What Do Scientists Think of This Video?

  • Thread starter Thread starter On Radioactive Waves
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Video
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion critiques the claims made by Stanley Meyer regarding his water fuel cell technology, asserting that his invention lacks scientific credibility. Participants highlight that Meyer has no formal scientific qualifications and emphasize that water cannot be used as a fuel source without consuming more energy than it produces. The consensus is that Meyer's assertions of achieving 1700% efficiency in electrolysis are unfounded and unsupported by the scientific community, which largely dismisses his work as pseudoscience.

PREREQUISITES
  • Basic understanding of thermodynamics
  • Familiarity with electrolysis processes
  • Knowledge of energy efficiency concepts
  • Awareness of scientific validation and peer review processes
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of thermodynamics and energy conservation
  • Study the electrolysis process and its energy requirements
  • Explore the scientific method and the importance of peer-reviewed research
  • Investigate historical claims of perpetual motion and their scientific rebuttals
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for chemists, physicists, engineers, and anyone interested in understanding the scientific evaluation of unconventional energy claims and the importance of rigorous scientific inquiry.

On Radioactive Waves
Messages
136
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone, long time no see :)

I hope this would be the correct forum to post in .. I haven't been here in a while so I don't know if this topic has already (probably surly has) been discussed.

What does the chemists, physicist or engineers think about his video?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3333992194168790800

Sorry if this is not the correct forum for this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
"For 15 years, Meyer has been fighting to have his invention taken seriously".

Yep. That's because his invention is what I refer to as being "complete and utter bobbins".

"Meyer has no formal qualifications in science".

Sounds about right. Water is no more a fuel than exhaust fumes. It is a combustion product. Apparently hardly any current is consumed by Meyer's 'electrolysis' process. It doesn't say how much energy is consumed. Meyer claims his process releases several hundred times more energy than is inputted. "1700% greater efficiency than conventional electrolysis?" Hmm.

"Meyer's claims have been ignored by the global scientific majority". There's a very, very simple reason for this. The fact remains that you cannot use water itself as a fuel. To liberate hydrogen requires more energy than you'll get back during its use.

The video alludes to the US government and NASA being involved with Meyer's concept. There's no way they'd allow him to admit this if it were true, and if they were wanting to keep it under cover themselves. Indeed, if this was the case and he was working with such organisations, Meyer, as a lone "inventor" (I'm loathe to say engineer) would have no interest in supporting such hideous propaganda as this video.

Please, if you're interested in Meyer's claims, do some simple research into basic thermodynamics. You don't have to take my word for it to see for yourself that it's all utter cobblers.

As an aside, I had to giggle when I saw Meyer locking up his high security facility. The camera clearly shows his alarm system's security code...
 
Last edited:
(edit - I know now) This is a hoax. Plain and simple. He claims 'the arabs' offered him a billion dollars to sit on the idea. That's a load of crap. Anyway, brewnog covered all the bases and we don't discuss perpetual motion crackpottery here (12 year stale crackpottery, at that). It is a waste of our time and yours.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
10K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K