Greg, I thought you promised to experiment with mercurysonofusion
> come August, and this is August. Would it not be better quality time
> with the experiment rather than make posts to the Net? What neutron
> measurements do you plan to make on the mercury?
> My writings have a _Policy Statement_ included and therefore should
> be heeded more than your writings, Greg. The policy statement concerns
> the funding of big science projects. It is _Pragmatic_.
>
> Policy Statement--- fund those big science projects which demonstrate
> a *beneficial surprize* along the way.
>
> So, let us review the history of these three competing engineering
> fusion programs.
>
> (1) Tokamak fusion: started 1950, spent 15 billion, with never any
> beneficial surprizes along the way. At best achieved 1/4 breakeven.
> (2) Laser (Shiva -Nova) fusion: started 1970, spent 5 billion, with
> never any beneficial surprizes along the way. Again, at best achieved
> was 1/4 breakeven
>
> (3)Sonofusion: started 1988, spent only some thousands of dollars,
> not millions nor billions. A huge big surprize occurred in the year
> 1990 when Gaitan & Crum were able to sustain a stable large bubble that
> was repeatable. Two big surprizes, stability and repeatability. This
> bubble can already be used to produce lasers. So already this 1990
> discovery has engineering use.
>
> So, from judging the history of seeking fusion energy, already, of
> the 3 contenders we have a front runner according to the _policy
> statement_.
>
> How much would it cost both in time and in money to setup Sonofusion
> with the most advanced state of the art equipment and to accurately
> measure forsonofusion in 1,000 different liquids, liquids of nearly
> all the elements of the periodic table and 900 others and their various
> different dopings. My estimate is in the low millions of dollars. How
> much time? I suspect in less than 1 to 2 years of diligent work. Then,
> if no further big surprize comes withSonofusionafter the 2 years time
> is up, back to the ITER and NOVA and their increased budgets and
> activities. But in the meantime, the 2 years for Sonofusion, keep
> tokamak and laser fusion at this level with no increase. After the 2
> years is up with intense research into those 1,000 liquids, and no
> further big surprize, then back to ITER and NOVA on schedule.
>
> My policy statement was recently put into action. Although I must
> admit that I arrived at this policy statement after the deeds and
> actions had already been committed. I bespeak of the Mars Pathfinder
> mission. Here we had big science project. And before the Mars
> expedition we had other planets and satellites competing for space
> missions. But a big beneficial surprize came to the space program in
> the form of a Mars meteorite found on the South Pole that was
> discovered to "claim purported life". That discovery justified the
> spending for the Pathfinder mission to Mars. Here we have an example of
> a big science project that follows my policy statement to the tee.
>
> So, considering that Sonofusion of the three types of fusion design
> has been the only research to turn up a big beneficial surprize. And
> considering that the cheap money and the small amount of time, 2 years
> is fast, that the knowledge gained of 1,000 different liquids and
> dopings, knowledge that will be sought in the future anyway! That this
> route makes the most pragmatic and commonsense.
>
> And also,Sonofusion, if it exists is either directly related to
> Laser fusion, in that the collapsing bubble is the laser driver. Or, Sonofusion, on the remote chance could be a tiny *supernova-physics*.
>
> What I am implying above is that Sonofusionis combinable with Nova
> Laser type fusion. Instead of the pellet to be fused with Lasers. Stick
> the Sonobubble in the center of the Lasers and help the Sonobubble
> along with achieving fusion. But we need to know what the best liquid
> is and doping is.

It works with tap water. Use a sonic jewelery cleaner tune it, add
high voltage to help it along. Mix in incombustible (exhaust) gasses
to prevent the hydrogen and oxygen from making pairs and to reduce the
burn speed.

Thanks for your time and good luck,

http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/1yrf1mzjtxzk5/2

Salmon Egg

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 12:12:40 AM11/22/08
to
In article
<9b08f0a7-5f5c-4c22...@u14g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,
gabydewilde <gdew...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The first to accomplish Sonofusion has to be the Pistol shrimp.
>
> In 1874 John W. Keely described and demonstrated the acoustic
> dissociation of water.
>
> In 1970, Dr. Andrija Puharich (MD) acidentally made oxyhydrogen gas
> while subjecting blood to specific freqencies. Unknowingly
> reproducing Keely's work.
>
> Punarich refined system has a barrel-shaped cavity containing water.
> He introduces alternating current at 600 Hz. The cavity
> resonates with the impulses. Adding additional harmonics, cause
> the proton in the hydrogen atom to rotate, further forcing the
> hydrogen to split from the oxygen.
>
> Keely stated that water can be progressively dissociated at 620, 630
> and 12,000 Hz (These are on the molecular, atomic and etheric levels
> respectively.)
>
> Punarich 600 cps is a harmonic of Keely's 12,000 Hz etheric level
>
> 12,000 / 20 = 600

<snip>

Being interested in sonoluminescence, I thought that I might find some
insight from this post. WAS I WRONG! The short quote indicates to me
that the poster knows little to nothing.

I would have more confidence in the Keely reference if there was
something to back it up. How was the sound generated? What was the
presumed mechanism for disassociation of water? Was cavitation involved.

Wikipedia lists Puharich as a parapsychologist--not a good credential
for a scientist. The poster does not seem to know the difference between
a harmonic and a subharmonic. While that is not a sin, it does not build
up confidence that the poster knows much about anything.

The frequencies listed are very low compared to any frequencies I would
expecg to find in a molecule. Even 12kHz is a low frequency for
molecules. It is difficult to make single quartz crystals that vibrate
at such a low frequency.

Later on, the poster mentioned a person holding 10,000 patents. That
roughly corresponds to a patent a day for nine years. It seems more like
a person filing for patents on everything to intimidate nuisance royalty
payments than true inventor. Even at $1000 a patent, it would cost about
$10,000.000 just in filing expenses.

Nuff said.

Bill

--
Private Profit; Public Poop! Avoid collateral windfall!

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 2:10:41 AM11/22/08
to
On Nov 22, 6:12 am, Salmon Egg <Salmon...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> <snip>

Hello mister .... egg?

You sound like you are looking for a good excuse to continue to be
ignorant.

We have a global energy crisis, are you ignorant about that also?

The economy is about to crash, are you ignorant about that also?

Are you going to research sonofusion when everyone is dead?

Is that the right time?

Lets do a little investigation who you are and where you are coming
from.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.engineering.electrical/browse_frm/thread/ccae58783128e281?hl=en
On Mar 4 2007, 10:04 pm, Salmon Egg <salmon...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 3/4/07 12:39 PM, in article 4bbmu25pfboaoo9q83stp98tjlmetm2...@4ax.com,
> "Terry" <Kilow...@charter.net> wrote:
> > I was watching Myth Busters. They raised a coil of wire to some high
> > voltage transmission lines.
>
> > It looked to me like they had the turns parallel to the power line.
> > They were not able to have much success.
>
> > Shouldn't the coil be perpendicular to the line?
>
> > Would this work?
>
> > Anyone see the show?
>
> At first, I thought the post was a kook post. Now I realize that your fraud
> receiver realized there was something wrong.
>

Ohhh? Look at you mister debunker?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/browse_frm/thread/fd058831993cd55e?hl=en&q=energy
On Aug 20 2006, 6:31 pm, Salmon Egg <salmon...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 8/20/06 5:38 AM, in article 4kr3dlFdgfh...@individual.net, "Dirk Bruere
>
> > Every claim of 'free energy' that I've come across fails to do this, for
> > very good reasons.
>
> > Dirk
>
> If you can find a reliable and well funded bookie taking bets on both sides
> of the issue, I am willing to put a considerable amount of money on the
> line. I won't tell you which side I will take because I do not wish to lower
> the odfs.

Ow, but it is very obvious what side you are on.

Now lets see what you wrote here.

> I would have more confidence in  the Keely reference if there was
> something to back it up.

Keely was obviously not believed, still it is important to add him to
the record. Confidence indicates you operate by some disbelieve
system. You don't want this to work right? Your comment clearly
indicates how you are looking for ways to not make it work.

> Wikipedia lists Puharich as a parapsychologist--not a good credential
> for a scientist.

You have little credibility using Wikipeida as a reference mister egg.
I don't see any egg professor listed in wikipedia btw.

Dr. Andrija Puharich M.D. was researching blood and rediscovered the
Keely freqencies then came to the same conclusion. He didn't know
about Keely.

M.D. = M.D.

You have very little credibility compared to the M.D. But lets use
Puharich own words:

"The basic cycle of using water for fuel is described in the following
two equations, familiar to every high school student of Chemistry:

H2O Electrolysis + 249.68 Btu Delta G ==> H2 + (1/2)O2 per mole of
water (1 mole = 18 gms.). (1)

This means that it requires 249.688 Btu of energy (from electricity)
to break water by electrocal fission into the gases hydrogen and
oxygen.

H2 and (1/2)O2 === catalyst ===> H2O - Delta H 302.375 Btu per mole
of water. (2)

This means that 302.375 Btu of energy (heat or electricity) will be
released when the gases, hydrogen and oxygen, combine. The end product
(the exhaust) from this reaction is water. Note that more energy
(under ideal conditions) is released from combining the gases than is
used to free them from water. It is know that under ideal conditions
it is possible to get some 20% more energy out of reaction (2) above,
then it takes to produce the gases of reaction (1) above. Therefore,
if reaction (1) could be carried out at 100% efficiency, the release
of energy from reaction (2) in an optimally efficient engine (such as
a low temperature fuel cell), there would be a net energy profit which
would make the use of water as a fuel an economically feasible source
of energy . "

USP # 4,394,230 ~ Method & Apparatus for Splitting Water Molecules

http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT4394230

Because you probably don't know anything about patents either.
80%-100% efficiency is a mandatory cap, beyond 100% you don't get a
patent. So that is why it says 100% efficient.

We should really judge you by your citation of wikipedia.

This is where the corporate petroleum mongers deleted Punarich from
the wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Water-fuelled_car&diff=next&oldid=245804997

Here is puharich lecture on the topic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oa0bFK6iNI

Here is puharich shaking hands with the pope

http://www.puharich.nl/Photos/imagine/019_jpg_jpg.htm

For such a faith based researcher like you this should be the most
credible reference thus far.

> The poster does not seem to know the difference between
> a harmonic and a subharmonic. While that is not a sin, it does not build
> up confidence that the poster knows much about anything.

Thank you for forgiving me for my sins. The whole world is dieing,
lets not pretend my credentials are worth killing everyone for. I have
documented more than enough for you.

You seem to be unfamiliar with harmony and sympaty.

This is a sin! You sinner!

> The frequencies listed are very low compared to any frequencies I would
> expecg to find in a molecule. Even 12kHz is a low frequency for
> molecules. It is difficult to make single quartz crystals that vibrate
> at such a low frequency.

You can use any harmonics. 42,800 Hz or 85,600 Hz or 161,200 etc etc

> Later on, the poster mentioned a person holding 10,000 patents.

Ow, your first clear act of data falsification egg man? Nakamats
claims to hold over 3000 patents. I haven't bothered to count them.

Here you are so obviously still looking for a way to debunk the topic.
Patents are meaningless in themselves. He got royalties over every
floppy disk that was ever sold. That alone should buy hims some
credibility for debunkors like you - egg head.

>That
> roughly corresponds to a patent a day for nine years.

He also writes books in a single day.

> It seems more like
> a person filing for patents on everything to intimidate nuisance royalty
> payments than true inventor. Even at $1000 a patent, it would cost about
> $10,000.000 just in filing expenses.

But 10 million isn't a lot of money for him.

Here is nakamats on BBC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjuyqjXbHKw

Yoshiro Nakamatsu ( born June 26, 1928), a.k.a. Dr. NakaMats, is a
Japanese inventor claiming to hold the world record for number of
inventions with over 3,000. He is known as the "Edison of Japan."
Nakamatsu claims that possibly his greatest invention is the floppy
disk (1950). He is the only person who has licensed 16 patents to IBM,
including the floppy disk. He created his first invention at the age
of five.

Nakamatsu is a graduate of the University of Tokyo. He has so far
completed four doctor thesis and claims that he will never stop
studying.

Archimedes, Michael Faraday, Marie Curie, Nikola Tesla and Yoshiro
Nakamatsu were chosen by U.S. Science Academic Society as the five
greatest scientists in history.

He was awarded the 2005 Ig Nobel prize for Nutrition, for
photographing and retrospectively analyzing every meal he has consumed
during a period of 34 years (and counting). The goal of NakaMats is to
live over 140 years old.

He invented the Enerex, a pollution free car engine that runs on tap
water and can generate three times as much power as a standard
gasoline engine. It splits water, producing hydrogen as the fuel.

So your debunking failed miserably mister egg head?

Perhaps you can tell me where the bone in chicken eggs comes from.

Is it transmutation of elements? yes?

The pistol shrimp claims to create a flash of light, super high
temperature and radio waves using a cavitation in it's claw.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeFUO2F7Gvw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONQlTMUYCW4

His claims are supper debunked by MIT and congress. Obviously,
clearly, of course, so logically, wikipedia says it is all a hoax!

Just look under climate change denial.

You thought you could convince us all to just die now ahhh? You are a
mass murdering lunatic living of Asian child labor. That is who you
are. People are dieing in Africa because you are to fucking greedy to
buy them a simple pump. You like sending people to Iraq to die and
kill there. All for that petroleum you love so much.

And you want the western world dead also. Because of your preconceived
filth and scientific dishonesty.

Time to fuck off now Nazi boy.

http://knol.google.com/k/gaby-de-wilde/water-fueled-car/1yrf1mzjtxzk5/2

Mark Thorson

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 3:14:29 AM11/22/08
to
Salmon Egg wrote:
>
> Being interested in sonoluminescence, I thought that I might find some
> insight from this post. WAS I WRONG! The short quote indicates to me
> that the poster knows little to nothing.
>
> I would have more confidence in the Keely reference if there was
> something to back it up. How was the sound generated? What was the
> presumed mechanism for disassociation of water? Was cavitation involved.

Keely was a notorious con arist.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/keely/keely.htm

> Wikipedia lists Puharich as a parapsychologist--not a good credential
> for a scientist. The poster does not seem to know the difference between
> a harmonic and a subharmonic. While that is not a sin, it does not build
> up confidence that the poster knows much about anything.

Exactly.

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 4:01:39 AM11/22/08
to
On Nov 22, 9:14 am, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> Keely was a notorious con arist.
>

Declaired to be a con without anything to back up the acusation. False
acusation is of course a fraud in it self.

Mark Thorson is a con artist!

I can just say you are and that is all the proof needed? Right?

> Exactly.

Good to see you agree with me.

You wrote this in another topic:

On Nov 22, 3:34 am, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:
> "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |" wrote:
>
> > A link to a popular press article is not proof of much......Trig
>
> The article cites its sources in the scientific literature.
> If you question anything in the popular article, you can
> go back to original studies.

Lets try this with your debunkor website: lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/
keely/keely.htm First of all it is a website that only debunks things,
nothing is ever objectively studied here, it is debunking all the way.
As a source it is even worse than wikipedia. But at the end of the
page we find this referrence from a "believer".

http://www.svpvril.com/svpweb5.html#historical

So the debunkor website is actually referrencing some one who builds
Keely devices. So I have now explosed your fraud Mark Thorson. No more
proof is needed.

You sound like you are looking for a good excuse to continue to be
ignorant.

We have a global energy crisis, are you ignorant about that also?

The economy is about to crash, are you ignorant about that also?

Are you going to research sonofusion when everyone is dead?

Is that the right time?

Dr. Andrija Puharich M.D. was researching blood and rediscovered the

M.D. = M.D.

http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT4394230

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Water-fuelled_car&diff=next&oldid=245804997

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oa0bFK6iNI

http://www.puharich.nl/Photos/imagine/019_jpg_jpg.htm

For such a faith based wikipeida researcher like you this should be


the most
credible reference thus far.

or not?

On Nov 22, 5:13 am, gabydewilde <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The first to accomplish Sonofusion has to be the Pistol shrimp.
>
> In 1874 John W. Keely described and demonstrated the acoustic
> dissociation of water.
>
> In 1970, Dr. Andrija Puharich (MD) acidentally made oxyhydrogen gas
> while subjecting blood to specific freqencies. Unknowingly
> reproducing Keely's work.
>
> Punarich refined system has a barrel-shaped cavity containing water.
> He introduces alternating current at 600 Hz. The cavity
> resonates with the impulses. Adding additional harmonics, cause
> the proton in the hydrogen atom to rotate, further forcing the
> hydrogen to split from the oxygen.
>
> Keely stated that water can be progressively dissociated at 620, 630
> and 12,000 Hz (These are on the molecular, atomic and etheric levels
> respectively.)
>
> Punarich 600 cps is a harmonic of Keely's 12,000 Hz etheric level
>
> 12,000 / 20 = 600
>

> http://www.dailytech.com/murky+waters+surround+purdues+latest+bubble+...

> http://www.thenational.ae/article/20081026/FRONTIERS/286862798/1036/N...


> "Just what does it take before a revolutionary discovery is accepted
> by the world's scientific community? That's the question raised by
> renewed claims by a US-based company to have found a radically new
> source of energy."
>
> http://www.blacklightpower.com/index.shtml
> "BlackLight Power, Inc. is the inventor of a new primary energy source
> with applications to heating, distributed power generation, central
> power generation, and motive power. It is based on a new chemical
> process of releasing the latent energy of the hydrogen atom, the
> BlackLight Process. On October 20, 2008, BlackLight announced off-site
> validation of a 50 kW reactor. Rowan Scientists confirmed BLP's 1 kW
> and 50 kW power source tests corresponding to 20 kilojoules and 1.0
> megajoules respectively. Chemical analysis of the reactant and
> product R-Ni powder could account for less than 1% of the observed
> energy from known chemistry. BlackLight's results have been published
> widely and replicated by independent groups."
>
> Archimedes Plutonium wrote the following 11 years ago:
>
> Message from discussion Put ITER and NOVA on ice; and all-out-attack

> on Sonofusionhttp://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.fusion/msg/83b267c7a169770...

amdx

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 10:55:42 AM11/22/08
to

"gabydewilde" <gdew...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9b08f0a7-5f5c-4c22...@u14g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...

>The first to accomplish Sonofusion has to be the Pistol shrimp.

>In 1874 John W. Keely described and demonstrated the acoustic
>dissociation of water.

>In 1970, Dr. Andrija Puharich (MD) acidentally made oxyhydrogen gas
>while subjecting blood to specific freqencies. Unknowingly
>reproducing Keely's work.

Just as a point of interest, at one time I worked at a manufactuer of
ultrasonic equipment.
We produced high power (1 Kw) high frequency (400 khz to 1 Mhz) amplifiers
and transducers.
With our two inch transducer in an aquarium filled with water pulsed at
several hundred watts,
you could see the sonoluminescence as the sound exited the transducer travel
about 15" to the
glass wall, reflect off the wall and go back to the other wall and reflect
again. I had the transducer
at a slight angle to the glass so the reflection didn't come back straight
at the transducer. This
was in a dark room with your eyes dark adjusted.
Here is a picture of a water plume created by the transducer.
http://i395.photobucket.com/albums/pp37/Qmavam/Plume.jpg

Mike



Uncle Al

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 11:45:29 AM11/22/08
to
gabydewilde wrote:
>
> The first to accomplish Sonofusion has to be the Pistol shrimp.
[snip 262 lines of crap]

idiot

Cavitation is not sonofusion. There is no sonofusion.

Hey fucking stooopid - physical conditions during fluid cavitation
implosion exponentially become more severe (black body emission) with
increasing boling point of the medium. Sonofusion of deuteroacetone,
bp = 55.5 C is beneath contempt. Sonofusion of deuterium oxide, bp =
101.4 C, is also crap. Look up Ken Suslick for spectroscopic
observation of cavitation collapse conditions including within
concentrated sulfuric acid.

The only decent experiment is sonofusion of deuterosulfuric acid/1.7
wt-% D20, bp = 337 C. Nobody ever did that because sonofusion is crap
at face value independent of experimental conditions.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

Uncle Al

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 11:48:25 AM11/22/08
to
gabydewilde wrote:
[snip 237 lines of crap]


> And you want the western world dead also. Because of your preconceived
> filth and scientific dishonesty.
>
> Time to fuck off now Nazi boy.

idiot

Cavitation is not sonofusion. There is no sonofusion.

Hey fucking stooopid - physical conditions during fluid cavitation
implosion exponentially become more severe (black body emission) with

increasing boiling point of the medium. Sonofusion of deuteroacetone,

Cwatters

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 12:12:08 PM11/22/08
to

"gabydewilde" <gdew...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9b08f0a7-5f5c-4c22...@u14g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...

>In 1874 John W. Keely described and demonstrated the acoustic dissociation
>of water.

Is there any of his own writing on the web? All I can see are claims by
supporters.


Mark Thorson

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 1:05:09 PM11/22/08
to
gabydewilde wrote:
>
> On Nov 22, 9:14 am, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >
> > Keely was a notorious con arist.
>
> Declaired to be a con without anything to back up the acusation.
> False acusation is of course a fraud in it self.

I provided a link to a web page FULL of evidence that
Keely was a charlatan. Photographs of his equipment,
contemporary accounts of his activities reported in
reputable publications, drawings and photographs of
the concealed mechanisms discovered afer his deah which
actually drove his fraudulent machines. And yet you
deleted that link, which I restore here:

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/keely/keely.htm

That's plenty of solid evidence. There is no question
that Keely was a swindler and his machines were just
part of his con game.

> Mark Thorson is a con artist!

You are a liar, in addition to being an idiot.

hhc...@yahoo.com

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 1:40:47 PM11/22/08
to

Mark, thanks for posting this. Hopefully, the link will not be deleted
by crackpots.

Keely was indeed a swindler, and today his name is known only to a
few. Had he chosen to be a stage magician with his tricks, he would be
a legend. To give him due credit however, he avoided prison for his
crimes. In that respect, he was rather fortunate and quite lucky.

Harry C.

Salmon Egg

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 2:32:33 PM11/22/08
to
In article
<7bf1b3f8-9e1b-4636...@g38g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
gabydewilde <foto...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Nov 22, 6:12 am, Salmon Egg <Salmon...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > <snip>
>
> Hello mister .... egg?
>
> You sound like you are looking for a good excuse to continue to be
> ignorant.
>
> We have a global energy crisis, are you ignorant about that also?
>
> The economy is about to crash, are you ignorant about that also?
>
> Are you going to research sonofusion when everyone is dead?
>
> Is that the right time?
>
> Lets do a little investigation who you are and where you are coming
> from.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.engineering.electrical/browse_frm/thread/cc
> ae58783128e281?hl=en

<snip>

I did not read the original post in detail. The first twenty or thirty
lines were enough to make me skeptical. Nothing else that followed
reversed that opinion. I believe the original poster is self-delusioned.
Even some prominent scientists have gone off the deep end. Newton became
very interested in alchemy. He had an excuse. At that time the evidence
for chemical transmutation of base metals was much less than it is now.
I took the time to respond because the curse of people believing in
pseudoscience with a religious ferocity in the USA is rampant.

As for my own credentials, I have a PhD in EE and a professional
engineering license. Nevertheless, truth trumps letters after one's name.

I do believe that there will be a global energy crisis. It will not
affect me personally. I will be long gone before the real shit hits the
fan. Meanwhile, it will take a bigger economic crisis than we have now
for my modest standard of living to go to hell. Meanwhile, I appreciate
having lived in the USA that I want to do what I cven to keep kooks from
governing this country.

When cold fusion was announced, it was by self-delusioned scientists who
have since lost their good reputation. Worse, some investigators trying
to duplicate the Fleishman and Pons results did indeed "duplicate" them.
At the time, my colleagues and I were highly skeptical. If they had
achieved what they claimed, they should have been dead from neutron
irradiation. Nevertheless, because of their good reputation at the time
and incredibly great economic significan, a whole cold fusion industry
started.

Just because a serious energy crisis is looming there is no excuse to
latch onto any proposed solution no matter how crazy it is.

Angelo Campanella

unread,
Nov 22, 2008, 11:57:57 PM11/22/08
to

hhc...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Nov 22, 1:05 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>gabydewilde wrote:
>>>On Nov 22, 9:14 am, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>>Keely was a notorious con arist.
>>>Declaired to be a con without anything to back up the acusation.
>>>False acusation is of course a fraud in it self.

SNIP.

I think it's time that you all stop cross-posting to
alt.sci.physics.acoustics becasue you cease to make any scientific sense
with this thread.

You ceertianly are not posting anything new to the acoustics world. For
instance, I saw my first examples of sonoluminescence in the 1960's, and
the first ultrasonic water fountain in the early 1950's.

Plese stop sending us this very old and very stale "news". Please cross
us out of your cross-post list.

Thank you.

With Season's Greetings,

Sincerely,

Angelo campanella

Benj

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 2:47:50 AM11/23/08
to
On Nov 22, 10:55 am, "amdx" <a...@knology.net> wrote:

> Here is a picture of a water plume created by the transducer.http://i395.photobucket.com/albums/pp37/Qmavam/Plume.jpg

Nice plume but did you collect any burnable gas from it? Yeah, I
thought not.

The problem here is rather than quoting a bunch of suspicious sources
like Keely (someone, whose ramblings I've never been able to make
sense of, even though I've made sense of MANY things the debunkers
pretend are false), what we need is simple instructions with complete
details of how to build a water to burnable gas generator. We already
know how to build an electrolysis based one, so where is the one that
is going to save the world? I don't buy the usual crap that you can't
reveal anything because it will ruin patents etc. Phooey. If the world
needs saving, then be the hero and your rewards will come! Claims
about "secret" devices are worthless. We all know that there are
"forces" with vested interests that will try hard to destroy any
invention that would really work! Hence the only chance is to get the
data out there BEFORE they have the chance to kill you! If you
haven't figured this out then it's pretty clear all secrecy plays
right into the hands of those trying to cover up such inventions. And
that means that probably you'll end up committing suicide by three
shots to the back of the head and all your lab notes will suddenly be
gone. Duh.


gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 5:36:03 AM11/23/08
to


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8149798555293700132
"super efficient ultrasonic water heater. A stainless steel sphere
with 1.7 gallons of water starts at 101 degrees F and rises to 184
degrees F in two minutes from 1.62 watts input from a 9 volt battery
supplying .18 amps. Normally 1.7 US gallons of water would require
10,296 watts of energy at 100% efficiency to be raised from 101 to 184
degrees F in 2 minutes. This is super efficient at over 6000 X more
heat from the input of electricity. There are no catalysts, heavy
water or other exotic materials required as in cold fusion and no
harmful radiation is released. The stimulus for this research &
development was John Keely's Sympathetic Vibratory Physics using
frequencies in combination with shapes of materials. THE WORLD NEEDS
THESE SOLUTIONS - OPPORTUNITES TO HELP - EMAIL US TO FIND OUT MORE!
wits...@yahoo.com"

At the end he says it can also make hydrogen.

The interviewer ask such incredibly dumb questions it is obvious what
his intentions are.

"why is this significant?",

"what would people use this for?",

"is there no radiation?",

"you say this can save the world from the energy crisis, but looking
at it it is going to take a little bit more than just this"

The same kind of reasoning you find in this topic. People don't want
this to work.

If you observe the abundant pseudoskepticism you can see why non of
of'em actually tried to make it work.

quote Benj:


"Nice plume but did you collect any burnable gas from it? Yeah, I
thought not."

Yeah, or what about cars? Howmany cars did you power with this
ultrasonic aquarium pump? Yeah, I didn't think at-all !!1!!111!!one!!
1!!eleven!!!1!!

Or this one:

"what we need is simple instructions with complete details of how to
build a water to burnable gas generator. "

Yes, there will be no talking allowed until it is for sale in my
kmart!

Now B silent!!!1!!1!!one!!!!

hahahaha

Hear hear Benj.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7p4mioawIA

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 5:38:08 AM11/23/08
to
On Nov 22, 4:55 pm, "amdx" <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> "gabydewilde" <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Very nice picture Mike.

Keely used 3 drops of water. I imagine (compared to lifting up a whole
aquarium) that would take a bit less current.

You say 400 000 to 1 000 000 Hz

I'm by no means an expert in music but we all know an octave higher or
lower tends to sound the same. I feel that means something :-)

If we start at 42 800 Hz

2*4280 = 8560

2*8560 = 17120

2*17120 = 34240

2*34240 = 68480

2*68480 = 136960

2*136960 =273920

2*273920 = 547 840 <==== is between 400 kHz and 1 MHz

2*547840 = 1095680

Of course you didn't match it like tuning a violin.

I think the basic "trick" is to saturnise the water with vacuum
bubbles.

If the bubble density is high enough high voltage vacuum electrolysis
shoudn't boggle the mind.

Here is a water heater using Keely's technology.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8149798555293700132
"super efficient ultrasonic water heater. A stainless steel sphere
with 1.7 gallons of water starts at 101 degrees F and rises to 184
degrees F in two minutes from 1.62 watts input from a 9 volt battery
supplying .18 amps. Normally 1.7 US gallons of water would require
10,296 watts of energy at 100% efficiency to be raised from 101 to 184
degrees F in 2 minutes. This is super efficient at over 6000 X more
heat from the input of electricity. There are no catalysts, heavy
water or other exotic materials required as in cold fusion and no
harmful radiation is released. The stimulus for this research &
development was John Keely's Sympathetic Vibratory Physics using
frequencies in combination with shapes of materials. THE WORLD NEEDS
THESE SOLUTIONS - OPPORTUNITES TO HELP - EMAIL US TO FIND OUT MORE!
wits...@yahoo.com"

At the end he says it can also make hydrogen.

Thanks again for the picture, very nice.

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 6:11:18 AM11/23/08
to
On Nov 22, 5:48 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
> [snip] physical conditions during fluid cavitation

> implosion exponentially become more severe (black body emission) with
> increasing boiling point of the medium.

Very interesting, Meyer used the water like the dielectric medium in a
capacitor. Quickly charging and discharging it should cause it to heat
up.

Failure of water capacitors is a well known effect, also their
gravitational self healing property when the dielectric vaporises.

Furthermore in order to accomplish the same thereas one may draw the
exhaust heat from the engine therein to establish said heat required
therefor in accomplish that said.

> Look up Ken Suslick for spectroscopic observation of cavitation collapse

Looking at his credentials he looks to me like the pope of dogma. If
he would announce such discovery his career would be over. Researchers
consumed hundreds of thousands of millions claiming to be (re)
searching for a new energy source. In just the last 40 years they
didn't find a single solution.

I know of thousands of garage inventors who discovered the most
flabergasting effects in their spare time using pocket change.

This means by definition the dogmatist back scrubbers are doing
something wrong.

It is not hard to see what it is. They claim to be looking for an
energy source while asserting conversation laws. Non of'em can show
any math for this assertion, this makes that assertion a
pseudscientific fallacy of the highest order.

Your name calling further establishes this great truth.

bwhuhuhu!! *points finger*

As your pschatrist, my advice for you ali-bahbah is to engage in more
lamp rubbing.

Here:

http://www.borderlands.com/

:-)

________
http://knol.google.com/k/gaby-de-wilde/cold-fusion/1yrf1mzjtxzk5/17
http://knol.google.com/k/gaby-de-wilde/water-fueled-car/1yrf1mzjtxzk5/2

amdx

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 7:21:53 AM11/23/08
to

"Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:f0157d4b-ab5c-4e47...@k8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...

> On Nov 22, 10:55 am, "amdx" <a...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>> Here is a picture of a water plume created by the
>> transducer.http://i395.photobucket.com/albums/pp37/Qmavam/Plume.jpg
>
> Nice plume but did you collect any burnable gas from it? Yeah, I
> thought not.


I'm not on the burnable gas generator bandwagon.

It is my understanding that the H and OH radicals recombine very quickly in
solution.
When the transducer is producing ultrasound positioned to make a plume, the
aquarium gets filled with a very fine mist. Years ago the fellow I worked
with
put a lit Bic lighter in the mist--- nothing happened.
Chemistry does happen with the H and OH when other molecules are in
solution.

Mike

amdx

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 7:47:39 AM11/23/08
to
>> Here is a picture of a water plume created by the
>> transducer.http://i395.photobucket.com/albums/pp37/Qmavam/Plume.jpg
>>
>> Mike
>
> Very nice picture Mike.
>
> Keely used 3 drops of water. I imagine (compared to lifting up a whole
> aquarium) that would take a bit less current.
>
> You say 400 000 to 1 000 000 Hz
>
Yes, most of our work was near 620 Khz.

> I'm by no means an expert in music but we all know an octave higher or
> lower tends to sound the same. I feel that means something :-)
>
> If we start at 42 800 Hz
>
> 2*4280 = 8560
>
> 2*8560 = 17120
>
> 2*17120 = 34240
>
> 2*34240 = 68480
>
> 2*68480 = 136960
>
> 2*136960 =273920
>
> 2*273920 = 547 840 <==== is between 400 kHz and 1 MHz
>
> 2*547840 = 1095680
>
> Of course you didn't match it like tuning a violin.
>

No idea where your going with this.

> I think the basic "trick" is to saturnise the water with vacuum
> bubbles.
>

I suspect you mean saturate? I have no idea what a vacuum bubble is!
Different sparge gases are used, Xenon, Krypton, Argon, Helium.

> If the bubble density is high enough high voltage vacuum electrolysis
> shoudn't boggle the mind.
>

Huh?

> Here is a water heater using Keely's technology.
>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8149798555293700132
> "super efficient ultrasonic water heater.

I'm not a believer.
Mike


Douglas Eagleson

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 8:04:48 AM11/23/08
to
> http://www.dailytech.com/murky+waters+surround+purdues+latest+bubble+...
> http://www.thenational.ae/article/20081026/FRONTIERS/286862798/1036/N...

> "Just what does it take before a revolutionary discovery is accepted
> by the world's scientific community? That's the question raised by
> renewed claims by a US-based company to have found a radically new
> source of energy."
>
> http://www.blacklightpower.com/index.shtml
> "BlackLight Power, Inc. is the inventor of a new primary energy source
> with applications to heating, distributed power generation, central
> power generation, and motive power. It is based on a new chemical
> process of releasing the latent energy of the hydrogen atom, the
> BlackLight Process. On October 20, 2008, BlackLight announced off-site
> validation of a 50 kW reactor. Rowan Scientists confirmed BLP's 1 kW
> and 50 kW power source tests corresponding to 20 kilojoules and 1.0
> megajoules respectively.  Chemical analysis of the reactant and
> product R-Ni powder could account for less than 1% of the observed
> energy from known chemistry.  BlackLight's results have been published
> widely and replicated by independent groups."
>
> Archimedes Plutonium wrote the following 11 years ago:
>
> Message from discussion Put ITER and NOVA on ice; and all-out-attack
> on Sonofusionhttp://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.fusion/msg/83b267c7a169770...
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I was predicting a rotational disassociation of a water molecule using
an MRI machine's intense magnetic field.

Simply pulse it for extra power levels to non-livable field strengths.

Molecule rotation is caused by spin field.

As a method it should allow fairly cheap hydrogen gas. A cost per Kw-
hr of maybe a few cents.

Efficiency over electrolysis appear to be caused by rotation.

Tim Jackson

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 8:58:57 AM11/23/08
to
Douglas Eagleson wrote:
> On Nov 21, 8:13 pm, gabydewilde <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> It is significant to note that Punarich converted his motor home to
>> run on water and reportedly drove it around for hundreds of thousands
>> of miles using water as fuel.
>>

With a by-product of... water.

Isn't there a circle of hell designated specifically for
perpetual-motion advocates?

If not, don't we have a bin for recycling them as tallow candles?


Tim Jackson

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 12:01:14 PM11/23/08
to
On Nov 23, 2:04 pm, Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

yes, good point.

John Kanzius never officially revealed the power consumption of this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGg0ATfoBgo

Unofficially he did say it was well over 100%

Of course he started out announcing it was the fuel of the future.

He is to much of a bright man to just say that.

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 12:28:43 PM11/23/08
to
On Nov 22, 7:05 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:
> gabydewilde wrote:
>
> > On Nov 22, 9:14 am, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> > > Keely was a notorious con arist.
>
> > Declaired to be a con without anything to back up the acusation.
> > False acusation is of course a fraud in it self.
>
> I provided a link to a web page

Yes, this in it self is worth a compliment.

hear:

*** John Ernst Worrell Keely reported disintegration of mass with
standing waves (which is now a commercial process),

*** John Ernst Worrell Keely reported producing light in water (what
is now termed sonoluminescence),

*** John Ernst Worrell Keely reported acoustic levitation (verified by
NASA and others)

*** John Ernst Worrell Keely reported geometries that could intensify
sound pressures without adding additional energy (recently patented
and in use by MacroSonics),

*** John Ernst Worrell Keely reported cold in the presence of certain
'orders of vibration' (now patented as an acoustic refrigration and
cooling system),

Your debunkor website wont reference any of that because it would harm
their agenda of selective journalism.

> drawings and photographs of
> the concealed mechanisms discovered afer his deah which
> actually drove his fraudulent machines.

Oh excuse me but destroying his lab quite clearly gives away the
inherit intend. Any claimed conclusions from efforts towards
destroying everything can be discarded. The intend was to destroy his
laboratory. *end of your story*

I mentioned him because he was the first to make the claim. You can
assert he didn't make the claim but you rely on a debunkor homepage
where nothing ever survives. A kind of cave men chest pounding
littered with self proclaimed superiority.

Keely first discovered negative attraction, this is how you arrived at
this topic showing off your occult skills to me.

I feel sorry for you having such a silly job debunking things.

Here, this is good:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9125003792513982191

To repeat the context for you:

The first to accomplish Sonofusion has to be the Pistol shrimp.

In 1874 John W. Keely described and demonstrated the acoustic
dissociation of water.

In 1970, Dr. Andrija Puharich (MD) acidentally made oxyhydrogen gas

while subjecting blood to specific frequencies. Unknowingly
reproducing Keely's work.

Nobel prize winner Dr. Nakamats who holds over 3000 patents and


invented the floppy disk claimed his Nostradam II engine can make free
energy from water. His patent describes the use of a resonating member
to disassociate water into hydrogen and oxygen.

The hundreds of laboratory confirmations of Pons and Fleishman's cold
fusion setup also deserves a note here.

Lets not forget Stanley Meyer, who obviously couldn't be expected to


explain everything he invented. Stan's hardware has been
experimentally examined by Dr. Eugene Antonov, Dr. Vladimir
Dresyiannikov, Dr. Tibor Nagypal, Roy Azevedo, Peter Graneau, Charles
Millet, Neal Graneau, Gary Johnson, Rea O’Neill, Prof. Mike Laughton,
Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin, Dr Keith Hindley, US military, US Patent

Office experts and the Patent Office seconded experts.

The basic WFC was subjected to three years of testing. This raises the
granted patents to the level of independent, critical, scientific and
engineering confirmation that the devices actually perform as claimed.

Named scientists have observed the cell making gas without heating up
for many hours at a time.

Former NASA scientist Daniel Dingle has been driving around in a car
running on water since 1965. He deserves the benefit of the doubt
because not one news agency has dared to visit him.

Heavy water physicist Yull Brown has unquestionably demonstrated we
are dealing with a nuclear reaction by neutralising radioactive
materials using a brown gas torch. This is a soup made of water
droplets, steam, protonic and normal hydrogen and oxygen.

NASA scientist Herman P. Anderson has also managed to accomplish cheap
dissociation of water.

Anderson, Brown, Dingle, Punarich, Nakamats and Meyer have all build
cars running on water. A car with a Garrett carburetor drove
journalists around Texas as early as 1935 refueling at the lake. Denis
Klein also build a car running on it's own hydrogen source.

Even when one asserts all of the above to be hoaxes in the face of our
world problems, even then the pistol shrimp will be staring you in the
face.

O_O

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 12:45:08 PM11/23/08
to
On Nov 23, 2:58 pm, Tim Jackson <t...@tim-jackson.co.uk> wrote:
> Douglas Eagleson wrote:
> > On Nov 21, 8:13 pm, gabydewilde <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> using water as fuel.
>
> With a by-product of... water.

Nice try.

Using water in stead of petroleum.

Hydro-dioxide in stead of hydo-carbon.

It looks like you loose eh? ROLF

Are you sure about your BSc in Physics & Electronic Engineering?

Ha-Ha Oh-Oh ?

Funny guy.

> Isn't there a circle of hell designated specifically for
> perpetual-motion advocates?

Yes, it's called OPEC. Biggest burning ritual in the histories of
mankind.

> If not, don't we have a bin for recycling them as tallow candles?

1 - How long does it take for electron orbit to decay?

2 - What powers the sun?

> Tim Jackson

On a serious note, I read you are contributing to an internet cancer
support group.

John Kanzius should be interesting to you.

http://www.kanziuscancerresearch.com/press-release/nationalcancerinstitute.pdf
Great advances rarely come from mas sive, federally funded directives.
So said the late Francis Moore, M.D., surgeon in chief at Brigham and
Women’s Hospital in Boston and Harvard Medical School professor,
reflecting on whether the government’s war on cancer might ever yield
a cure. Rather, he opined, they tend to come from creative people whom
no one has heard of before, working in obscurity. Enter John Kanzius,
a retired TV engineer and ham radio operator without a college
education, whose use of radio waves for treating cancer has brought
him to the attention of the cancer world. Featured on the program 60
Minutes last April, Kanzius is now coordinating the research of
scientists at the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in
Houston and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center — from his
home in Erie, Pa. Kanzius’ contribution is a radio frequency (RF)
transmitter of his own design that excites metal nanoparticles
inserted into cancer cells.

Very nice stuff.

Mister Kanzius officially backed of from his burning water invention,
this was probably after getting some corporate spanking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGg0ATfoBgo

But we remember what he was doing here.

He is oxydating hydrogen ^_^

It's not boiling, forget about that terawatt antenna you are thinking
of :-)

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 2:14:28 PM11/23/08
to
On Nov 22, 5:48 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:

> [snip] physical conditions during fluid cavitation


> implosion exponentially become more severe (black body emission) with

> increasing boiling point of the medium.

Very interesting, Meyer used the water like the dielectric medium in a
capacitor. Quickly charging and discharging it should cause it to heat
up.

Failure of water capacitors is a well known effect, also their
gravitational self healing property when the dielectric vaporises.

Furthermore in order to accomplish the same thereas one may draw the
exhaust heat from the engine therein to establish said heat required
therefor in accomplish that said.

> Look up Ken Suslick for spectroscopic observation of cavitation collapse

Looking at his credentials he looks to me like the pope of dogma. If

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 2:17:55 PM11/23/08
to
On Nov 22, 8:32 pm, Salmon Egg <Salmon...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> I did not read the original post in detail.

ok, apology accepted.

Tim Jackson

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 3:06:53 PM11/23/08
to
gabydewilde wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2:58 pm, Tim Jackson <t...@tim-jackson.co.uk> wrote:
>> Douglas Eagleson wrote:
>>> On Nov 21, 8:13 pm, gabydewilde <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> using water as fuel.
>> With a by-product of... water.
>
> Nice try.
>
> Using water in stead of petroleum.
>
> Hydro-dioxide in stead of hydo-carbon.
>
> It looks like you loose eh? ROLF
>
> Are you sure about your BSc in Physics & Electronic Engineering?

Yup, but I don't pull rank. Are you sure about your spell checker?

And as to your chemistry, that really sucks. Are you talking about
di-hydrogen oxide, i.e. water? I never heard of hydrogen dioxide. For a
start it would be an ion, not a neutral molecule.

You split water to make hydrogen and oxygen then you burn the hydrogen
in the oxygen to make water and power your car. So water comes in and
water goes out. That doesn't make it a fuel, at best a catalyst. If it
were the fuel, then if you feed the exhaust water back into the intake
you've got perpetual motion.

> 1 - How long does it take for electron orbit to decay?
>

Which electron at what energy level in what element? Anything from
nanoseconds to forever. Is this relevant?

> 2 - What powers the sun?
>

Not water that's for sure. And is doesn't produce hydrogen either.
Crudely, it burns hydrogen and produces helium. How is this relevant?

> On a serious note, I read you are contributing to an internet cancer
> support group.
>

I do pastoral care, not snake oil sales.

Ah, WTF. *Plonk*


Tim Jackson

Cwatters

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 3:48:21 PM11/23/08
to

"gabydewilde" <foto...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fbc15243-2f38-442a...@f20g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...

>*** John Ernst Worrell Keely reported producing light in water (what
>is now termed sonoluminescence),

Where did he report it?


Uncle Al

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 8:27:15 PM11/23/08
to
gabydewilde wrote:
>
> On Nov 22, 5:48 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
> > [snip] physical conditions during fluid cavitation
> > implosion exponentially become more severe (black body emission) with
> > increasing boiling point of the medium.
[snip]

> > Look up Ken Suslick for spectroscopic observation of cavitation collapse
>
> Looking at his credentials he looks to me like the pope of dogma.

[snip crap]

Be ignorant elsewhere. Suslick wrote the book in cavitation
conditions measurement and nobody has rewritten it better.

You are a liar and a thief. You are a piece of shit. To gainsay
observation is to declare yourself to be a professional ass.

[snip rest of crap]

Uncle Al

unread,
Nov 23, 2008, 8:30:21 PM11/23/08
to
gabydewilde wrote:
>
> On Nov 22, 5:48 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
>
> > [snip] physical conditions during fluid cavitation
> > implosion exponentially become more severe (black body emission) with
> > increasing boiling point of the medium.

[snip]

> > Look up Ken Suslick for spectroscopic observation of cavitation collapse
>
> Looking at his credentials he looks to me like the pope of dogma.

[snip rest of crap]

Ignorance is not a form of knowing things.

> The only decent experiment is sonofusion of deuterosulfuric acid/1.7
> wt-% D20, bp = 337 C. Nobody ever did that because sonofusion is crap
> at face value independent of experimental conditions.

There it is, schmuck. Get one of your charlatans to perform it.

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 24, 2008, 5:47:28 AM11/24/08
to
On Nov 23, 9:06 pm, Tim Jackson <t...@tim-jackson.co.uk> wrote:
> gabydewilde wrote:
> > On Nov 23, 2:58 pm, Tim Jackson <t...@tim-jackson.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Douglas Eagleson wrote:
> >>> On Nov 21, 8:13 pm, gabydewilde <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> using water as fuel.
> >> With a by-product of... water.
>
> > Using water in stead of petroleum.
>
> > Hydro-dioxide in stead of hydo-carbon.
>
> > It looks like you loose eh? ROLF
>
> > Are you sure about your BSc in Physics & Electronic Engineering?
>
> Yup, but I don't pull rank.

Oh, but you should.

As long as it is constructive of course.


> Are you talking about
> di-hydrogen oxide, i.e. water?  I never heard of hydrogen dioxide. For a
> start it would be an ion, not a neutral molecule.

Yes, I was trying to remind you that it is the hydrogen in the
petroleum that is the fuel.

> You split water to make hydrogen and oxygen then you burn the hydrogen
> in the oxygen to make water and power your car.

You split hydrocarbons to make hydrogen and carbon then you burn the


hydrogen
in the oxygen to make water and power your car.

> So water comes in and water goes out.  That doesn't make it a fuel,
> at best a catalyst.  If it were the fuel,

I don't think it is very important what to call it to be honest.

>then if you feed the exhaust water back into the intake
> you've got perpetual motion.

Exactly,

What do you have against perpetual motion?

> > 1 - How long does it take for electron orbit to decay?
>
> Which electron at what energy level in what element?  Anything from
> nanoseconds to forever.  Is this relevant?

"Forever"

I cant deny electron orbit is perpetual motion.

> > 2 - What powers the sun?
>
> Not water that's for sure.

For sure?

> And is doesn't produce hydrogen either.

Oh?

> Crudely, it burns hydrogen and produces helium.  How is this relevant?

Because it is a giant blob of water.

> > On a serious note, I read you are contributing to an internet cancer
> > support group.
>
> I do pastoral care, not snake oil sales.

Royal Raymond Rife worked all his life at what he called MOR. Mortal
Oscillatory Rate. Doctors state numerous successful clinical trials
have been documented. Today we have lots of video evidence of it.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-661201775015095955

I'm not about to declare this doctor a fraud. Or the cure a cure. It
goes beyond that what I'm legally allowed to say. I don't see how
declaring snake oil is going to justify not using technology. This
kind of reasoning makes you the cause of the problem.

John Kanzius is not doing something that different.

http://www.kanziuscancerresearch.com/press-release/nationalcancerinstitute.pdf
Great advances rarely come from massive, federally funded directives.


So said the late Francis Moore, M.D., surgeon in chief at Brigham and
Women’s Hospital in Boston and Harvard Medical School professor,
reflecting on whether the government’s war on cancer might ever yield
a cure. Rather, he opined, they tend to come from creative people whom
no one has heard of before, working in obscurity. Enter John Kanzius,
a retired TV engineer and ham radio operator without a college
education, whose use of radio waves for treating cancer has brought
him to the attention of the cancer world. Featured on the program 60
Minutes last April, Kanzius is now coordinating the research of
scientists at the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in
Houston and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center — from his
home in Erie, Pa. Kanzius’ contribution is a radio frequency (RF)
transmitter of his own design that excites metal nanoparticles
inserted into cancer cells.

Mister Kanzius officially backed of from his burning water.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGg0ATfoBgo

I don't know about you but to me "snake oil" doesn't mean anything. It
is not some godly label that holds a self fulfilling truth. having a
BSc in Physics & Electronic Engineering doesn't mean you are god or
anything. In fact it doesn't allow you to make any medical claims just
like me.

As for perpetual motion. Denial doesn't qualify as proof.

We suffer from illusion of grandeur, believing that in the field of
commerce is highly ethical and full of humanitarian motives. An
astounding body of evidence speaks to the contrary, turning the
loving, traditional beliefs about the motives upside down.

Then you come along to tell me I cant call water a fuel?

Who cares?

We want the solutions and we want them now!

I'm well aware no one is willing to listen, but hey, that doesn't mean
I'm going to shut up about it just because you like to be ignorant.

You will have to find some other way to bless your ignorance.

I'm sorry ok?

http://knol.google.com/k/gaby-de-wilde/water-fueled-car/1yrf1mzjtxzk5/2

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 24, 2008, 6:47:26 AM11/24/08
to
On Nov 23, 9:48 pm, "Cwatters"
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
> "gabydewilde" <fotot...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Hello, waters.

I understand you are interested in Keely but most of his material was
lost.

We only have 2nd 3rd 4th and 5th hand information.

Dale Pond has accomplished the seemingly impossible with it.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9125003792513982191
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5430570751600484561

Keely is of course just one of the people who accomplished acoustic
dissociation.

A combination of effects seems to me to be the most viable method we
have today.

High voltage pulse trains, heat, vacuum and sympathetic vibration.

We really have thousands of methods to push the envelope on fuel
efficiency.

Start by accepting corporate interests represent only their own
financial interests. If they didn't do that they wouldn't survive on
the market. They are legally bound to do that what serves the
interests of stock holders. For stock traders only the short term
financial gains are important. They don't even know what it is they
are doing. All they have is a bunch of numbers to navigate and 20
seconds to make a decision. It would be delusional for anyone to
pretend humane agenda points can be evaluated in those 20 seconds or
even to pretend the stock brokers are obligated to evaluate those.

In fact, if they don't want to buy it the next guy absolutely will.

If it is my job to sell you something then I will do my job. I'm not
going to think about anything else. I will do what I can to show you
the ways you will benefit from the purchase.

It would be for you to decide if there is an ethical dilemma involved.
If you are just an employee, most likely you are not allowed to make
decisions against your employers financial interests.

To think there is any ethical evaluation going on here would be
delusional.

The energy monopolists in Keely's days didn't have any choice, they
had to get rid of the stuff.

But now, 150 years later we have thousands of perfectly workable
methods of saving our economic ass.

Here are __ONLY A FEW__ of them:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy.hydrogen/msg/347fa4a38bbfa05c?hl=en

In France there is a small revolution going on. Several thousands of
trucks, tractors, cars and even a helicopter have been converted.

The police has given up on locking people up for improving their fuel
efficiency. From the outside there is nothing to see, the only thing
you can detect without taking the car apart is the lack of pollution.

Here are some open source plans.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Bob_Boyce_Electrolyzer_Plans

This improves fuel efficiency by 40-60%

It already goes way beyond Faraday's direct current setup.

The point of this discussion is to push it to the point where it
overcomes the lack of efficiency of piston engines. Those are pretty
horrible so it isn't going to be easy.

We had rotary engines for a long time, why aren't they using them?

Or to give a really dumbed down example:

A 500 cc engine with a flywheel can accelerate way faster than any V8
car.

There is no way in the world anyone could deny that.

The money snatchers do not have your best interests at heart. They
don't care about you, you are to buy their products and that is where
it ends.

So lets investigate and give them new toys to force down our
throats. :-)

We cant stop them, so lets do it this way.

If you want to read about Keely, google is your friend.

Please share what you find,

Thanks,

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 24, 2008, 7:00:53 AM11/24/08
to
On Nov 24, 2:27 am, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
>
> You are a liar and a thief.  You are a piece of shit.  To gainsay
> observation is to declare yourself to be a professional ass.  
>

I don't declare myself to be an expert, this is actually why I started
this topic.

I think after 150 years of nonsense dogma parade it is time for the
real experts to start doing that what the economy, the environment and
the people really need.

To suggest Large Hadron collisions are scientifically interesting
means that what is scientifically interesting has very little to do
with the things we need from our scientists.

You are screaming like an infant how I'm a thief right? hahaha?

Compared to that I guess I really am an expert. I learn something new
every day.

All I do is look at the evidence. While you stick your nose in the
wind and declare to be ubah the inventors get killed trying to save
your screaming infantile ass.

So scream on my noble friend.

It doesn't look good on you but if it is all you can do please
continue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06iCfowinUM


>> > Look up Ken Suslick for spectroscopic observation of cavitation collapse

>> Looking at his credentials he looks to me like the pope of dogma.

> Suslick wrote the book in cavitation conditions measurement


> and nobody has rewritten it better.

Here you go little screamer :-)

http://www.blacklightpower.com/

bhooo-whooo ?

haha?

Salmon Egg

unread,
Nov 24, 2008, 2:40:53 PM11/24/08
to
In article
<28a992b2-2246-46fd...@f3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
gabydewilde <foto...@gmail.com> wrote:

> But now, 150 years later we have thousands of perfectly workable
> methods of saving our economic ass.
>
> Here are __ONLY A FEW__ of them:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy.hydrogen/msg/347fa4a38bbfa05c?hl=en

This is some more absolute nonsense. A patent without implementation is
worthless. I have patents on schemes that have not been implemented. Of
those that have been implemented, I do not know of one that has made a
fortune for the patent owner. Note, that in spite of what the US
Constitution says, it does not provide much protection for real
inventors--only for the patent owners.

One example I like to point out is Smucker's patent for crustless
sandwiches. Smucker is trying to intimidate Cornish pasty makers to pay
royalties on what they have done for centuries.

Cwatters

unread,
Nov 24, 2008, 3:04:37 PM11/24/08
to

"gabydewilde" <foto...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:28a992b2-2246-46fd...@f3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...

On Nov 23, 9:48 pm, "Cwatters"
>Dale Pond has accomplished the seemingly impossible with it.
>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9125003792513982191

Seems like he just preaching the new religion of vibrations.
How can the pressure in the motor go to infinity?
How do you polarise water by squeezing it with a ball?
I'm reasonably sure thay could make springs in Keely's day.
Water has been used as the integral part of machines many times.
No surprise the motor isn't working.



gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 24, 2008, 3:31:00 PM11/24/08
to
On Nov 24, 8:40 pm, Salmon Egg <Salmon...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> A patent without implementation is worthless.

BWHAHAHAHAHA

gabydewilde

unread,
Nov 24, 2008, 3:31:34 PM11/24/08