You can leave me to my ignorance and I will leave you to yours.I have already explained the science behind your fallacy.Freepatentsonline is not patentsonline it is merely dreamers in most cases looking for an audience for their lunacy.The day you start and run a car using the principles of deuterium separation I will eat my hat in public for all to see.
Hydrogen fuel cells yes,solar power to create the reaction yes,your system I won't be eating my hat.
ohlord

 

Hi Suckapunks,

I don't belong to the "Flat Earth" society but have trouble with your post based on one simple premise.
Show me an example of such an installation that works.

All the processes that you refer to are to some extent true / feasible but linking them to the conclusion that you can pour a few gallons of water into your auto tank and with some "small" mods to the carburettor you can drive off into the sunset, goes beyond my belief threshold.

Hydrogen can be used to run an engine in a similar way to LPG. However output will be much less than an equivalent LPG installation. But it will work OK.
However you have to manufacture the Hydrogen. Electrolysis. Fine. But where does the power come from? This is the fallacy that is being so much of the eco talk with electric cars. There is still a power staion somewhere creating the electricity although of course there are several ways of making the electricity without burning fossil/hydrocarbon fuels.

Now atoms and molecules do have energy stored within them and there are a variety of ways of releasing this energy. Fission / Fusion / and the principles behind the fuel cell. The fuel cell of course doesn't try to "burn" the hydrogen but uses it to produce electricity in a "reverse" electrolytic type process.

So I do not discount the possibility that potential exists for extracting the inherent locked up energy within water and the notion that more power can be relewased than is required to "fuel" the process BUT I am unaware of any installation that has so far managed to package this into anything resembling a usable power for a vehicle other than the fuel cell.
This being the result of mega billions spent by NASA and the like.

So I don't discount the possibility.
Amazing advances have been made in electronics (miniturisation) giving rise to products like the mobile phone which only say 30 years ago was unbelievable (remember those space comic strips about going to other planets etc), TV screens of a size suitable for use at a football matches and on the immediate horizon, ones that use only a fraction of the current power consumption (thanks to photoluminescence from nature) etc.

HOWEVER I REFUTE THAT ANYBODY HAS ACTUALLY SUCCEEDED IN DELIVERING WHAT YOU SUGGEST. IF SO LETS GET A U-TUBE VIDEO SET UP AND THEN YOU MAY BEGIN TO CONVINCE SOME MORE OF US.

I'm sorry I can't provide the tech. details you were looking for but I guess if you look up Bosch Jetronic on the net you will begin to navigate towards what you require. Fuel injection on your MB is quite straightforward and is like any other modern auto. No great mystery but I'm not the designer of the injectors.

Stuart

 

One more item my degree is in science,reading your diatribe I can clearly see that you have no such degree or even a simple understanding of basic chemistry.Since when has water changed its chemical makeup from hydrogen and oxygen,to hydrogen and carbon?
From that point on the rest of what you have to offer means nothing.
You are not John Galt
the engine you propose violates the First law of thermodynamics
I've been through all this before and can only offer this to your lack of knowledge of chemistry.Conservation of energy.Perpetual motion machines don't and will never operate.
Your beloved Stanley Meyers was sued for fraud and lost his case on all counts.
Einstein,Newton,Telsa were geniuses. Stanley Meyers was merely a quack and charlatan.
ohlord

 

Ohlord,

I just love the way you guys tell it! STRAIGHT.

Stuart.