RF Helps Dissociate H2 in Sea Water?

Apply a billion watts of nearly anything to a teaspoon of salt water and you'd get atoms flying in all directions this makes it a simple mechanical sorting problem from there.

You have to mix in the majic pixy dust for it to work.

They were keeping it a secret because they all work for the oil companies.

Those are cute tricks, but it isn't the gold per se doing the work. Rather, the gold nano-particles are coated with suitable coatings that adhere to the desired targets. That's where the majick is, thus making Kanzius' fantastical mystery machine--a 13.56 MHz ISM band generator--look a bit small by comparison.

Nice links. Thanks.

--James Arthur

True, but that's not the whole picture. The size and shape of the gold nanoparticles have a big effect how they are absorbed by cells. See:

Note that these investigators are using light instead of RF to heat the gold particles.

There's a large area of research involving the use of nanoparticles in cancer detection and treatment:

You're correct that the basic problem is differentiating between cancerous and normal cells. If you can identify or target cancer cells, there are a wide variety of treatments that will work. For example, there was some work done on staining cancer cells, so that a laser could be used for thermal ablation. Insufficient contrast and marginal contrast caused that approach to lose favor. If gold nanoparticles (and EFGR antigens) can differentiate sufficiently between cancerous and normal cells, then anything from RF ablation to chemo-poison delivery will work.

Incidentally, using RF to heat the particles isn't anything new:

I'll pretend not to notice the possibility of heavy metal poisoning from the gold.

Presumably it would stay in the tank while the evaporated water vapor was cooled to liquid again. I was visualizing a micrwave still.

Now as to disassociating water into a stoichiometric hydrogen oxygen mixture....

Robert

Why not use a resistive heater and save a lot of complexity?

John

Actually I grew up in Cleveland and it wasn't Lake Erie but the Cuyahoga river that used to catch fire. It was a common occurrence (probably helped by kids who thought it was cool to set fire to a river) In fact fires were at one time so common they had a fireboat with the job of going up and down the river putting out the fires. Of course it wasn't the river that was burning but the oil sludge and other petroleum crap the oil refineries in the Flats used to dump into the river.

As IO understand it, they were using a more or less standard diathermy machine. I'd guess that places the power in the 20-100 watt range.

Hi John, I 'think' he was building on the work of the infamous Stanley Meyer, who 'created' the water fueled car. Meyer exposed water in stainless steel tubes to a 'special' frequency that caused the individual atoms to vibrate and disassociate into hydrogen and oxygen without all the energy that electrolysis requires. Now, the problem is that his 'special' frequency was several orders of magnitued too small to have any such effect, so it looks like this guy tried using microwaves.

Now, thinking about it, the RF will hit the surface of the water, and try to set up E and H fields that will conducted by the salinity of the water, causing a small amount of current to flow, but undoubtedly generating enough voltage to liberate a small amount of hydrogen via electrolysis. It also heats the water enough to generate a good portion of plain old water vapor. He then sets a spark or flame to it, and viola! the water appears to burn! It makes a great science demonstation, looks good on camera, and of course, has little to no practical application especially as an energy source.

Charlie

And energy, unless maybe you preheat the water cooling the RF generator. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either unless there are some special unmentioned circumstances.

Anyone know how reverse osmosis compares energetically?

Robert

Isn't the real question here whether one can make hydrogen from this at an acceptable price? Secondly what about the applications not yet tested with this like say ammonia mixed with salt? Ammonia should be able to produce three time what water does right? Or what about a salt hydrogen peroxide mix or gallium/aluminum/salt/water mix??????

urvile43528

Isn't the real question here whether one can make hydrogen from this at an acceptable price? Secondly what about the applications not yet tested with this like say ammonia mixed with salt? Ammonia should be able to produce three time what water does right? Or what about a salt hydrogen peroxide mix or gallium/aluminum/salt/water mix??????

urvile43528

Isn't the real question here whether one can make hydrogen from this at an acceptable price? Secondly what about the applications not yet tested with this like say ammonia mixed with salt? Ammonia should be able to produce three time what water does right? Or what about a salt hydrogen peroxide mix or gallium/aluminum/salt/water mix??????

urvile43528

Isn't the real question here whether one can make hydrogen from this at an acceptable price? Secondly what about the applications not yet tested with this like say ammonia mixed with salt? Ammonia should be able to produce three time what water does right? Or what about a salt hydrogen peroxide mix or gallium/aluminum/salt/water mix??????

urvile43528

In journalism school? You've got to be kidding.

John

Or a potassium and water mix? That will release far more hydrogen than it will consume in microwave energy.

John

Isn't the real question why you keep asking a silly question?

In reply to your posts, the answers are no, no, no, no, and possibly another no.

John