http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Water 4 Gas - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/1eb6c2388ced324e?hl=en
* CBS News on the economy and grocery shopping - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/1ad6efab460db467?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Water 4 Gas
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/1eb6c2388ced324e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 21 2008 2:17 pm
From: "Bob"
"max" <betatron@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:betatron-124FE9.15165221062008@news.ftupet.com...
> In article <BY2dnfi-WJc9psDVnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> "Bob" <ma@trix.net> wrote:
>
>> "max" :
>> > "Bob" wrote:
>> >
>> >> "max" :
>> >> > "Bob" wrote:
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> HHO increases mileage simply because an automobile is only about
>> >> >> 20-30%
>> >> >> efficient.
>> >> >
>> >> > Your next assignment is to make a logical connection between the
>> >> > elements of the sentence above.
>> >>
>> >> Your next assignment is to quit acting like a pedantic grade school
>> >> teacher who doesn't know anything outside his limited range of
>> >> experience.
>> >
>> > gosh, i almost forgot, because it was so long ago. Almost 3 decades
>> > ...
>> >
>> > see, i've _actually_ done the experiment. I used to use my very own
>> > highly enriched U235 reactor to split water and fed the resultant gases
>> > into a pair of diesel engines. Did it myself, regularly. Even wrote
>> > down the data.
>>
>> Your very own reactor? You get that thing on Ebay, or what?
>> You sound like a bureaucratic clerk with mad scientist aspirations.
>
> aspire hell, i do it for the money. and the chicks.
>
>>
>>
>> > Yep, i got about 3% more power out of the diesels. Sad to say, but that
>> > 3% gain was grossly outpaced by the reactor power necessary for
>> > hydrolysis.
>> >
>> > So... my "limited" experience is exactly congruous with the topic at
>> > hand. I've run hydrocarbon ICE's on an HHO boost. I know _exactly_
>> > what
>> > happens.
>> >
>>
>> "exactly congruous"? Hardly.
>>
>> There's a bit of difference between using a nuclear reactor to generate
>> HHO
>> to augment diesel engines, and making a small modification to use the
>> waste
>> energy generated by an auto engine.
>
> no, there isn't. Energy is energy and it always flows downhill.
Energy flows downhill? Well, let's use your quaint image to illustrate what
these guys claim. Since less than 20% of the energy "flow" from a car's
engine gets to the wheel, "they say" that some excess is used to fractionate
a small amount of water into HHO, which is sent to the carbuerator.
As a putative scientist, you should know there are few (if any) actual
facts in science. Scientists just use the best theories which fit their
observations. To dismiss any "weird" claim without considering the
information, isn't very professional.
>
>> If you took some time to look at the
>> large number of experiences of people who've done this, perhaps you could
>> comment in a meaningful way.
>
> No. I've seen these cockamamie water-for-gas schemes since first i got
> my first vax account in 1985 and wasted my time reading news on a mail
> to uucp gateway. I am not going to read the 2000th version of the same
> dipshit claims that have been soundly debunked (or, in my case,
> disproven as simple matter of course) for decades.
>
> Maybe you can pull out the infinite-magnet generator next?
>
>>As it is, you still sound pedantic.
>
> That's probably because i'm sick and tired of the old brown's
> gas/HH0/make hydrogen with your cigarette lighter nonsense. Of people
> who rub their two brain cells together and suddenly discover a secrit
> method to double their >whatever< with a couple tubing connectors and a
> Mr. Coffee.
>
>
>> The parts required to do this fairly simple modification cost less than
>> a
>> few hundred. People claim 20-50% better mileage. But after looking at a
>> good
>> bit of real-world anecdotes about it, I can think of a number of reasons
>> why
>> it's not economically feasible. And they have nothing to do with hydrogen
>> flames, UV detectors, blow-out walls, or nuclear reactors.
>
> The point of all this is that i do have a fairly extensive experience
> with a number of engineering disciplines directly related to the
> generation, use and transformation of energy.
>
> And one of the things i have a very acute sense of the risks associated
> with playing around with things you don't understand. Energy sources
> have a tendency to teach lessons to the needful.
>
> You want to start fucking around with stoichiometric mixtures of
> hydrogen and oxygen, feel free. My two thesis are: A, you're wasting
> your time and B, if you're stupid enough not to know A, then you're
> probably not smart enough to avoid injury. I've seen hydrogen
> explosions. You haven't.
>
> sorry it was so hard for you to keep up, but you got there eventually,
> even if you don't know why. congratulations!
Sorry? Really?
Your pedantic, dismissive attitude may impress the chicks. But you admit to
not having kept up with what people are doing nowadays. So you actually do
not know what you're talking about when it comes to this modification done
on an automobile engine.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 21 2008 8:01 pm
From: max
In article <4JGdndLktddv8sDVnZ2dnUVZ_t3inZ2d@earthlink.com>,
"Bob" <ma@trix.net> wrote:
> As a putative scientist, you should know there are few (if any) actual
> facts in science
no wonder you can't understand me.
--
This signature can be appended to your outgoing mesages. Many people include in
their signatures contact information, and perhaps a joke or quotation.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: CBS News on the economy and grocery shopping
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/1ad6efab460db467?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 21 2008 5:56 pm
From: "catalpa"
"Anthony Matonak" <anthonym40@nothing.like.socal.rr.com> wrote in message
news:485d4119$0$5132$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> lenona321@yahoo.com wrote:
>> This includes at least one video.
>>
>> http://search.cbsnews.com/?source=cbs&q=saving+money+food
>
> The two biggest parts of anyones budget these days is housing
> and transportation. It would make more sense to save lots of
> money on those two first and have a little extra to spend on
> food than the other way around.
>
> Anthony
The biggest part of my and many other peoples budget is taxes. I'd love to
save money on taxes, but the federal, state, county and local governments
and the school board won't let me.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en
No comments:
Post a Comment