Re: firewater? [OFF-TOPIC]

["rlsusenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <NoSuchPerson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Robert L Bass wrote:
>> Unless Roy has come up with some new, magical
>> laws of physics and chemistry, the same thing will
>> be true of his RF electrolysis process.
>
> Kanzius' technique does not involve electrolysis.  Whether it is
> efficient enough to be useful remains to be seen.

Where can I find papers on this "technique"?

As for "efficiency", even if this technique were 100% efficient at
liberating hydrogen, the energy liberated by oxidizing that hydrogen
would, at best, equal the energy used to break out the hydrogen in the
first place.  (And thermodynamics laws say that neither process can
possibly be 100% efficient.)

>> Make no mistake:  This is still hydrogen as an
>> energy storage or energy transportation medium --
>> not as fuel.
>
> The Kanzius method is not being held forth as a means of directly
> powering vehicles.  Apparently, he thinks it might be more suitable for
> operating turbines to produce electricity.  Kanzius and other

Again, I don't understand where the energy to turn turbines is supposed
to come from.  You can't "burn" water.  You can use energy to break it
into its components and then release some of that energy by allowing
those components to recombine.

Unless there's an atomic reaction involved, or some chemical reaction
other than 2H2+O2 => 2H2O, there's no fuel source here.

> researchers have been prudent about claims of the system's usefulness in
> its present form.
>
> FWIW, Kanzius' cancer research is apparently regarded highly enough that
> there are major studies being conducted at some of the top cancer
> research facilities in the country, including MD Anderson where
> pancreatic cancer cells were killed in a laboratory test.  The data is
> far from conclusive but the results of the MD Anderson studies have been
> so encouraging that multiple studies are now underway elsewhere.  For
> people like myself who are fighting cancer, this is promising research.
> Though it's not a proven treatment it's definitely not a hoax.  If in
> the process of developing a new treatment for some types of tumors
> Kanzius has accidentally found a cure for the nation's energy crisis,
> [Sorry, I have to say it] more power to him.  :^)

If this technique can be applied to fighting cancer, that's great.  But
it has nothing to do with being an energy _source_.

Can you point at any papers describing the physics or chemistry of the
process you're talking about?

>> And, of course, all of this is off-topic.
>
> Not entirely.  Alternative energy is of interest to many home
> automators.  I don't want to give the impression of being sold on this
> thing but it does look interesting and just maybe....
>