Quote:
Originally Posted by ChazInMT
I'll post what's in the Wiki Link I put there earlier.
"The hydron (a completely free or "naked" hydrogen atomic nucleus) is too reactive to occur in many liquids, even though it is sometimes visualized to do so by students of chemistry. A free hydron would react with a molecule of the liquid to form a more complicated cation. Examples are the hydronium ion in water-based acids, and H
2F+ , the unstable cation of fluoroantimonic acid, the strongest superacid. For this reason, in such liquids including liquid acids, hydrons diffuse by contact from one complex cation to another, via the Grotthuss mechanism."
Sooooo, if I'm reading that right, these have nothing to do with what you're doing because of the extreme reactivity of it. When you posted "Proton" earlier this week, that was my immediate thought, you were referring to H+ somehow. But I knew this would not factor into anything because it would instantly cling to the nearest electron it could find forming some weird molecule and thus be unavailable to you for use as a sort of chemical accelerant.
Explain this "Domino Effect" process of how H2 is going to "Shred" gasoline hydrocarbons when it is at concentration of 1,000:1 causing a vast amount of more free hydrogen or lighter hydrocarbons. The 230CC per minute is assuming it is pure Browns gas which is 66.6% H2 and 33.3% O2, so the 700:1 becomes closer to 1,000:1. Show me where it talks about this reaction on the web somewhere that is NOT an HHO site.
BTW, your bringing added O2 and H2O from your system into the equation are moot since water vapor is present at 2% give er take, and O2 is 23% of the 15,000:1 air that the engine is using. The H2 would be the only added compound which is not already present in the atmosphere.
This seems to me to be the basis of where you're efficiency lies, so it should be reasonable to ask where this information comes from.
Also, there are 6 Red highlighted sections in the post I made earlier that I am seeking clarification on. You claim these are not pseudo-scientific but you have not addressed these. I posted earlier today that it is difficult to have a logical conversation with you because you do not answer questions. I am saying those 6 Red passages are not quantified in anyway and are very confusing to someone who is trying to understand this. Are you going to address these points further? Or just prove my point that you do not answer questions when asked? Or somehow get exasperated with me and continue to attack me thus again avoiding the answers and further digging the chasm you have created by you're unwillingness to discuss things civilly?
|
As you pointed out and linked to, the H+ atom is VERY short lived. At it's creation in an electrolysis cell, it will immediately look for some way to be stable and will thus migrate to the negative plate, take on an electron and pair up with another H atom to form the diatomic H2 atom which is even more stable. This is of course a gas, which is bubbled out and which we are attempting to use in our engine under discussion.
The fact that H+ is so short lived due to it's reactivity is why it is called a radical. That H2 gas, in the combustion chamber, with enough conditions to add enough energy, dissociates back to a pair of H+ radicals. Since there is not near enough hydrogen to combust, the H+ is caught there in the nano seconds before ignition. But, it is not just sitting there. It is very reactive, as you linked to. It looks for something to do with it's reactivity. The C8H18 carbon chain is available and thus suffers the ravages. That is where the domino effect starts in. This happens billions of times a second at the flame front, but if it can be started before hand, we can gain that fraction of a second.