�

[Pyrotex]

... Since the fella is using seawater in at least one of his demonstrations, and since chlorine is 55% of seawater salt vs. sodium @ 30.6%, then oughtn't the flame burn with some green? Or maybe the other salts get deposited on the sides of the vial as the seawater is used?

In high school, me and a friend set up a chemistry experiment where we burned chlorine in a hydrogen atmosphere. It produces an opaque, milk-white flame.

 

Of course, burning hydrogen in chlorine would work the same.

[modest]

Any idea what that Sodium frequency might be theoretically?

 

Google tells me 26.452 MHz. Nuclear magnetic resonance is described on wiki:

 

Nuclear magnetic resonance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

But I honestly haven't looked at that yet.

 

Why not fill up a balloon and see what's there? I can't find a claim that he's done that which seems suspicious

So obvious an observation of hidden in plain view, that I'm still dazzled by it. Not sure what you mean by 'see what's there',

 

Ideally, he could collect a bit and take it to his nearest university where any one of a hundred kids could do som spectroscopy and tell him exactly what he has produced there. Is it a perfectly stoichiometric mix of [ce]2H_2 : O_2[/ce] or maybe there's no oxygen? But, I would just be interested to know if this stuff burns apart from the apparatus. I know this seems trivial, but stuff acts weird in an EM field.

 

It's been over a year since this guy did these videos and there's no reason he wouldn't have many more answers than he has given.

 

but to blow up a balloon you have to pressurize the collected gas and that is a bomb/fireball waiting to go off if it is HHO. :ebomb: :naughty: (It would be H_2: O_1 wouldn't it? :confused: Here's where I get wobbly. :hihi:. )

 

A normal sample size of either HHO or 2H2O2 would not be dangerous - no more dangerous than what he's doing on the videos.

 

Besides, for all the insistence of the implosion qualities of HHO, I don't think there is anyone actually stupid enough to fill a pressurized cylinder with the stuff.

 

No, I think you're probably right. This is a garage experimenter on a TV report in a time when everyone is all agog about Hydrogen fuel. This is a cool effect, but 'Lucy, you got some 'splainin' to do!". :phones: Noot brought up the good point that without electrodes and an electric current, this isn't technically electrolysis, but without measuring the fluid for current there's no declaring it so.

 

I think we need to be careful in dismissing this too easily. I don't mean this would be or should be more efficient than normal electrolysis - I see no likelihood of that at all. Yet... something very interesting may be happening here.

 

An electric current or electrical conduction in the water would be most natural. It’s sitting in front of a EM field generator (presumably) - so that can easily force electrical conduction just like putting a fork in the microwave.

 

If you put neon or prosperous [edit: ?prosperous? :rolleyes:... "phosphorus" :)] in front of a high frequency EM generator, it glows spectacularly. Iron in a field of a certain frequency will nearly (or completely?) melt which people thought was crazy when Tesla originally did it - but it's common electromagnetic induction heating now. So, I think there's room for something interesting here.

 

Isn't there a chemical calculation that gives a range of energy needed to disassociate chemical bonds?

 

The Nernst equation can be solved at different temps. The usual value given for water is 1.23 volts at 25 C, but that can be lowered using electrolytes or catalysts.

 

Check this picture out. [ATTACH]2438[/ATTACH]

 

It is from the Wikipedia page for Sodium, with the captionDoes this flame look the least bit familiar?

 

That is what I immediatly thought when I saw it. But now I'm reading this report:

 

Update:I talked on the phone to one of the scientists Ed Apsega at APV Engineering in Akron Oh. They tested John Kanzius process...

 

The yellow flame was the glass burning. (The flame started out clear.)

 

-blog on the topic

 

So, I don't know. :shrug:

 

2 Na + 2 H2O => 2 NaOH + H2

 

<...>

 

Now I am doing a lot of wondering given the sodium observation by Modest. When a large chunk of sodium is dropped in water you get a very visible and violent reaction. You would get the same reaction, but microscopic, if NA were added atom by atom to water. Perhaps the radio waves are not loosening the H2O bond in water that the inventor speculates, but actually causing a reaction with the NaCl.

 

This is good thinking. I'm not sure how radio waves would force an electron to attach to the sodium, but I suppose if it did then it might look just like what's in the video. The sodium ion would turn elemental and react with the molecular water.

 

Once again, all he would have to do is a simple test of the water for the presence of NaOH to see if something like this is happening.

 

I can't help but think we're missing something simple and MB is gonna come in here and slap some sense into all of us :hihi:

 

~modest

[Turtle]

Did he just call me "Noot"?

 

:lol: My bad. I confused this conversation with another I was having with Nootropic; ergo, Noot. I meant to refer to you as 'Nit'. :hyper:

 

think we need to be careful in dismissing this too easily. I don't mean this would be or should be more efficient than normal electrolysis - I see no likelihood of that at all. Yet... something very interesting may be happening here.

 

An electric current or electrical conduction in the water would be most natural. It’s sitting in front of a EM field generator (presumably) - so that can easily force electrical conduction just like putting a fork in the microwave.

...

This is good thinking. I'm not sure how radio waves would force an electron to attach to the sodium, but I suppose if it did then it might look just like what's in the video. The sodium ion would turn elemental and react with the molecular water.

 

Once again, all he would have to do is a simple test of the water for the presence of NaOH to see if something like this is happening.

 

In high school, me and a friend set up a chemistry experiment where we burned chlorine in a hydrogen atmosphere. It produces an opaque, milk-white flame.

 

Of course, burning hydrogen in chlorine would work the same.

 

The plot thickens. I was just joshin' inventor John ; I think this is an amazing bit of discovery and experimentation.

 

I watched the whole video again and have a couple observations. At time-point 3:17, John is holding a vial with a small amount of red liquid, but no explanation is in the naration. :confused: I also took note of his power panel on the RF generator at time-point 3:26; it goes from 0 - 1,400 watts in 200 watt increments. Unfortunately the panel isn't clearly visible when he turns it on. :(

 

So many chemicals & compounds in the mix here. First, we don't have simply Sodium here, we have Sodium Chloride don't we? Doesn't this matter to your discussions of how Sodium burns or otherwise reacts? In one run John adds Morton salt to, presumably, tapwater. Well the water is likely chlorinated and may also have Floride in it, and Morton salt has Sodium Ferrocyanide added as an anti-caking agent.

 

Then we have someone saying the glass is burning, and I have to say what kind of glass is it? Hardly a situation where we can make a reliable assessment of what is going on. I say we rush the lab! :eek2: :hyper:

 

That's all I got 'til I get some more coffee in me.:naughty:

[Turtle]

...Then we have someone saying the glass is burning, and I have to say what kind of glass is it? ...:coffee_n_pc:

 

Here's some chemistry on the glass side: >>

 

CHEMICAL COMPOSITION of BOROSILICATE GLASS

Chemically speaking, borosilicate glass substitutes boron oxide particles in place of the soda and lime particles found in soft glass. The boron oxide serves as a flux or glue to hold the silicate particles together with aluminum oxide and sodium oxide. Because the boron oxide particles are so small, the silicate is held together more closely resulting in a much stronger glass.

Solstice Glass - About Borosilicate Glass

[Nitack]

:coffee_n_pc:

 

Oh MB... I am actually eagerly awaiting your take on this particular topic

[Mercedes Benzene]

 

Oh MB... I am actually eagerly awaiting your take on this particular topic

 

Sorry. I haven't been following this thread. And now that I've been summoned by a certain turtle, it's a lot of information to digest.

I have to wait until I get home though, since for some reason, my work computer is not letting the sound on the video play. :coffee_n_pc:

[modest]

The patent says:

 

The invention relates to a method of using radio frequency waves to artificially create catalytic action in a catalyst-free chemical reaction within a substance. To mimic or imitate the catalyst, radio frequency waves are transmitted through the substance at a signal strength sufficient to electronically reproduce the effect of the physical presence of a selected catalyst. The radio frequency waves have a selected transmission frequency substantially equal to a catalyst signal frequency of the selected catalyst, defined as the signal frequency determined by nuclear magnetic resonance of the selected catalyst.

 

Catalytic simulation using radio frequency waves - Patent 6217712

 

But, I think this is wrong. I think it mis-characterizes the way a photocatalyst works. An article on artificial photosynthesis:

 

About the same time, American chemists discovered a class of compounds called ruthenium trisbipyridines that are sensitive to blue light. These orange-colored molecules, which give Mihok's test-tube solution its mashed Creamsicle appearance, fire off an electron when struck by a photon of light. "Ru-bipy" — as it's known in chemistry circles — "is a fantastic reducing agent when stimulated by light," says Mallouk. "Water-splitting requires 1.23 volts of energy. The excited state of Ru-bipy gives off 2.1 volts — almost twice what we need."

 

Energy at the Speed of Light

 

So, in order for this thing to do what Kanzius is claiming, it would need to use the energy of the radio wave to remove an electron from the chlorine. Basically, to photodissociate the chlorine ion freeing the electron for the hydrogen to grab. But, a radio wave doesn't have the energy to photodissociate a chlorine ion, I'm sure. It has nowhere near that energy.

 

So, I'm at a loss...

 

~modest

[Mercedes Benzene]

To me, this guy's *efforts* blithely violate the laws of thermodynamics.

 

Apparenlty, many *actual* scienctists have been unable to recreate his claims:

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/dec/can-radio-waves-really-make-water-burn/?searchterm=kanzius

Alas, using radio waves to tap hydrogen and oxygen as a combustible source of energy is inefficient, and scientists have so far been unable to adapt the process for energy production.

[modest]

To me, this guy's *efforts* blithely violate the laws of thermodynamics.

 

I think we're all solid that this has zero chance of making more energy than it uses. Actually, I don't think Kanzius has claimed otherwise.

 

Apparenlty, many *actual* scienctists have been unable to recreate his claims:

Can Radio Waves Really Make Water Burn? | Technology | DISCOVER Magazine

Alas, using radio waves to tap hydrogen and oxygen as a combustible source of energy is inefficient, and scientists have so far been unable to adapt the process for energy production.

 

Yeah, I think your link is debunking the idea that water buns like gasoline. While that's also not Kanzius' claim, I bet some people walk away from these videos with exactly that idea.

 

The link also says that this is normal electrolysis that's happening.

 

Kanzius had essentially replicated the centuries-old method of water electrolysis, separating water into hydrogen and oxygen gases by running a current through water loaded with salt, which makes it conductive.

 

I'm curious how they came to this conclusion because it's exactly what I've been trying to figure out. Are they really suggesting that passing an EM field through salt water with no electrodes is expected to electrolyze water?

 

If it's just the capacitance caused by the field then it should happen just as easily in a microwave - shouldn't it? Assuming this is a normal RF generator - I can't figure why this would happen. I can't figure why a radio wave would make electrolyzed water.

 

~modest

[Mercedes Benzene]

The link also says that this is normal electrolysis that's happening.

 

I'm curious how they came to this conclusion because it's exactly what I've been trying to figure out. Are they really suggesting that passing an EM field through salt water with no electrodes is expected to electrolyze water?

 

If it's just the capacitance caused by the field then it should happen just as easily in a microwave - shouldn't it? Assuming this is a normal RF generator - I can't figure why this would happen. I can't figure why a radio wave would make electrolyzed water.

 

~modest

 

Since they used the word "essentially," my guess is that they mean it is comparable (but not equivalent) to electrolysis, since electrolysis requires a direct current. Any form of energy would be capable of splitting the O-H bonds in the water, as long as it reaches a "critical" level capable of overcoming the bond energy.

[modest]

Since they used the word "essentially," my guess is that they mean it is comparable (but not equivalent) to electrolysis,

 

Agreed. I see that now.

 

since electrolysis requires a direct current. Any form of energy would be capable of splitting the O-H bonds in the water, as long as it reaches a "critical" level capable of overcoming the bond energy.

 

I agree, but a hydrogen bond is too strong to be broken by a radio wave photon... at least through ordinary photodissociation/photolysis. :confused:

 

~modest

[Turtle]

Since they used the word "essentially," my guess is that they mean it is comparable (but not equivalent) to electrolysis, since electrolysis requires a direct current. Any form of energy would be capable of splitting the O-H bonds in the water, as long as it reaches a "critical" level capable of overcoming the bond energy.

 

Actually, AC current does the job too, it just doesn't seperate the gases H & O. Each electrode produces each gas alternately and the result is the mixed gas called Brown's gas at both electrodes. So in this regard, the radio signal is the alternating current.

 

Not that I know what's going on here yet. :shrug: Did I notice the flame start spontaneously in some of the vids? Hey; did y'all know flame is a conductor? I still want to know what's left in the tube when it runs dry! Scrape it out, weigh it, spectroscopize it, and find out how much salt etcetera actually burned. Also I noticed in that blog Modest gave that 200 watts is specifically mentioned. Where'd I put that?....:doh:

 

That is all. :confused:

[Mercedes Benzene]

Actually, AC current does the job too, it just doesn't seperate the gases H & O. Each electrode produces each gas alternately and the result is the mixed gas called Brown's gas at both electrodes. So in this regard, the radio signal is the alternating current.

 

Not that I know what's going on here yet. :shrug: Did I notice the flame start spontaneously in some of the vids? Hey; did y'all know flame is a conductor? I still want to know what's left in the tube when it runs dry! Scrape it out, weigh it, spectroscopize it, and find out how much salt etcetera actually burned. Also I noticed in that blog Modest gave that 200 watts is specifically mentioned. Where'd I put that?....:doh:

 

That is all. :confused:

 

Ooooo. Poor choice of words on my part!

I didn't mean direct current as in DC (the noun). I meant direct as an adjective describing current, meaning, current directly run through the water. Directly. :doh:

Sorry for the confusion.

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

I didn't mean direct current as in DC (the noun). I meant direct as an adjective describing current, meaning, current directly run through the water. Directly.

What could be more direct than generating the current within the h2o and the salts. Basically it seems to be no more than using the metals in solution as the second half (output side) of a transformer. I would be willing to bet this could be done at any frequency with varying results in gas output....Which really isn't all that different from how transformers perform at varying frequencies (each has it's own optimum operating frequency). A higher concentration of metals in the mix (much like having more windings on the output) would likely result in more current yielding the need for less input current or produce more gas for the same input current.