On 5 Jun, 07:24, Jim Higgins wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 18:42:00 -0700, John Smith I





wrote:
Jimmie D wrote:

...

Sodium Chloride (salt) contains sodium (DUH! Huh?), well guess what,
sodium ions impart a yellow color to the flame and make it visible.

Hydrogen is lighter than air (the hindenburg! Duh, again!) this makes
the gas being emitted very anxious to head towards the ceiling. This
also is causing heat to be convected upwards RAPIDLY!

Result, paper towel is unburned.

If it were a plasma arc, the paper towel would be one electrode. Ever
see electrodes made of metal melt in a plasma arc? Carbon electrodes
burn away?

Nuff said ...

Regards, JS

It's induction coupled plasma, not arc discharge plasma.

But let's explore the claim that the water is "burning." If water
burns, what are the reactants and what are the reaction products?

If it's hydrogen that's burning, then it was derived from the water by
applying enough energy to split the water molecule... and if this is
really the case then you've input as much energy in the form of RF as
you get back by burning the (allegedly) produced hydrogen.

There's this nagging little thing called conservation of energy and
matter and getting more energy out of this particular system than you
put into it is a violation of the fundamental laws of physics and
chemistry.

What's really happening is that electrons are being excited to higher
energy levels by application of an intense RF field and upon "falling
back" to their original state release the difference in energy between
the higher and lower states. It's not "burning" in the classic sense
of the term.

Here's a decent explanation of how induction coupled plasma is used in
analytical chemistry.http://www.cee.vt.edu/ewr/environmen...r/icp/icp.html

This invention will never withstand strict scientific review because
it will be trivial to demonstrate that it doesn't produce more power
than is input in the form of RF. No net excess power produced means
no new power source.

It's almost frightening that hams would consider the claims for this
thing to be valid. Not that I expect hams to be competent in every
scientific discipline, but there are some basic fundamentals
applicable to how the universe operates...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The question is not what he is striving for is a valid quest.
The question is should the press or media decide on it's validity
and possibly consider the censoring of the story. Some people
on this newsgroup are angry because the story has been given
publicity that they feel is undeserved and harmfull to the minds
of some readers. They want to squash the idea by ridicule or
censorship since in their judgement it propulgates falsities
about science. If the minority in science who wish to decide
what is and what is not harmfull or fruitfull to the community
then the study of science itself is not required and
neither is debate.
Art