John Kanzius, K3TUP is inventing again.

Kanzius Snake Oil

Dissociation of H2O (with a pinch of salt for ions) into burnable hydrogen and oxygen has been used to swindle naive investors out of millions in various "water as burnable fuel" scams. It works, and is impressive visually, but it is a net energy LOSS. RF, DC, so called catalytic electrodes, it's all been done by the scam artists. Hey, its REALLY simple: if this process produces a net energy gain then demonstrate a stand alone self sustaining engine where ONLY water is added and there is no external power source. I'll take bets all day long that Kanzius cannot EVER do it.

As for his cancer cure, funny isn't it how one guy, if his claims are true qualifies hands down for two Nobel prizes next year, medicine and physics. Heat kills cells, and selective heating of malignant cells is great for fighting metastatic cells and leaving normal ones unharmed. Kanzius's nano particles do enhance heating when they are INJECTED directly into cancer sites, but there is no selective uptake. He cannot apply the particles systemically and have them naturally concentrate at cancer sites. If you can physically access a cancer site you can do many things including injecting chemo drugs, DIRECTLY heat the tissue, surgically remove the tissue, etc. Kanzius's process is just one of many. There are less invasive treatments including experimental proton therapies, intersecting x ray beam therapies, and many others.

The idea that big oil or big medicine can buy patents and suppress threatening technologies is urban myth. Once something is published, many people who don't give a damn about patents have access and they WILL exploit it. Look at India, they produce TONS of patented drugs without licenses from the patent owners and they are sold in countries where the patents are enforceable. It is underground and cannot be effectively policed. You cannot stomp a good published idea into the ground and kill it. Thats not how human nature works. The supposed 200 MPG carb that GM suppressed, the supposed Tesla wireless energy transmission that the power companies suppressed, all myths.

Plain and simple: if Kanzius can prove his water as fuel claims then he is certainly going to win the Nobel prize in physics. The oil crisis will be over. The sheiks will be crying their hearts out. Don't hold your breath.

 

The problem with a nuclear reactor in a car are idiot drivers.

Instead of just having a car accident, you'll have a nuclear disaster.

 

It's guys like you------guys who insist on injecting common sense and facts into the discussion----who kill a lot of promising threads on QRZ.com.

I curse both you and your wretched spawn.

 

KB4BLU has it right

KB4BLU got it exactly right, in part

". . . Using an analogy of the 3 laws of thermodynamics...

1. You can't win
2. You can't break even.
3. Don't even try. "


Classic - True - A good test of Snake Oil. If they promise they can beat #1 or #2 you should immediately apply #3. You will end up better off (more money, cleaner environment, better efficiency etc). Short of someone finding the magic "ON" switch for Zero Point Energy extraction that's as good as it gets. In fact, trying to over-optimize most systems results in WORSE conditions. Entropy of the SYSTEM WILL increase - if you work really really hard to make your little slice of the universe neater and recycle, reuse and reduce you will stir up the rest of the cosmos for everyone else. Work the energy balances - most "going green" approaches just make someone else's ricebowl brown.


73
Herman - W5HLP
"Reality - more fun than drugs and legal in most states"

 

Get a boat anchor!

 

The ONLY way that hydrogen will ever be useful as a common fuel is if we totally rely upon nuclear power to produce the electricity that is needed to produce the hydrogen. Otherwise it doesn't make sense to burn fossil fuels to produce hydrogen, and wind or solar don't produce enough energy to be useful.

I don't think the public or the politicians are ready to face the fact that some day we're going to have to go pretty much all nuclear.

So Kanzius' RF work, whether or not it is better or more efficient (though I think probably not) than conventional means of producing hydrogen, is moot.

 

I agree about having to go nuclear. It's the only choice, but I don't see the other natural sources like geothermal, wind, and solar stepping up to the plate.

But all nuclear is not created equal. There's multiple fission technologies right now, and fusion is on the horizon.

I used to think that fission was a phase we should have passed through in less than 20 years, that we should have been on our way to fusion by the 60's, except for the artificial incentives in place for the atomic power industry. (Want to see a sweet deal? Just check out what liabilities an atomic plant would have if it melts down!)

But hopefully with He3 some new technologies will rapidly come to the forefront. Just have to see.

 

They've been around for quite a while already--they're commonly known as-------boat anchors!

 

Yes, there are drivers who are idiots--and there are drivers who drive long distances--DAILY--and have never ever had a serious accident. Those drivers outnumber the idiots by a wide margin. On the other hand, there are idiots that cause accidents although they've never been in one themselves.

Also, just as there are cars now that keep the passenger compartment intact even through accidents that would have left older cars a pile of smashed up scrap, there are ways and means now to protect the small nuclear units cars would use and prevent release of any radioactivity to the surroundings.

At least that is one thing that can be said of automobile technology today--protection has finally been given the attention needed to catch up to the potentials of damage a car accident could cause.

 

If this is the way everybody used to think, there would be no innovation, no new discoveries and no scientific advances. People who think outside the box and question traditional and accepted ways of doing things are the innovators who will succeed in freeing us from the addiction we have to OPEC and its oil.

 

Ok when you invent a perpetual motion machine I will listen to you. No one no matter how much they thought "out of the box" has ever violated basic scientific fundamentals.

 

Ah, not true! Many discoveries have violated the "basic scientific principles" of the time. In reality, they just seemed to do so and ultimately they changed our understanding of scientific principles. Our understanding of what basic scientific principles are migrates over time and one needs to retain some humility and openness along the way.

Not that I'm saying perpetual motion will ever happen.

But using RF energy to liberate hydrogen may have some application. Some simple questions I have: is it more or less efficient than electrolysis? Can the hyrdrogen be captured for use later rather than burned as it is liberated? No matter, it is always good to search, explore, experiment. You never know what you will find or how useful it will turn out to be. So one should be cautious about branding such exploration as snake oil.

 

On the other hand, I'm sure you've heard the saying "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" or somesuch.

More is needed than mere assertion that something operates outside the "basic scientific principles". That's a claim that any goofball can make. And unfortunately there are people that buy into such claims.

The "basic scientific principles" (BSPs) certainly serve a useful screening purpose. If some claim seems inconsistent with BSPs then that is or should be a red flag that it deserves a closer look. Someone tells you their magnetic gizmo puts out more energy than it uses - that violates known BSPs so that should trigger a response along the lines of "Prove It!".

This really doesn't relate to Kanzius. If everyone were to read carefully what he's actually claimed, there's nothing extraordinary about it - nothing that seems to violate any known BSPs. The issue is more along the lines of practicality or cost/benefit.

 

Maybe I can be clearer. Some basic priciples that were though to true were not proven. One example is the earth centered universe that was thought to be a basic truth. However it was never given a rigerous proff. Even the king of Spain, Ferdinan I believe, commented when the earth centered universe was explained to him that if he had been around at creation he could have given God some advice. That model was that bad.

The point I am trying to make is that NO ONE has ever violated a basic principal that was rigerously proven.

Another way of looking at what I am saying is Powered flight. In the early 1900's a scientist proved that passenger aircraft were impossible. There was no way to carry many passengers. The weight would be impossible to get in the air. What happened was no one knew too much about aluminum or other lightweight materials. Now was he right or wrong ?? Well his science was good as he was correct. The lightweight materials made it possible to have aircraft to carry more weight and still be able to stay in one piece.

Well I am at work and I don't know if I got my point across or not. SO back to work.

 

Here go the wild conspiracy theories again. The oil companies are going to "buy up the invention and hide it".

This is really old old stuff. We did this experiment in science class in 5th grade 1960 using a battery to break down the water. RF is just another well known way to do it.

The problem is always, as others have pointed out, breaking the water down and getting more energy than it takes to break the water down. A kilowatt generator required to produce a few hundred milliwatts isn't a step forward, nor is the experiment new.