Thread: Can a Molecular Change happen seperating gas and liquid?

If it were possible to apply specific heat to a liquid matter, taking that liquid to a temperature, above the boiling temperature of that liquid. What if in doing this you reached the boiling temperature of a portion of the liquid in the original liquid, and that portion turned to a gas, while another portion of that original liquid, remained a liquid, because it had not reached it's boiling temperature. Having a gas and a liquid, they seperate. I did this to gasoline. What can be done to one liquid, can be done to any liquid. Go to You Tube, White Gasoline Vapor. Read everything, including the comments, where I discovered what I really did.

Congratulations. You have discovered fractional distillation. You're only about 800 years late.

Well with fractional distillation you still have the original liquid, after it is distilled, and condenses. How do you explain, the different saturation temperature of the white vapor I created, lower than that of liquid gasoline, which turns to a liquid at 100 degrees Fahrenheight, it has twice the combustion power of gasoline, seen running on two different dyno machines, 0 parts per million hydrocarbons, seen on a smog analyzer, oh and the liquid I retain doesn't mix with gasoline anymore, it is also not flammable anymore. Fractional distillation can't do all this to gasoline. If you knew how I am doing it, you would not doubt it.

im not an expert, or even that educated in chemistry, but it is natural that the white vapor has different properties-a mixtures properties are the sum of those of its parts. I don't know why the liquid you retained wouldn't mix with the gasoline unless the vapor liquid was dissolved in the gasoline. Im sure the smarter people will have a better answer.

im not an expert, or even that educated in chemistry, but it is natural that the white vapor has different properties-a mixtures properties are the sum of those of its parts. I don't know why the liquid you retained wouldn't mix with the gasoline unless the vapor liquid was dissolved in the gasoline. Im sure the smarter people will have a better answer.

Something else I didn't mention about the liquid, it's boiling temperature is far above that of gasoline. I went above 600 degrees Fahrenheight, and couldn't get it to boil. I had no way of taking it to a higher temperature.
I have found a way to apply any specific temperature to any liquid. This makes it possible to find the boiling temperature, of a portion of the original liquid, turning that portion to a gas, having reached it's boiling temperature, while the portion of the liquid that didn't reach it's boiling temperature will remain a liquid. Doing this to gasoline I saw the a bubble form, which was liquid on the outside, inside the bubble was a clear gas, and when the bubble broke, the clear gas turned white, like it was a Magic Trick. I think this is the void, in the molecular numbers of gasoline, being filled by oxygen, the dominate gas in air, since it is present when the bubble breaks. The void was created when the liquid remained a liquid.

sorry for posting twice-for some reason the delete button wasn't there.
Anyway, im befuzzled (not really that hard to do). I though when they refined crude they seperate all the components with boiling point so that there will not be that many different boiling point making up gasoline. Could you replicate the experiment? Could there have been some impurities?

Gasoline in sot just one hydrocarbon molecule, but several different ones. The molecules I believe range from C4H8 to C12H26. Each will have a different vapor point.

I admit I have no chemical or math knowledge. What I do have is pratical knowledge, and being a retired refrigeration tech, I know about liquids and gasses, and how they function. I can say that I think the liquid might be liquid carbon. I get a 0 parts per million reading on a smog analyzer. The liquid has an oily texture, but it is not gasoline, it isn't flammable, and it's boiling temperature is far above that of gasoline.
I have discovered with gasoline the higher the octane level the lower the boiling temperature. This helps the gasoline to become a gas or vapor faster, burning better.
Here is a story about the truck in the video: We ran the truck on gasoline first, putting a clean dry rag over the exhaust pipe. Trying to smell the rag, if you got it to close to your face your eyes started to burn. We did the same thing running the white vapor, using a new clean dry rag. When you put the rag up to your face, and breathed through it, it smelled like you were ironing clothes, is that clean or what? Try it on your own vehicle, and see if you can get the rag close to your face.

Gasoline is a blend of a great many different hydrocarbons, formulated to give it specific properties. If you boil gasoline the lighter components will come off first and the boiling point of the remaining liquid will rise as only heavier components remain. As bubbles form on the surface and then burst the invisible vapor inside the bubble immediately contacts relatively cool air and condenses as fine droplets forming the white mist you describe.

I looked briefly at your video but didn't understand what you were saying and the few comments I read were not helpful at all.

How do you explain, the different saturation temperature of the white vapor I created

You boiled off some of the lighter components that have a lower molecular weight than the heavier components (by definition) and therefore boil off at a lower temperature. As already mentioned this is the basic principle behind fractional distillation.

lower than that of liquid gasoline, which turns to a liquid at 100 degrees Fahrenheight,

Gasoline contains butane which by itself would boil at below zero Celsius.

it has twice the combustion power of gasoline,

This I seriously doubt. All hydrocarbons have heats of combustion in the same general range.

0 parts per million hydrocarbons, seen on a smog analyzer,

Burning light hydrocarbons you should be able to get really low unburnt HC in the exhaust. This is not necessarily surprising.

oh and the liquid I retain doesn't mix with gasoline anymore,

It will mix if you give it a stir.

it is also not flammable anymore.

If you atomize it and mix it with air it will burn. It may be hard to ignite if it's just sitting in a bucket.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

I can say that I think the liquid might be liquid carbon.

It isn't.

Well like I said I know nothing about the chemicals in chemistry. I can tell you I don't boil the liquid like everyone else does. So what I get is something nobody else has seen, or tested. Science is still learning. What you knew in the past can be useless in the future. I am just telling what I have done, experienced, and seen. All of this stuff I have experienced doesn't add up to what you say.
In my process all the liquid circulates continuously. I think the liquid I retain would mix under these conditions, so mixing doesn't happen. I have seen this liquid burn, but only assisted by being saturated by the gas I have created.
Now tell me how I get the increase in power over gasoline? Think something happened you have never seen, or done. Something nature has the power to do when coaxed right.
I know the liquid didn't mix , because after several hours, my process stops working, the liquid in my chamber has no gasoline left to vaporize, this non flammable liquid has filled the chamber, I use a float to maintain the liquid level in my chamber. All I have left is the non flammable, oily liquid. I put a pit cock to drain the liquid from the chamber. I thought this was my nemesis, on running a vehicle on vapor, until I realized just what I really did.
To many things tell me I have done something nobody else has done. I have results nobody has seen before. I had a college shop instructor accuse me of using nitrous oxide, when I switched to run on my vapor. This happened, I have many stories about this vapor that defy the norm.
Looking back at what you said, I did find the seperation in the different boiling temperatures of the flammable gas, and the non flammable liquid is wide spread, this is why my chamber was able to seperate them. I had no temperature control on the amount of heat applied. It was the wattage I used that produced the right temperature.

Show us a schematic of your process.

A schematic would reveal how I do it. In due time. You wouldn't happen to have access to a gas spectrum analyzer, say in the Portland, Oregon area. A place where they don't ask an arm and leg to analyze a gas, and a liquid?

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

A schematic would reveal how I do it.

Um, yes, that's rather the point. I have no ideas what you're doing, but I do know that you have a lot of wrong beliefs about it because the results you report make no sense. If you don't tell us what you are doing we can't help you understand what's really going on.

Well I have found a way to take any liquid to any temperature, even above the boiling temperature of the liquid, and in doing so have seperated molecules in gasoline. Getting a highly flammable gas, that has twice the power of gasoline, with 0 parts per million hydrocarbons emission. I get a non flammable oily liquid that doesn't mix with gasoline, and it has a boiling temperature over 100 degrees higher than the boiling temperature of gasoline. Both were made from gasoline but neither are gasoline anymore. See it on You Tube, White Gasoline vapor, read everything.

I watched part of your youtube. You didn't explain anything. I read a couple of comments which made no sense. Sorry, but if you cannot state in clear terms what you are doing then I'm done with this nonsense.

I'm sorry but what background are you using as reference to your knowledge? I have 38 years in refrigeration working with gasses and liquids. If you don't understand about the boiling tmeperatures of liquids, maybe I am in the wrong area of the science blog.
You know when a liquid boils, and condenses it returns to the original liquid. Ok if I boiled a portion of the gasoline it would return to it's original state, right. How come it isn't returning to gasoline, if it were gasoline it would be a liquid at the temperature seen in the video. Well apparently the original liquid of the gas I created has a lower boiling point that gasoline, because it is still a gas. Also when a liquid is made from another liquid it will be soluble with the original liquid. Mine doesn't mix with gasoline at all. Must be something other than gasoline.
I don't know for sure but the only way to change something like this is through a molecular structual change. Specific temperature, and mass are the determining factors in how I did it.

Basically what I am saying is I have found a way to apply specific temperatures to different molecules in a liquid, when I do this, that molecule and all the molecules who's boiling temperature is lower than the molecule's boiling temperature, that I am targeting, will turn to a gas, all the molecules in the liquid who's boiling temperature is above the boiling temperature, I have targeted, will remain a liquid. Now I found a void is created in the gas portion of the seperation, this is why my gas turned white. Air was surrounding the area where my process took place and oxygen was the dominate gas so I figure oxygen filled the void turning my gas from clear to white, when the bubble, the exterior being the liquid I created, retains a clear gas, in my process. When this bubble breaks this clear gas turns white, like a magic trick. I figure this is the void being filled, with oxygen.

It is assumed you can't take a liquid above it's boiling temperature, well I have found a way, using heat and no pressure, and I can apply any temperature desired.

Here's what I think you are doing. I'm trying to interpret your various statements into a coherent description:

1. You heat gasoline. Perhaps you are using engine exhaust to heat it.
2. By heating it you drive off some of the lighter components as a vapor. Some will come off even before the liquid boils. They come off more rapidly when it does boil. You say it doesn't boil. OK, then light hydrocarbons are being evolved from the surface without boiling.
3. As the lights are removed the boiling point of the remaining liquid increases. Convection in the liquid will keep it reasonably well mixed so there is always more light material moving to the surface. You can keep on producing light vapors without boiling the liquid, as the temperature increases, but the light vapors become heavier and so does the liquid (i.e. the concentration of large molecules increases in both the liquid phase and the vapor phase).
4. The vapor is drawn into the engine intake manifold and burns in the cylinders. This should be quite efficient because most of the fuel has already been vaporized (the engine exhaust heat provided the latent heat of vaporization that with a liquid fuel would be supplied from the heat of combustion, reducing the heat available to expand the combustion products). And a gaseous fuel should burn more completely than a liquid fuel, leaving no HC in the exhaust, which you say you observed.
5. Eventually you are left with only liquid which has been depleted of all the lighter components and therefore has a much higher boiling point than what you started with, and you don't have enough heat from the exhaust to continue producing vapor. This is the problem. Your engine ran more efficiently, but you can only use a fraction of the fuel. You leave a large amount of unused energy in the liquid and overall the efficiency is lower than if you had burnt the gasoline conventionally.
6. The white vapor you see is a mist of tiny liquid droplets carried along by the gas.

Is this about right?

You are not even in the same world as to what I am doing. Have you ever experimented with gasoline, or for that matter with any liquids. If you did you were not paying attention to what was happening. What it says mathematically doesn't always happen that way, all equations have not been taken into account. Lets put it this way, you set on the side and watch, and I'll show how it is done. Then you can go back to school and learn more.
It is people that think like you do, that never accomplish anything in life, you doubt everything, and have proved nothing.
I have nothing connected to the exhaust, or any other operating portion of the vehicle. The chamber provides a way to take the gasoline above it's boiling temperature. I can explain how it happens in logical terms, but that would disclose how I do it, which is what everyone wants to know. When I get the lab test and patent my process I will come back here and watch you eat your words.
If you can't see a molecular change when you see one you need to find another profession.

Good luck stealth. You're well on the road to nowhere and I won't be trying to help you anymore.

Thank You
You know math and formulas were created after the inventions were created, it was the pratical application that solved all the problems, not the math or the formulas. Without the trial and error method, we would still be living in the stone age.

Stealth you are not explaining yourself well enough.

Well if taking liquid to temperatures above the boiling temperature, of that liquid, and finding a gas that is not gasoline anymore, but has twice the power of gasoline, and in the same process getting an oily liquid, that boils at over 600 degrees Fahrenheit, and it is not soluable with gasoline. Both made from gasoline, both were made from gasoline using heat. Now to get changes like this would require a molecular structual change, or good magic.

you did this twice and one time got a vapor and the other time you got an oily mixture?

No this all happens in one process. I get a white gas, and at the same time a non flammable liquid, that is not soluable with gasoline. Both were created from gasoline, going above the boiling temperature of gasoline which is around 500 degrees Fahrenheit. I took the liquid up to almost 600 degrees Fahrenheit.

Ok, the makes sense. I think you boiled off some of the lighter components of gasoline and are left with the heavier parts. the white vapor had a low boiling point, so it came out first. The rest of the gasoline now has a higher boiling point, because of the trial-and-error supported rule that the mixtues properties are the sum of its parts-as one of its lower boiling point components is gone, the rest of the liquid begins to have a higher boiling point. Don't tell me I only know the equations, because I only know what I've done in a lab.
The only explanation I can think of for the new liquids not mixing back together with the gas is that they were previously dissolved in the gasoline and the gasoline you are trying to mix the liquids with is already saturated with those liquids. Try mixing the two liquids that you got together.

I seriously doubt here was any chemical change involved.

I don't get two liquids. I get a white gas with a much lower boiling temperature than gasoline, and I get the liquid, in the same instance, which has a high boiling temperature. Which is what happens when you boil liquids. Conventional boiling when the liquid condenses it becomes the same liquid you just boiled. This white gas gas gives off 0 parts permillion hydrocarbons, when running in an engine, that is the white vapor in the video, it's boiling temperature is much lower than that of gasoline, so it remains a gas, must not be gasoline anymore.
The liquid happens when the bubble breaks in my process. The liquid is the outside of that bubble, and it ends up in the bottom of my chamber accumilating until no gasoline liquid can enter the chamber, because the liquid doesn't mix with gasoline anymore. It builds up in the bottom of the chamber, where I use a float valve to maintain the liquid level in the chamber. This liquid, not being flammable, stops my process when to much of this liquid builds up and no gasoline comes into the chamber. My process stops at this point, and I have to dump the liquid out and fill the chamber with gasoline again. This is a radical change over gasoline.
The liquid is the part of the liquid gasoline that didn't reach it's boiling temperature, from the gasoline going to almost 600 degrees Fahrenheit. This is how I know that liquid has a much higher boiling temperature than gasoline. I took this liquid to over 600 degrees, and it still didn't boil. I thought the liquid was my nemesis, in running a vehicle on vapor, until I realized what I had really done.
Question? How many liquids are there that have a boiling temperature over 600 degrees Fahrenheit? What is the boiling temperature of liquid mercury?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasolin...and_production

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_additive

The exact contents of the fuel you are using depends on where it was bought, and where it was refined. What you have probably done is drive off the volatiles such that many of the inorganic and non-flammable additives in the fuel have prevented it from being easily ignitible. Your white gas is probably a mix of short-chain alkanes and alkenes, and other small organic molecules.

Oh, and as has already been said (I think) petrol or gasoline does not have a distinct boiling point. Smaller, more volatile molecules dissolved in the heavier fractions will leave solution at reasonably low temperatures and escape as gases, but maintaining these temperatures will not cause the whole volume of fuel to boil away as the heavier fractions have higher boiling points.

Also given the catalysts present in commercial fuels, and given that the equipment you use may act as a catalyst, cracking may be occuring, explaining why you end up with a gas that will not re-dissolve in the remaining fluid.


Hope this helps.

I know gasoline doesn't have a specific boiling temperature, the octane added to the gasoline determines the boiling temperature, the lower the boiling temperature is, the higher the octane level is. The boiling temperature of gasoline ranges from 100 to about 500 degrees, depending upon the octane level. Remember I took it close to 600 degrees. and funny things started to happen. Ever been able to take a liquid above its boiling temperature before, especially almost 100 degrees above the highest boiling temperature gasoline has? When you do tell me what I already know. This is not about just boiling the liquid, but taking it where nobody has been before. I didn't have a temperature control on my chamber the wattage determined the temperature. However with a good control, and some refining on my system and any temperature can be applied to any liquid.

You can take the petrol to above it's boiling temperature because it has several different boiling points, for the different molecules in the mixture. I stand by what I said before; you have probably done nothing more than remove the volatiles from the mixture, leaving you with a range of inorganic additives in an organic solvent, and short-chain hydrocarbons in gas form (or even hydrogen, perhaps, depending on your setup).

Well then I guess it will all come out when I get the lab tests, done. I know what I have seen, and done, it is nothing like what you say. Boil water and what you get when the water is condensed, is water. Any liquid you boil will return to the original liquid after it is boiled the conventional way. I am not boiling in the conventional way. Where, in the gas and liquid that I have created from gasoline, do you see gasoline again, it isn't there anymore. Tell me which two liquids have the same boiling temperatures, each boils at its own specific temperature. When you get out of that temperature range, you are dealing with another substance, it is no longer the same liquid, or gas, because the boiling temperatures are different. The difference I get in the temperature is far below gasoline's lowest boiling temperature. Getting what you are talking about would mean you have to work above the boiling point of the liquid. Gasoline has a boiling temperature range from 100 to 500 degrees, depending upon the octane level. The higher the octane level the lower the boiling temperature. I am at least 50 degrees below gasoline's lowest boiling temperature with the gas I created.
If you say it is propane, or butane, what ever is in gasoline, that gas is clear, that is why they add an odor to detect it. Look at the gas in the video it isn't clear so it can't be either of these.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

Boil water and what you get when the water is condensed, is water. Any liquid you boil will return to the original liquid after it is boiled the conventional way.

Any single liquid that is not oxidised in the process, yes. You are dealing with a mixture of chemicals, some of which may be thermally degrading.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

I am at least 50 degrees below gasoline's lowest boiling temperature with the gas I created.

I don't know exactly what your experimental procedure is, but this being the case i would say you are probably breaking down the long-chain hydrocarbons into smaller molecules (methane, ethane, maybe short-chain amines, etc). Something in your setup may be acting as a catalyst.

Nothing but heat and the way I apply it.

I now know the reactions that Thomas Edison, Tesula, and some of the other inventors got, when they tried to show the world something it had never seen before.

What, because you're the first person to heat petrol?

As I explained above, your result is not drastically different to what we might expect. The fact that you will not describe your exact setup makes it impossible to ascertain exactly what has happened, but your continued insistence that you have discovered something new and that 'conventional' science cannot explain it is both vexing, and unscientific.

stealth, lets calm it down. You are not tesla or edison, ad I doubt you are showing the world something ist has never seen before.

Now, make a hypothesis based on your results, then test it on another applicable liquid. k?

As we all know liquid has to reach the boiling temperature before it boils. I have found a way to take any liquid to any temperature desired, then it boils at that desired temperature. It is the amount of time that it takes the liquid to reach the boiling temperature, of any liquid that afforded me the door to be able to take the liquid to any temperature before the liquid boils.

Trying it on other liquids. Well with a combustable gas leak detector, applying my process. Not having any control over the temperature, I detected a combustable gas coming from distilled water, when the heaters first came on in my chamber, so I suspect I might get more of that flammable gas if I get closer to the temperature that seperates oxygen, and hydrogen in water. I saw this gas not far above the boiling temperature of water.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

As we all know liquid has to reach the boiling temperature before it boils. I have found a way to take any liquid to any temperature desired, then it boils at that desired temperature.

Is pressure constant during this procedure?

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

I detected a combustable gas coming from distilled water, when the heaters first came on in my chamber

Probably a random error, or contamination.

No pressure is present, anywhere, look at the flowing white vapor. No fluke, it happened several times. Had to restart my system after it cooled down to reach that temperature range again, several times.
Forgot to mention in my process, at present I need a non conductive liquid, gasoline and distilled water are non conductors, but with some design changes that can be remedied.

From your comments on youtube:

If lab tests prove me right, gas mileage will not be a concern, you will be using water in your gas tank, and burning hydrogen in the engine, creating water from burning the hydrogen.

No. The first law of thermodynamics states that the total energy of an isolated system cannot change; whatever energy is released from burning the hydrogen, you use exactly as much energy liberating the hydrogen to start with. As energy is 'wasted' as heat, you will overall be wasting energy with this process. For exactly the same reason, we do not have cars running off water/hydrogen using existing electrolytic cells, which have been around for hundreds of years.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

Forgot to mention in my process, at present I need a non conductive liquid, gasoline and distilled water are non conductors, but with some design changes that can be remedied.

Is this because your process involves exposing the liquid to electrodes?

This video was made in or around 1996, in Bandon, Oregon, so if you have ever been there I have seen it never get ove 90 two times throughout the year. The year I left there it rained 105 inches of rain that year. Same year the video was made. So you know it was far below the saturation temperature and that white gas should have been a liquid if it were still gasoline.
I left the chamber with a friend there, and didn't see it for 17 years, when I came back to visit, in 2009, he still had it and I recovered it. On my way back to where I lived in New Mexico, I stopped and because I didn't realize what I really did with the gas, until I tried to explain it on You Tube. I set up the chamber and tried the distilled water thing. This was last year, since my house burned down, and i moved back to Oregon. I lost everything, including the chamber, but I discovered how to do it to gasoline through an accident, and I can duplicate that accident and make the gas and liquid for a lab test.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

So you know it was far below the saturation temperature and that white gas should have been a liquid if it were still gasoline.

Originally Posted by drowsy turtle

i would say you are probably breaking down the long-chain hydrocarbons into smaller molecules (methane, ethane, maybe short-chain amines, etc).

I never said the gas was gasoline. I said it was probably a hydrocarbon, derived from the gasoline by evaporation and/or cracking.

Where am I wasting energy? Through heat, I am using nature's ability to seperate liquids from gas. Coaxing mother nature, with heat in a different way than just boiling it. Which is taking the liquid to a temperature where it boils. Exactaly what I have done only faster, so the liquid assumes the temperature presented, before it boils.

Increasing temperature uses energy.

Splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen also uses energy; burning hydrogen in oxygen releases exactly the same amount of energy. The internal combustion engine is about 50% efficient at best, so half of the energy is wasted. Whatever process is used to produce the hydrogen will not be 100% efficient either (electrolytic cells, which produce almost no heat, have a theoretical maximum of 90-94% efficiency and an observed maximum efficiency of 45% or so). It therefore stands to reason that whatever process you are using to heat the water, presumably an electrical supply, would be better used to propell the car directly, as less energy would be wasted.


The other important question, which I think you must have missed, was does your setup involve exposed electrodes?

I am not stupid. I have designed control systems through Texas Instruments, using TTL Logic, and JK Flip-Flop circuits, with 555 timers. What I have done is perfectly safe.
Another tip I found. Gasoline doesn't ignite until a metal (any metal) projects a slight red glow. Somewhere in the 1100 to 1500 degree range.
I miss quoted something, metals all have a different melting temperature so the temperature at which they glow will all be different. I gaged the temperature with stainless steel.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

If it were possible to apply specific heat to a liquid matter, taking that liquid to a temperature, above the boiling temperature of that liquid. What if in doing this you reached the boiling temperature of a portion of the liquid in the original liquid, and that portion turned to a gas, while another portion of that original liquid, remained a liquid, because it had not reached it's boiling temperature. Having a gas and a liquid, they seperate. I did this to gasoline. What can be done to one liquid, can be done to any liquid. Go to You Tube, White Gasoline Vapor. Read everything, including the comments, where I discovered what I really did.

Dear Stealth,

1. Look up "specific heat." You misused the term.
Specific heat refers to the capacity of a substance to store thermal energy, as compared to water which has a specific heat of 1. Gold's specific heat is about one-thirtieth of water.

2. No, you can't do the same thing "to any liquid" that you did to gasoline, which is a mixture of compounds.

3. Keep on discovering. But you're not the first person to make this profound observation, really.

When you observe it happen you will have no doubt in your mind it is changing, not boiling, and returning to the original gasoline liquid, and gasoline fumes. I have seen it up close, and when the liquid bubble breaks in my process. The clear gas turns white, like a magic trick, while the liquid goes to the bottom of my chamber.
Know this, running a bigger engine, on gasoline fumes, has never been done before, look on You Tube none of the videos running on vapor are anything bigger than a lawn mower engine. I can run any size engine. Had it on a gas guzzling 360 76 Ford pick up, with full time 4X4. I made more vapor than it could use, at any RPM.
I can run any size engine, I must have done something nobody else can do. Wow, mabe some, or all, of the other things I am saying might be the truth.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

I am not stupid. I have designed control systems through Texas Instruments, using TTL Logic, and JK Flip-Flop circuits, with 555 timers. What I have done is perfectly safe.

I didn't ask if it was safe, I asked if there are any exposed electrodes. Please stop trying to guess what I'm trying to say, because you're getting it wrong.

Yes there are four exposed, and there is some bare wire. Design change will alter this.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

Yes there are four exposed, and there is some bare wire. Design change will alter this.

What voltage is there across them?

Do you think it's possible that this is what is happening?

It would be easy to test; change your design so all the electrodes are covered, and see if the gas is still produced.

(I'm talking about when you put water in it. When you put gasoline in, the gas you get could be any mixture of hydrocarbons, sulphates, hydrogen, amines, amindes, etc. - I've never come across hydrocarbons being electrolysed before)

If my house didn't burn, taking the chamber with it, I would be working on the water right now. I know of other ways to do to water what I did to the gasoline. I bet I find the seperation temperature of hydrogen and oxygen.
I use specific heat as a term to indicate a specific temperature. I know the difference.
Like I said the time that it takes the liquid to heat up before it boils was the door in. Heat the liquid up really fast, and it will assume the applied temperature, before it boils, boiling at the applied temperature.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

If my house didn't burn, taking the chamber with it, I would be working on the water right now. I know of other ways to do to water what I did to the gasoline. I bet I find the seperation temperature of hydrogen and oxygen.

I bet I can calculate it; that's neither here nor there.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

Like I said the time that it takes the liquid to heat up before it boils was the door in. Heat the liquid up really fast, and it will assume the applied temperature, before it boils, boiling at the applied temperature.

This is pure speculation. Besides which, the rate at which water is heated has no relation on the boiling point, as can be demonstrated by spraying a small amount of water onto a hot pan, for instance. You still have to give the molecules the same amount of kinetic energy, and still have the same elthalpy of vapourisation, regardless of the rate of heating.



Also, if you're talking about splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen, boiling is irrelevant.

To split water takes 928kJ/mol, or 51.6kJ/g. To boil one gram of water, starting from room temperature, takes 2.593kJ. I don't care how quickly you heat some water, this still applies. Hence I suggest that you are inadvertantly electrolysing the water.

And, as I said before, you will get less energy from burning any hydrogen you produce, than you used producing it. Sorry, that's just how the laws of physics work.

Well all I can say is I am going where nobody has been before. Who knows what I will find.

Originally Posted by stealthb2000

Well all I can say is I am going where nobody has been before. Who knows what I will find.

What I'm trying to explain is, you're not. You exposed water to live electrodes, and produced a small amount of hydrogen (and by inference, oxygen). This process has been known since the 19th Century. The fact that you are heating the water up in the process simply makes your setup inefficient; all this heat is wasted.

I know you don't believe me, which is why I suggest you try redesigning your chamber so that the electrodes are covered up. If I were a betting man, I would bet you that this prevents it from working.


Sorry, I do understand and respect what you're trying to do, but you haven't made the breakthrough you think you have.

What's the purpose of the electrodes anyway? This thread is supposed to be about appplying heat, if I understood it correctly. Adding electrolysis to the process is a variable that makes the results of the heat experiment worthless.

Originally Posted by MeteorWayne

What's the purpose of the electrodes anyway? This thread is supposed to be about appplying heat, if I understood it correctly. Adding electrolysis to the process is a variable that makes the results of the heat experiment worthless.

As I understand it, he appraoched this in a "let's see what happens" way, without knowing much/anything about chemistry.

So far this is a 5 page crock-o-crap.
good luck grasshopper

Well gentlemen, maybe not knowing what the chemistry books say might be an advantage. Especially when they tell you something cannot be done. Here is a bit of data from chemistry that is totally wrong. They say the ignition temperature of gasoline is around 500 to 600 degrees. I am telling you that is wrong. When iron starts to glow a dull red gasoline will ignite, and that is more than 300 degrees above the 600 degrees, they say gasoline ignites at. I know this for a fact. I didn't have any temperature reading device that would go higher than 750 degrees, when I discovered this.

Huh? So you're saying the iron is too hot? The 500-600 degrees is a MINIMUM ignition temperature.

Here is what I have done to gasoline. I took two 250 watt, 110 volt flat bar heaters, and supplied 110 volts DC to them. They produced 600 degrees Fahrenheit temperature. The chamber had a float valve connected to the vehicle fuel system to maintain a liquid level inside the chamber bottom. The chamber bottom was "V" shaped to assure liquid would be accessible to the inlet side of a second high pressure fuel pump, which circulated the gasoline, to the spray directed at the flat bar heaters. This high pressure fuel pump would create the spray over the heaters. My spray tube was a 1/4 inch copper tube, welded and sealed at one end, and I made a fine punch to make holes in the copper tube, directing the spray directly on each heater. Now I put the heaters in about a 20 degree angle to insure the fine gasoline droplets would travel down the flat bar heaters and get a continuous temperature. The gasoline does not auto ignite at 500 or so degrees. like it says in the chemistry books. I am here to tell you it will auto ignite when an iron calrod heater rod starts to turn a dull red color. This is around 1000 degrees Fahrenheit. I have seen it and done it. The gasoline showed me you can do this to any liquid. The vapor I create has twice the power of gasoline, and the liquid. The liquid comes from the gasoline. It is the part of the gasoline that did boil when it was sprayed onto the flat bar heaters. This liquid accumulates in the bottom of my chamber, and after a period of time, circulating with the high pressure fuel pump. The chamber stops making vapor, because the liquid in the bottom of the chamber is no longer flammable, and does not mix with gasoline anymore. I thought this liquid was my nemesis, to running a vehicle on vapor, until I realized just what I really did. I have created a Molecular Change to Gasoline, and I can do it to any liquid. I am about to do it to water, so stand by.

You were "about to do it to water" 7 months ago.

You have discovered electrolysis. Congratulations, your nobel prize is in the post...

Years ago, this same guy posted a "white gasoline vapor a chemical change... who wants to fund me" question on yahoo answers (that's my usual haunt when I'm killing time) where I walked through the science and attempted to correct this "stealth" persons misconceptions. He wasn't looking for answers. Just funding. As he is doing here.

So, it's not really worth the effort writing anything else except this. To those reading this in the future, Bunbury is 100% correct. And the "vaporized gasoline will improve fuel mileage" is nonsense busted by popular mechanics, mythbusters and other independent research groups.

It gets a 10 out of 10 on my scammometer scale,