Iran is Building Flying Saucers.

[kumaran]

The top picture in my post was taken on 26th Nov in Eindhoven, Netherlands...of some of the Netherlands/Belgium Keshe Foundation Team.

The bottom picture shows the KF Centre, Ninove, Belgium...the opening of which was announced on the 12th Feb...and opened on March 2nd.

Not only were the pics taken at a different time/date but also in a different country.

So hopefully this puts the car/people thing to rest.....

................................................................................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................................................................

general comment.....(not specifically addressed to Psyche)......

It's easy to put a negative slant on anything and everything. Whatever is said in this thread doesn't have any effect on what's happening 'in real life'...

with the Keshe Foundation and it's different areas of interest...like Space Travel and Health and other things.

From what I've seen and heard (on the internet) I believe that Mehran Keshe is genuine and does have the technology he talks about.

And is trying to share it in a responsible way.

http://keshefoundation.com/en/

Bee

I have changed my mind about keshe. After listening to some people talk about suppression of free energy I have to say it is possible Keshe has been stopped just like tesla. I have decided to give him the benefit of the doubt. I have decided he truly believes what he says and hence I no longer think him a scam. But it is rather depressing the world governments suppressing such vital and ground breaking technology. This is the interview that convinced me here

. It was enlightening. Tony Kilvert mentions Mehran Keshe as genuine/ Edited May 5, 2012 by kumaran

[badeskov]

Bee

I have changed my mind about keshe. After listening to some people talk about suppression of free energy I have to say it is possible Keshe has been stopped just like tesla. I have decided to give him the benefit of the doubt. I have decided he truly believes what he says and hence I no longer think him a scam. But it is rather depressing the world governments suppressing such vital and ground breaking technology. This is the interview that convinced me here

. It was enlightening. Tony Kilvert mentions Mehran Keshe as genuine/

By all means of respect, but in my opinion you seriously need to take a step back from this topic and, in particular, this Keshe fellow.

Also, there is no such thing as a free lunch, i. e. free energy. Everything comes with a cost associated with it. It may be heavy on the extraction side, it may be heavy on the production side, it may be heavy on the operational side, but either way, the thought of free energy is an illusion.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited May 5, 2012 by badeskov

[bmk1245]

By all means of respect, but in my opinion you seriously need to take a step back from this topic and, in particular, this Keshe fellow.

[...]

Impossible, its a full moon today...

[kumaran]

I asked someone their opinion about whether the Keshe technology would work and he said it would. Here is the reply I got to my e mail.

I've now had chance to read the Patent Application of Kershe:

His method for achieving gravity-wave generation is 'half-backwards'; he starts in the middle, goes to the beginning and then finishes up at the end. This is because his ideas have developed from historical experimental discoveries (not theoretical reasoning). he quotes:

' Thorndike in the late 1950s discovered liquid-helium scintillation'.

'Stockton later showed the emission of very intense uV rays centred at 80 nm'.

'Adams confirmed the transparency of liquid Helium to its own scintillation light'.

From these, as a nuclear scientist, he decided that the way forward was to embrace these discovereies and through scintillation generate plasma and gravity waves. Then, working backwards he proposes that the genration of the Earth's magnetic field must be produced in a similar way and then proposes that the centre of the Earth contains Hydrogen. But then, later, arguing for the existence of 'black holes', he contradicts himself by saying 'lighter elements in the mass [planets] move to the outer layers of the mass'. He can't have it both ways.

Moreover, the mechanics of his generation method is self-defeating for several reasons [for example, he uses helium to heat hydrogen and so then has to employ cooling, thereby defeating the natural mechanics of 'periodic scaling' that requires input heat to stimulate the emission].

Moreover, a Patent Application is a legal document intended to establish, define, and clarify the limits and jurisdiction of the ownership of intelluctual property. It is not intended as a forum for aspiring educators or would-be Authors. Keshe would have been better advised to focus his Application around gravity and antigravity wave wave capability of his invention and to limit the scope of his claims to one or two; for example power generation, levitation and weapons systems, leaving the crumbs for others to pursue at a later date.

In Conclusion: The Patent Application has been prepared emotively rather than legally.

But no-one in their right mind would pursue the method of generation he proposes, it is very dangerous—cracks in the reactor (for example caused by eartyhquake) would result in catstrophic meltdown .

I note that the Application was withdrawn in 2010, probably because of lack of funding.

Notwithstanding, I still believe that his invention would work and that he has made a major contribution to scientific thought.

Edited May 5, 2012 by kumaran

[DONTEATUS]

Well as sure as Im the King of B.B.Q and the Sun and Moon revolve around our Sun, I will bet you as soon as Keshe gets a working Starship with his ,very improbable probaility Drive. William Shatner I meant James T. Kirk . Will come out of Star Fleet retirement to Command this FTL Craft ! JMO.

[badeskov]

I asked someone their opinion about whether the Keshe technology would work and he said it would. Here is the reply I got to my e mail.

I've now had chance to read the Patent Application of Kershe:

His method for achieving gravity-wave generation is 'half-backwards'; he starts in the middle, goes to the beginning and then finishes up at the end. This is because his ideas have developed from historical experimental discoveries (not theoretical reasoning). he quotes:

' Thorndike in the late 1950s discovered liquid-helium scintillation'.

'Stockton later showed the emission of very intense uV rays centred at 80 nm'.

'Adams confirmed the transparency of liquid Helium to its own scintillation light'.

From these, as a nuclear scientist, he decided that the way forward was to embrace these discovereies and through scintillation generate plasma and gravity waves. Then, working backwards he proposes that the genration of the Earth's magnetic field must be produced in a similar way and then proposes that the centre of the Earth contains Hydrogen. But then, later, arguing for the existence of 'black holes', he contradicts himself by saying 'lighter elements in the mass [planets] move to the outer layers of the mass'. He can't have it both ways.

Moreover, the mechanics of his generation method is self-defeating for several reasons [for example, he uses helium to heat hydrogen and so then has to employ cooling, thereby defeating the natural mechanics of 'periodic scaling' that requires input heat to stimulate the emission].

Moreover, a Patent Application is a legal document intended to establish, define, and clarify the limits and jurisdiction of the ownership of intelluctual property. It is not intended as a forum for aspiring educators or would-be Authors. Keshe would have been better advised to focus his Application around gravity and antigravity wave wave capability of his invention and to limit the scope of his claims to one or two; for example power generation, levitation and weapons systems, leaving the crumbs for others to pursue at a later date.

In Conclusion: The Patent Application has been prepared emotively rather than legally.

But no-one in their right mind would pursue the method of generation he proposes, it is very dangerous—cracks in the reactor (for example caused by eartyhquake) would result in catstrophic meltdown .

I note that the Application was withdrawn in 2010, probably because of lack of funding.

Notwithstanding, I still believe that his invention would work and that he has made a major contribution to scientific thought.

That opinion is, I am afraid, rather irrelevant as we have no idea who that person is and what makes his opinion relevant in this respect. I am of the opinion that Mr. Keshe's invention will not work - in fact, I am certain it will not. But that is also rather irrelevant.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[kumaran]

I am trying to get keshe book but it is unavailable on Amazon which is the only place that accepts prepaid credit card I have. Really depressing as I wanted to find out more about Keshes technology.

[badeskov]

I am trying to get keshe book but it is unavailable on Amazon which is the only place that accepts prepaid credit card I have. Really depressing as I wanted to find out more about Keshes technology.

Read on his website (free and full of erroneous physics) or the patent (which is free online). You don't really need anything else.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[kumaran]

this is what my friend said about suppression of new ideas.

He said

Generally speaking, technology, and new ideas, are either deliberately or inadvertently supressed;

Beneficial new technology, by its nature, infers better, cheaper, quicker or safer ways of accomplishing the same results [or better results] as those currently available by present technology. This represents a threat to various groups.

For example, Oil Companies sell oil and therefore do not welcome alternative energy technologies, so they deliberately try to destroy the competition, at every stage of development.

Scientists and Academia hold priveleged positions in society that provides them with income for 'looking' for solutions to problems. If we pay someone to 'look' then this removes any incentive to 'find'. It pays participants to keep on looking for ever. Hence the reason that a cure for cancer has not been found; a cure for the common cold has not been found; a method to combine hydrogen with oxygen to make freshwater has not been found, etc.

Additionally, Science and Academia have a pecking-order among individuals that confers power and influence [ostensibly] based on academic achievement; 'qualifications', degrees, PhDs etc that were gained by becoming expert with existing [old]technology. New technology thus makes obsolete the old technology AND the old academic expertise, rendering all earlier education 'redundant' and useless. So not only would these people lose their jobs, but acceptance of new ideas or technology would undermine their status within their own peer group and with society at large, so they resist all change.

A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush, so bankers, who accept billions of dollars from existing technology [oil companies] would never forgo that income for 'promises' of 'jam tomorrow' from new technology that might never work; here we introduce the notion of risk aversion.

Politicians are paid by Oil Companies and Bankers to look after their interests [via party donantions and backhanders], so Politicians do not have the political will to embrace change.

Moreover, living creatures [including human beings] are genetically programmed to avoid change; it is 'safer' to keep still than to 'move' around.

The 7 deadly sin human 'programmes' also kick-in to affect the diffusion of new ideas; jealousy [and resentment], gluttony, slothfulness, desire, anger and pride [the reason why pride is regarded a s a sin is explained in FUTURESCIENCE].

Then there is the corollorary; lack of interest in anything new or the world at large, ignorance.

Then there is 'distraction'; normal people are simply too busy working as slaves to consider new ideas. For them the 'future' extends only up until the next pay-check.

So there are many factors, so many that a book could be written about them.

There are people of vision. There are the blind. There are people filled with love, and people filled with hate. Each chooses their own destiny. The technology that succeeds does so in spite of their efforts.

Vanity oh vanity. All is vanity.

[DONTEATUS]

But nothing from nothing leaves nothing ! But ya`z gotta have sumptin If you want to Dance with Me !

As in Free energy ! THere really is nothing from Nothing ! As Bade`s has put "No Free LUNCH" Even in the Movies one must put a little to get a Little ! And today One must pay a Lot to Get a Little.

Like Space theres a lot of it and very Little being spent on traveling into it !

[badeskov]

this is what my friend said about suppression of new ideas.

Frankly, I must admit that I do not put much credence into what your friend has to say. Please see below:

He said

Generally speaking, technology, and new ideas, are either deliberately or inadvertently supressed;

This is simply not correct and displays a rather astounding lack of knowledge of how science works. New ideas are published all the time, some more practical than others, but nonetheless published. It would behoove your friend to read some real scientific journals and get an understanding of how many new ideas are actually published on a continuous basis.

Beneficial new technology, by its nature, infers better, cheaper, quicker or safer ways of accomplishing the same results [or better results] as those currently available by present technology. This represents a threat to various groups.

That may be so, but they are typically published nonetheless.

For example, Oil Companies sell oil and therefore do not welcome alternative energy technologies, so they deliberately try to destroy the competition, at every stage of development.

This is simply as incorrect as it could be. Oil companies are well aware that they are trading a resource that will most likely not last and are looking for substitutes. Like hydrogen, for instance. If there was anything to "free" energy, they would pour vast sums of money into it so they would be the ones selling the resource. They certainly wouldn't try to suppress it, as that would never work - and they know it.

Scientists and Academia hold priveleged positions in society that provides them with income for 'looking' for solutions to problems. If we pay someone to 'look' then this removes any incentive to 'find'.

Again, simply incorrect on so many levels. Scientists 'find' all the time and a simple look through various scientific journals would show as much. I guess the bias against scientists is because they do not 'find' what your friend would like them to find. Unfortunately, it does not work like that - scientists find what observations and subsequent analysis tells them that they have found. Not what someone tells them they should find.

It pays participants to keep on looking for ever. Hence the reason that a cure for cancer has not been found; a cure for the common cold has not been found; a method to combine hydrogen with oxygen to make freshwater has not been found, etc.

Frankly, and by all means of respect, but now your friend is getting embarrassing. Lets have a look, shall we:

• A cure for cancer.
  This is an oxymoron essentially, as there will most likely never be a cure for cancer. Cancer is cells in your body running amok and any two cancers are not the same.
  
• A cure for the common cold.
  You can get vaccinated, but there is no cure. The common cold is not common, it mutates all the time.
  
• Mixing hydrogen and oxygen to create clean water.
  This is just stupid. Of course you can do that. It is just both dangerous and not very effective. Mix oxygen and hydrogen and light a match. It will essentially explode and the result is water vapor that you will have to collect. There are many more much, much more effective ways of getting clean water.
  

Additionally, Science and Academia have a pecking-order among individuals that confers power and influence [ostensibly] based on academic achievement; 'qualifications', degrees, PhDs etc that were gained by becoming expert with existing [old]technology. New technology thus makes obsolete the old technology AND the old academic expertise, rendering all earlier education 'redundant' and useless. So not only would these people lose their jobs, but acceptance of new ideas or technology would undermine their status within their own peer group and with society at large, so they resist all change.

This is simply nonsense. Old scientists may be experts on older technologies, but that is why they have new Ph.D.s under them to research the new technologies. And what they are really experts in is the process of science - which is really important.

Again, a distinct lack of knowledge of science in general is rather evident.

A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush, so bankers, who accept billions of dollars from existing technology [oil companies] would never forgo that income for 'promises' of 'jam tomorrow' from new technology that might never work; here we introduce the notion of risk aversion.

Politicians are paid by Oil Companies and Bankers to look after their interests [via party donantions and backhanders], so Politicians do not have the political will to embrace change.

Conspiracy theory with as little credibility as that holds. Give a bank the option of lending you money for some great invention that had a high chance of great payback to the bank and they would grab it.

Moreover, living creatures [including human beings] are genetically programmed to avoid change; it is 'safer' to keep still than to 'move' around.

The 7 deadly sin human 'programmes' also kick-in to affect the diffusion of new ideas; jealousy [and resentment], gluttony, slothfulness, desire, anger and pride [the reason why pride is regarded a s a sin is explained in FUTURESCIENCE].

Again, utter nonsense. They guy definitely doesn't know very much about science.

Then there is the corollorary; lack of interest in anything new or the world at large, ignorance.

This, by all means of respect, is where your friend is dwelling. He is coming across as largely ignorant about science and how it works. It is certainly not a correct description of science in general.

Then there is 'distraction'; normal people are simply too busy working as slaves to consider new ideas. For them the 'future' extends only up until the next pay-check.

Many are, and I daresay your friend is included given his lack of knowledge of science. Which is fair enough, but you can't really use him for anything in support of your arguments.

So there are many factors, so many that a book could be written about them.

There are people of vision. There are the blind. There are people filled with love, and people filled with hate. Each chooses their own destiny. The technology that succeeds does so in spite of their efforts.

Vanity oh vanity. All is vanity.

Before he writes a book he should educate himself a bit.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited for typos.

Edited May 7, 2012 by badeskov

[kumaran]

Frankly, I must admit that I do not put much credence into what your friend has to say. Please see below:

This is simply not correct and displays a rather astounding lack of knowledge of how science works. New ideas are published all the time, some more practical than others, but nonetheless published. It would behoove your friend to read some real scientific journals and get an understanding of how many new ideas are actually published on a continuous basis.

That may be so, but they are typically published nonetheless.

This is simply as incorrect as it could be. Oil companies are well aware that they are trading a resource that will most likely not last and are looking for substitutes. Like hydrogen, for instance. If there was anything to "free" energy, they would pour vast sums of money into it so they would be the ones selling the resource. They certainly wouldn't try to suppress it, as that would never work - and they know it.

Again, simply incorrect on so many levels. Scientists 'find' all the time and a simple look through various scientific journals would show as much. I guess the bias against scientists is because they do not 'find' what your friend would like them to find. Unfortunately, it does not work like that - scientists find what observations and subsequent analysis tells them that they have found. Not what someone tells them they should find.

Frankly, and by all means of respect, but now your friend is getting embarrassing. Lets have a look, shall we:

• A cure for cancer.
  This is an oxymoron essentially, as there will most likely never be a cure for cancer. Cancer is cells in your body running amok and any two cancers are not the same.
  
• A cure for the common cold.
  You can get vaccinated, but there is no cure. The common cold is not common, it mutates all the time.
  
• Mixing hydrogen and oxygen to create clean water.
  This is just stupid. Of course you can do that. It is just both dangerous and not very effective. Mix oxygen and hydrogen and light a match. It will essentially explode and the result is water vapor that you will have to collect. There are many more much, much more effective ways of getting clean water.
  

This is simply nonsense. Old scientists may be experts on older technologies, but that is why they have new Ph.D.s under them to research the new technologies. And what they are really experts in is the process of science - which is really important.

Again, a distinct lack of knowledge of science in general is rather evident.

Conspiracy theory with as little credibility as that holds. Give a bank the option of lending you money for some great invention that had a high chance of great payback to the bank and they would grab it.

Again, utter nonsense. They guy definitely doesn't know very much about science.

This, by all means of respect, is where your friend is dwelling. He is coming across as largely ignorant about science and how it works. It is certainly not a correct description of science in general.

Many are, and I daresay your friend is included given his lack of knowledge of science. Which is fair enough, but you can't really use him for anything in support of your arguments.

Before he writes a book he should educate himself a bit.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited for typos.

I intend to keep an open mind on the topic of free energy and antigravity suppression. It could be real thousands of inventors are claiming it. it must be true. Website is http://www.broandrew...uppression.html , http://www.rense.com...l72/oinvent.htm , http://freeenergynew...ession_bird.htm , http://www.panacea-b...suppression.htm , http://www.scribd.co...rgy-Suppression . it is really happening. I am convinced of it. The governments of the world are psychotic killers holding back relevant technology from the masses.

Even Foster Gamble says so here http://www.thrivemovement.com/home .

Edited May 7, 2012 by kumaran

[Troublehalf]

"Your theory is crazy, but it's not crazy enough to be true."

[badeskov]

I intend to keep an open mind on the topic of free energy and antigravity suppression. It could be real thousands of inventors are claiming it. it must be true. Website is http://www.broandrew...uppression.html , http://www.rense.com...l72/oinvent.htm , http://freeenergynew...ession_bird.htm , http://www.panacea-b...suppression.htm , http://www.scribd.co...rgy-Suppression . it is really happening. I am convinced of it. The governments of the world are psychotic killers holding back relevant technology from the masses.

Even Foster Gamble says so here http://www.thrivemovement.com/home .

I will again suggest that you read some real physics - that will tell you a lot about why the above is fringe and not considered serious. There are reasons for that we do not have "free" energy by now and it is not Government suppression. Or the oil companies. Or any other entity. It is physics.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[kumaran]

I apologise to the keshe foundation for taking it out on him when the governments and scientific community are to blame for this technology suppression. I do not think Keshe is a scam any more.

[badeskov]

I apologise to the keshe foundation for taking it out on him when the governments and scientific community are to blame for this technology suppression. I do not think Keshe is a scam any more.

Governments and the scientific community are as guilty of suppressing free energy technologies as they are guilty of suppressing Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.,,,,,

Cheers,

Badeskov

[arenee]

Governments and the scientific community are as guilty of suppressing free energy technologies as they are guilty of suppressing Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.,,,,,

Cheers,

Badeskov

Uh, duh, Bade,

Why do you think no one believes in them anymore...think about it my friend.

[psyche101]

I apologise to the keshe foundation for taking it out on him when the governments and scientific community are to blame for this technology suppression. I do not think Keshe is a scam any more.

How did Bee put it?

Ever the optimist!

Good gracious the Governments are not worried about Keshe and his nonsense, they have some rather more pressing business in that part of the world!

[psyche101]

Bee

I have changed my mind about keshe. After listening to some people talk about suppression of free energy I have to say it is possible Keshe has been stopped just like tesla. I have decided to give him the benefit of the doubt. I have decided he truly believes what he says and hence I no longer think him a scam. But it is rather depressing the world governments suppressing such vital and ground breaking technology. This is the interview that convinced me here

. It was enlightening. Tony Kilvert mentions Mehran Keshe as genuine/

I beg your pardon, but I simply must protest, what is all this about Tesla? He was taken advantage of by an entrepreneur , and had a project stopped because of the war. Please expand on the Government stuff.

[psyche101]

That opinion is, I am afraid, rather irrelevant as we have no idea who that person is and what makes his opinion relevant in this respect. I am of the opinion that Mr. Keshe's invention will not work - in fact, I am certain it will not. But that is also rather irrelevant.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Good Morning Badeskov

Kumuran's "friend" says in that explanation "self defeating" "Can't have it both ways" and "extremely dangerous" I cannot tell if he thinks it would work or not despite his conclusion? Whoever this may be? He also says we cannot convert Hydrogen and Oxygen into water, as far as I am ware, that is not at all true, it is a dangerous process, but now beyond our understanding, in fact the Hindenburg actually demonstrated this very principal did it not?

Also, I though scintillation in Liquid Helium was not observed until the 60's? By Simons and Perkins?

It strikes me that this could all have just been selectively copied and pasted from another fringe website?

Sorry my friend, I tend to turn to you for confirmation often, but that is the burden you bear for being consistently excellent in all aspects !

Cheers.

[psyche101]

I apologise to the keshe foundation for taking it out on him when the governments and scientific community are to blame for this technology suppression. I do not think Keshe is a scam any more.

Ohh well, tomorrow is another day!

[DONTEATUS]

I did forward this to Deion` Sanders Lawyers in the hope it would help him off Planet !

[booNyzarC]

I apologise to the keshe foundation for taking it out on him when the governments and scientific community are to blame for this technology suppression. I do not think Keshe is a scam any more.

I give this about 10 days, maximum.

[badeskov]

Good Morning Badeskov

Good morning old Buddy! How are you these days?

Kumuran's "friend" says in that explanation "self defeating" "Can't have it both ways" and "extremely dangerous" I cannot tell if he thinks it would work or not despite his conclusion?

It is in my honest opinion rather hard to figure out what is meant.

Whoever this may be?

Frankly, who cares? I'd be interested if the posted was actually something coherent with a logical and scientific approach to the subject at hand. Alas not...

He also says we cannot convert Hydrogen and Oxygen into water, as far as I am ware, that is not at all true, it is a dangerous process, but now beyond our understanding, in fact the Hindenburg actually demonstrated this very principal did it not?

Hindenburg indeed did demonstrate that process in a rather tragically spectacular fashion. That process is very easy to do, albeit somewhat hard to contain - just light hydrogen on fire. In fact, it also happens every single day in controlled processes, in hydrogen fueled cars. Their exhaust is essentially water vapor, tata. However, the ignorance on this matter runs even deeper than the ability to understand the process of generating water from hydrogen and oxygen. To do that you need have hydrogen and oxygen. While oxygen is plentiful in our atmosphere, you have to produce hydrogen, e. g. see http://en.wikipedia....ogen_production. That can be done by either steaming from hydrocarbons or electrolysis (i.e., splitting of water ). Both energy intensive processes. It is, by far, much more effective to desalinate water or purify dirty water.

Didn't think of that, did he now? So science could certainly make big plants creating water out of hydrogen and oxygen, there is just no reason to do so.

Also, I though scintillation in Liquid Helium was not observed until the 60's? By Simons and Perkins?

I believe it was discovered in 1959 by Thorndike and Shlaer (E.H. Thorndike and W.J. Shlaer, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 30, 838, 1959). I think Simmons and Perkins (if memory serves) derived some quantitative parameters from the effect in 1961.

It strikes me that this could all have just been selectively copied and pasted from another fringe website?

Oh, most assuredly it is.

Sorry my friend, I tend to turn to you for confirmation often, but that is the burden you bear for being consistently excellent in all aspects !

Thank you for the very kind words And likewise

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited May 8, 2012 by badeskov

[psyche101]

Good morning old Buddy! How are you these days?

Hello Badeskov

Not too bad, been rather busy of late, it has been that sort of a year.

It is in my honest opinion rather hard to figure out what is meant.

We are certainly in agreement there, the fellow seems to be contradicting himself quite regularly throughout.

Frankly, who cares? I'd be interested if the posted was actually something coherent with a logical and scientific approach to the subject at hand. Alas not...

That is probably the best point brought forth in the conversation!

Hindenburg indeed did demonstrate that process in a rather tragically spectacular fashion. That process is very easy to do, albeit somewhat hard to contain - just light hydrogen on fire. In fact, it also happens every single day in controlled processes, in hydrogen fueled cars. Their exhaust is essentially water vapor, tata. However, the ignorance on this matter runs even deeper than the ability to understand the process of generating water from hydrogen and oxygen. To do that you need have hydrogen and oxygen. While oxygen is plentiful in our atmosphere, you have to produce hydrogen, e. g. see http://en.wikipedia....ogen_production. That can be done by either steaming from hydrocarbons or electrolysis (i.e., splitting of water ). Both energy intensive processes. It is, by far, much more effective to desalinate water or purify dirty water.

Didn't think of that, did he now? So science could certainly make big plants creating water out of hydrogen and oxygen, there is just no reason to do so.

I did think so, it seems quite a claim to say we cannot do it, I had not thought about the cars, excellent example. And as you say, so much better processes exist, so it never has been a point of not being able to, but a question of productivity.

I believe it was discovered in 1959 by Thorndike and Shlaer (E.H. Thorndike and W.J. Shlaer, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 30, 838, 1959). I think Simmons and Perkins (if memory serves) derived some quantitative parameters from the effect in 1961.

Oh, most assuredly it is.

I stand corrected on that one! Thank you for the link.

Thank you for the very kind words And likewise

Cheers,

Badeskov

Mate, thank you for taking the time like this to help a fellow out. The world could use more in it like you Bade.

Cheers.