Skip to main content

Free Energy Schemes

The link is "Eric's History of Perpetual Motion and Free Energy Machines" which gives a list of the various scams that have been tried over the decades as mechanisms to get energy out of thin air.

The OM Energy scheme as far as I can tell talks about separating hydrogen from oxygen in water by generating a magnetic field by spinning the water. This is "powered" by the exhaust gases from a petrol engine. The "hydrogen" is mixed with petrol and used as part of the combustion system.

Superficially it would be possible to inject some hydrogen into an internal combustion engine and add to the fuel that way. Whether this would work that well or not is not the big issue.

The big issue is that when hydrogen is burnt it turns into water. So there is a defined amount of energy needed to separate oxygen and hydrogen and a defined amount of energy released when they are united. Even if no energy was wasted either way those amounts are exactly the same.

If we define the energy of Oxidation as Eo and the energy of Hydrolysis as Eh then the argument OM Energy have is that Eo>Eh. This is a complete non starter as it breaks the laws of conservation of Energy. In other words it is a "Free Energy" or "Perpetual Motion" machine.

In any event splitting the water atoms by spinning the water presses my scepticism button, the idea that it generates a magnetic field by spinning the water does the same. It is true that swirls could be created through viscosity.

Even if the splitting idea worked there would be energy losses as the water is generally heated up whilst being spun. There would be energy losses (see Carnot a couple of days ago) through the use of exhaust gases to generate torque. There are also energy losses on the oxidation of the hydrogen (also Carnot and Second Law of Thermodynamics)

What does not surprise me is the government wasting taxpayers money. What does surprise me is that this proposal has actually been press released by the government as a sensible way forwards.

Generally Patent offices won't register free energy machines (because they break the laws of conservation of energy).

Still it is nice to have a laugh from time to time.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…