On Jul 1, 12:48=A0pm, "Mike E. Fullerton" <inforequ...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> MarkA wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:50:21 -0700, HVAC wrote:
>
> >> "Mike E. Fullerton" <inforequ...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> >> in messagenews:6U7ak.44258$Jx.43096@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> HVAC wrote:
> >>>> Cough, cough (bull****) cough, cough.
> >>> Is your statement based on anything resembling fact or merely
mindles=
s
> >>> belief?
>
> >>>> ""=DF=83-- =B9=B9"" <W...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message news:
> >>>> 536-48650B38-...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>> Rory Johnson's =A0Magnetron Motor, as he named it, was a
revolutiona=
ry
> >>>> new
> >>>> source of power derived from the chemical reaction / fusion of
> >>>> deuterium
> >>>> and gallium.
>
> > ..."chemical reaction / fusion of deuterium and gallium."??? =A0Which
i=
s it?
> > Chemical reactions are not nuclear events. =A0If you can't tell which
y=
ou
> > are seeing, you don't know what you are looking at.
>
> And this is a problem because...? If I obtain a reaction with excess
> heat that can't be explained I might surmise its from a chemical or
> nuclear reaction. Why should I care? I've got a bloody (heavy) water
> powered car.
He didn't say it produced heat. He said it produced electricity.
Nuclear reactions produce energy in the form of radiation. Chemical
reactions produce energy in the form of heat. We know of a couple of
ways to produce electricity - photo-voltaic and bi-metalic junction -
but those aren't chemical or nuclear. Still the guy does mention
light and prisms. One of his materials, gallium, has been used in a
lot of semi-conductors. Deuterium is of course hydrogen and deuterium
oxide is water. Heavy water was used in the process of developing
fission reactions, though not in the reaction itself. Fusion
reactions use hydrogen. So the whole thing sounds like a complete
mishmash of science words related to energy. I suppose if you don't
really understand any of the science and you turn off your BS
detector, you could swallow this as another wonderful free energy type
story, but I hope you don't.
>
> >>> --
> >>> Skeptopathy (pathological skepticism)
> >>> the unscientific belief that unusual phenomena are bunk.
>
> > People have been talking up "cold fusion" for *decades.* =A0So far, no
=
body
> > has been able to show that it actually exists. =A0For a good, rational
> > examination, read Park's "Voodoo Science." =A0An "unusual phenomenon"
m=
ay
> > not be bunk, but it isn't cold fusion, either.
>
> Competent scientists have been talking up cold fusion for decades
> because it is a real phenomena. It is bizarre, difficult to replicate
> and not well understood. Because of these factors incompetent
> "scientists" and pathological skeptics have been ridiculing it instead
> of researching or even reading about it. You can't see something if you
> don't look at it.
>
> >> 'Deja-Poo'... The feeling that I've heard this **** before.
>
> > About a gazillion times? =A0Don't you think they'd have something more
> > convincing that hand waving by now?
>
> How ironic.
>
> --
> Skeptopathy (pathological skepticism)
> the unscientific belief that unusual phenomena are bunk.- Hide quoted
tex=
t -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
