I would like to know if the plans for makeing a car that runs om water
( http://www.netmar.com/~maat/archive/feb2/carplans_doc.htm ) really
work if there is any way to prove it? and any more information on the
subject would be nice

Hi madman514-ga,

Unfortunately, the idea behind these plans is totally flawed. But
there's enough real science behind it to make it sound convincing.

There really is such a thing as the "orthohydrogen" that is referred
to in the question-and-answer section of the page that you quoted.
Orthohydrogen is one of the two forms of molecular hydrogen (the other
is parahydrogen). The only difference is whether the two protons in
each hydrogen molecule spin the same way or opposite ways. It's shown
diagramatically here:

   Ortho- and Parahydrogen
   http://www.thch.uni-bonn.de/pc/bargon/PHIP/parahydrogen.html

Also, there really is a patent for producing orthohydrogen from water. Here it is:

   Apparatus for producing orthohydrogen and/or parahydrogen
   http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/chambers.htm

The plans that you ask about are based on that patent. They use the
same device, and the same technique of pulsed electricity to produce
the hydrogen from the water.

In addition, the plans show some electrical circuits to produce the
19Hz electrical pulse, and to pump the water as required. Those
circuits are fairly straightforward, and use off-the-shelf parts such
as the NE555 oscillator chip and the LM741 linear amplifier chip.
There's nothing "deep" going on here.

The final piece in the jigsaw is the engine modification, which is not
too different from that required when converting a car to run on other
alternative fuels such as LPG. Perhaps it would even work, in the
sense of enabling a car to burn hydrogen, but I certainly wouldn't be
game to try it on a car of mine.

There's no magic about producing hydrogen from water. Just stick a
couple of electrodes in some salt water and connect a battery. Collect
the little bubbles that form on the electrodes - hydrogen from one
electrode and oxygen from the other. Now combine them and light a
match. Boom! I did this experiment as a child and it certainly works.
But you don't get much energy out, compared to the electricity that is
needed to separate the water into hydrogen and oxygen.

The patent referenced above (US patent number 4936961) claims that it
describes a method of producing hydrogen from water that is more
efficient than the simple electrolysis described above. Maybe that's
even true. Maybe there will be more hydrogen produced than with
hydrolysis - but not enough to exceed the electrical input. Burning
the hydrogen is still not going to give you more energy than the
electricity that was needed to produce the hydrogen in the first
place.

That's a fundamental principle of physics. It applies everywhere,
always. Now let's suppose for the purpose of discussion that these
plans describe some process that breaks this fundamental principle. If
that were true, it would shake the core of science to its roots and
impact every aspect of our lives. A car that ran on water would then
be the least of our concerns!

"IF" (and it's a big "if") you could successfully build this device
and convert your car, then the best you could hope for is that it
would drive (very very slowly) until the battery ran down. The
suggestion in the article that the car's alternator can produce enough
electricity to power the hydrogen production is absolutely bogus.

Furthermore, note the extensive disclaimers in the article (e.g. don't
do this to a car that has any value, can't guarantee it to work, etc).
Don't you think they would have built one for their own car if they
really thought it had a chance of working?

The references at the bottom of the article include a similar "fuel
from water" device from Creative Science and Research. I note that
this similar device has earned them a "Cranky" rating at crankDOTnet:

   "cranks, crackpots, kooks & loons on the net"
   http://www.crank.net/energy.html

So, save your time and save your money. If you want to reduce your
fuel consumption, vacuuming the carpet to reduce the weight of the car
will produce an infinitely greater improvement than trying to convert
it to run on water!

Regards,
eiffel-ga


Google Search Strategy:

"Patent 4936961"
://www.google.com/search?q=%22Patent+4936961%22

"creative science and research" "fuel from water"
://www.google.com/search?q=%22creative+science+and+research%22+%22fuel+from+water%22

great answer, guess I'll still be buning gas in my suv for now!

A car that runs on water is already available. It's called a boat.

Of course this won't work. Get serious.

The question is not necessarily, "Can water be used as a source of
fuel for my car?" Yes, it "can" be a fuel. The important question
really is, "How much energy must be invested to dissociate the H2O
molecules vs how much will be returned by burning the dissociate H & O
gases?"

   Yes, if you break H2O into H & O, the two can be burned together,
releasing heat energy which can be used to run a motor. But how much
energy is required to break up the water? It's an empirical fact that
it takes a certain amount of energy to break the chemical bonds
holding together a water molecule, and that the energy of
recombination (burning) is at best equal to that of dissociation. If
there were no inefficiencies in the burning process, there'd be a net
gain in energy of zero.

   You ask if there's some way to prove the validity of the system in
the link provided. Yes, there is: the proof would be to build it and
show that it works as advertised, providing more usable energy than
must be put in to generate the fuel. I think the handiest evidence
against it si the fact that, even though varied individuals keep
claiming to have perfected some exotic understanding of the fracturing
of water, they are nevertheless not famous for driving their water
powered cars, thumbing their noses at the gas pumps. Even the website
which you've linked doesn't appear to have anything to the effect that
the site author has built such a device and is saving real money using
water instead of gasoline.

   But, as always, you should have a careful look at the plans. If you
think the project is within your ability and is affordable, then
perhaps you should give it a try. There's no big loss if it doesn't
work, and everything to gain if it does.

It's absolutely IMPOSSIBLE!

Don't waste any more time on this.

A friend of mine [ mechanic/engineer] once rigged up a system that
injected water as a mist into the petrol of a car. It increased the
economy from 20 m.p.g. to 50 m.p.g. \The problem was in the 'misting'
of the water, from liquid to virtually a gas. The carby. was away from
the car by 20 feet of three inch pvc pipe, which did the misting o.k.
But how do you pack this much pipe into the engine bay???He dropped
the idea.

Wikipedia has a good entry for this subject
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fuel_cell

I heard somewhere that plans for making a car that runs on water had
been patented and the patent bought by the U.S. Governnment.
This could just be an urban myth however.

There was a water-injection system in the 1950's.  It sprayed a fine
water mist into the carburettor. The theory being that petrol (gas to
the Yanks) would form a thin film around each water droplet and (a)
burn better, while (b) the engine ran cooler.  It began when someone
noticed his car seemed to run better in foggy conditions.

 I believe it did work, giving a slight improvment in MPG.  But died
after a few years.