Amiga.org

Coffee House => Coffee House Boards => CH / Science and Technology => Topic started by: blobrana on September 12, 2007, 01:15:15 AM

Title: Burning water
Post by: blobrana on September 12, 2007, 01:15:15 AM
Hum,
i thought my cooking was bad until i came across this:

Quote
An Erie cancer researcher has found a way to burn salt water, a novel invention that is being touted by one chemist as the "most remarkable" water science discovery in a century.
John Kanzius happened upon the discovery accidentally when he tried to desalinate seawater with a radio-frequency generator he developed to treat cancer. He discovered that as long as the salt water was exposed to the radio frequencies, it would burn.


Read more (http://www.pennlive.com/news/article114538.ece)
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Boot_WB on September 12, 2007, 02:14:05 AM
(http://temp.corvetteforum.net/bss/nomad/spock_fascinating2.jpg)













Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Cymric on September 12, 2007, 06:53:39 AM
I smell a rat, a big one. The process supposedly 'works' by separating water molecules into their molecular constituents, hydrogen and oxygen. These are then combusted. In other words, you get exactly the same amount of energy out of the system as you put into it. I fail to spot the appeal of such a design.

(Anyone notice that Orbo, the much hyped free energy device, is now completely out of the picture? Apparently we're dealing with another Orbo-wannabe.)
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Karlos on September 12, 2007, 01:25:19 PM
Pump saltwater full of focused microwave wavelength radiation and you'd expect it to do this. Notice how "excited sodium yellow" the flame is?

Looks more like microwave pumped plasma than a flame to me. Look on youtube for similar kitchen silliness involving sliced grapes in mircowave ovens.

-edit-

deja vu (http://www.whyzzat.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1888)
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Cymric on September 12, 2007, 06:03:27 PM
I hadn't seen the movies yet at the time of my first response. But that sure looks like a Na-enriched something to me, indeed. I'm also quite impressed that people can actually get so close to the apparatus without there being any need for shielding. You'd expect them to give off yellow flames themselves, really.
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: motorollin on September 13, 2007, 08:34:40 AM
Quote
Cymric wrote:
I'm also quite impressed that people can actually get so close to the apparatus without there being any need for shielding. You'd expect them to give off yellow flames themselves, really.

Maybe they're on a low sodium diet.

--
moto
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Oliver on September 14, 2007, 10:01:23 AM
Quote
motorollin wrote:
Maybe they're on a low sodium diet.


Yep, 'light salt' is a much healthier option for people like me, working in high rf environments.

Oliver
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: motorollin on September 15, 2007, 10:11:33 AM
That stuff ("Lo Salt") is made from potassium chloride instead of sodium chloride. I'm no chemist but I wonder whether that would have a similar reaction? It is further up the reactivity series than sodium so if it does I would expect the reaction to be more violent.

--
moto
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Karlos on September 15, 2007, 12:47:41 PM
@motorollin

If it works, I'd expect the potassium to give a lilac coloured flame characteristic of its main (visible) emission spectrum, just as it would in the traditional flame test.

Potassium ought to be easier to excite than sodium, it might produce a more pronounced flame effect for the same energy input but it doesn't imply it would be more energetic than sodium. This isn't a chemical reaction in the common understanding of the word, more a physical reaction of the atoms/ions that get created in the plasma.
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Cymric on September 15, 2007, 03:04:12 PM
I concur with Karlos: potassium would give a purple / violet flame.

I also would like to add for those who eat 'lo cal' salt that there isn't anything 'lo cal' about it: your body cannot use it for energy. It is just that you take in less sodium; this is better for heart and kidneys. (People unwittingly eat too much salt---sodium---anyway. I've read in numerous journals that all the effort to ban transfats from food is rather expensive, and that it might be more efficient to get them to eat less salt instead.)
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: JaXanim on September 15, 2007, 03:12:43 PM
Quote

motorollin wrote:
That stuff ("Lo Salt") is made from potassium chloride instead of sodium chloride.


It's actually 50/50 sodium/potassium chlorides. That would make the flame yellow with a lilac tinge. Or maybe a lilac flame with a yellow edge. Or maybe a yellowish-lilac stripey effect. Or maybe it would be greenish due to colour mixing, but not like copper, more like ripening apples. Chances are it would just be yellow since the potassium flame is never very intense.
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: blobrana on September 17, 2007, 05:22:24 PM
Burning water and other myths
Read more (http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070910/full/070910-13.html;jsessionid=5D860E7A9F3BB0C37DE1C7DC283A63CA)
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Hodgkinson on October 10, 2007, 09:57:29 PM
I did some reading on wikipedia after the BBC documentary this week about the Windscale Nuclear fire...

This was incredibly risky: molten metal oxidises in contact with water, stripping oxygen from the water molecules and leaving free hydrogen, which could mix with incoming air and explode, tearing open the weakened containment.

Maybe this has some relevance on the conversation?

Hodgkinson.
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Agafaster on October 11, 2007, 11:21:09 AM
Which, as you're probably aware, Karlos me ode, is why street lights glow a bit purply before they come on properly - potassium is used to kick off the sodium excitation in these low pressure sodium lights, as its easier to excite.

ahhh flame tests ! takes me right back ... too far back!
Sodium flame tests would be the last one we'd try - it tended to leave the flame discoloured even after the sample was removed.
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Dandy on October 23, 2007, 10:16:41 AM
Quote

Hodgkinson wrote:

...
Hodgkinson



Your sig isn't referring to John Hutchison (http://www.hutchisoneffect.ca/) in any way, is it?
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Hodgkinson on October 23, 2007, 10:04:52 PM
Quote

Your sig isn't referring to John Hutchison in any way, is it?


Nope. (Looks through the site and wonders whats going off there...)

Hodgkinson.
Title: Re: Burning water
Post by: Dandy on October 24, 2007, 08:55:43 AM
Quote

Hodgkinson wrote:

Quote


Your sig isn't referring to John Hutchison in any way, is it?



Nope. (Looks through the site and wonders whats going off there...)

Hodgkinson.



Bummer!
I love his experiments!

In case you're interested in an possible explanation of the stunning results he achieved I'd like to encourage you to read all you can get about
Burkhard Heim's "Unified Quantum Field Theory" (http://www.heim-theory.com/Contents/contents.html) - from my POV it's worth the hassle...

more about Heim-theory (http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18925331.200.html)