Based on
the Proton Theory
Developed
by Michael Rome
There are many facts and
technologies in the study of browns gas, yet unfortunately the opinions
and
misunderstandings seem to spread quicker. It is important to discuss
these
differences and properly inform those asking the questions. If we want
the
technology to take a serious foothold in our world as a trustworthy
energy
source we must begin with the right science, words, and understandings. Even many proponents of the science impose
their own understandings as ‘facts’, but
actually undermine the real framework of the facts which in turn
hinder
the furthering of the technology into acceptance and understanding
within our
society. There are some key points this
article discusses;
More in
than out? Does browns gas break the laws of energy?
Diatomic
hydrogen is the common hydrogen most people think of when one says
‘hydrogen’,
it’s chemical formula is H2.
Diatomic
oxygen also is the commonly referred to form of oxygen, it’s formula is
O2
Monatomic
forms of the above are only one atom, not bonded with anything and they
have no
subscript after them.
More in
than out
To many people, the term
‘perpetual machine’ comes to mind when hearing about devices that claim
to get
more energy out than what was put in.
Arguably so, but not a correct way of understanding browns gas
fuel
cells. A perpetual machine in theory
produces more work energy than it consumes, which is impossible given
our
current understandings of the laws of physics.
A fuel cell that effectively makes browns gas does not put out
more
energy than it requires for operation. In
fact, this fuel cell does not even put out workable energy, it only
produces a
potential energy source. The energy
was always present in the water. This
potential energy source, known widely as browns gas, has the same
amount of
energy in it as the water that went into the cell.
The big difference between water and browns gas is the
availability of the potential energy.
In browns gas the energy is readily available for a more
complete use
whereas in the water it is not. This
can be likened to having $1 million stored in a locked safe. If you take the money out of the safe and
place it in a plastic bag it becomes much easier for anyone to use it,
but if
left in the safe only the person with the combination can get it. Water has within it millions of dollars of
potential energy (so to speak), but it is locked away in the formation
of its
stable molecule. The proper form of
electrolysis unlocks this molecule and allows for an easier to use form
of
potential energy to be utilized. This
does not fit the description of a perpetual machine.
From
here we can understand that using this
browns gas to power any engine of sorts, the engine does not become
perpetual
either. The engine still requires a
certain
amount of energy to produce work energy, and the output will always be
less
than or equal to what was put in to operate it.
What does
happen is the engine, now using a more efficient form of energy, runs
more
efficiently. It will take less of this
type of energy source to produce the same results as it did when it was
running
off of a lesser source of energy. Many
misunderstand the process of running an engine off of browns gas
because of
these overlooked, major facts. The
picture many see is of a gasoline engine running off water and a small
electrical power source. What is really
happening is two separate and different processes.
The small electrical source is only unlocking the water
molecules, allowing the potential energy to be accessible. This unlocked form of energy, which was
already in the water to begin with, is then brought to the engine and
consumed
as a normal source of energy. The
result is an engine that produces more work energy than what we already
know it
can do. Another important fact to
realize is that the power specifications of the engine we are using
were
calculated assuming we used a less efficient energy source, such as
gasoline. New numbers and new energy
efficiency rating must be recalculated using the new source of energy. A cleaner, more effective source of energy
will produce a cleaner, more efficient engine.
This is why we went from using steam engines and begun using
gasoline,
or oil derivatives. The new source of
energy was more efficient, making the engines more efficient. Using the same analogy of the million
dollars; you can still buy an exotic Italian car with 100 million
pennies you
wheel barrowed in after torching the safe they were locked in, but
wouldn’t it
be much easier to walk in and write a check using the million you
deposited
into an account after opening the safe with the combination? The same money, the same outcome, more
efficient way of reaching your goal.
Is it H2
and O2???
2H2O = 2H2 +
O2 2H2 +
O2 = 2H2O
The above formula is widely accepted as the
official description of electrolysis (not showing the energy portions
of the
reaction). It is correct, but it is not
the only way to disassociate water.
Electrolysis has been around for a very long time, since Tesla
first
discovered that he can produce hydrogen and oxygen by breaking down
water. Everyone familiar with the process
knows
that the water molecule has poles and certain sides of it are attracted
to the
respective electrodes in the cell. It
is this force that overcomes the electrons’ bonds in the molecule and
pulls the
oxygen and hydrogen apart. Now, the
biggest misconception is what form these separate elements become once
they are
no longer a part of the water molecule.
Some say diatomic forms (H2 and O2), some say monatomic forms (H
and O),
and even some say a completely different arrangement of the water
molecule all
together. With all of these conflicting
theories, it makes understanding the efficiency and reality all the
more
difficult to embrace and apply.
The H2 in H2O
A critical incorrect notion
for many is a very easy one to overlook and the first that needs to be
addressed; the hydrogen’s placement and role in the water molecule. For most people, when looking at the formula
of water, they see what looks to be H2.
What is pictured by most is the diatomic, most commonly known,
form of
hydrogen, H2. This assumption is what
leads many astray, believing that the two hydrogen are connected to
each other
in the molecule. This is far from
true. The only thing the ‘H2’ states in
the formula is the fact that there are two atoms of hydrogen in the
molecule. This does not mean that they
are bonded together, and a look at any diagram of water and one can
clearly see
this to be true. The formula does not
give the arrangement of the molecules, for it takes knowledge of
electron
sharing and configuration to understand that aspect.
In fact, they sit 104.5 degrees away from one another on the
oxygen. They are repelled away from
each other because their exposed sides are positive (alike repels,
opposite
attracts).
FIRST NOTE: THE HYDROGEN IN WATER IS NOT
CONNECTED TO EACH OTHER, THEREFORE NOT DIATOMIC
Upon
understanding this, we arrive at another question.
What do the atoms look like at the moment of separation? Here lies another misunderstanding that can
throw the entire equation and process out of sync with what is actually
happening. We know that the Laws of
Electrolysis can tell us what happens, and we can assume that if the
monatomic
(single H and O) forms reach the electrodes, they react, and become H2
and O2. What makes us so sure that it is
monatomic H
and O once the molecule splits? Well, we do know that hydrogen has only
one
electron, and oxygen has six (in its outer shell).
We would assume that this is the form they take, right?
This is yet
another false assumption that allows us to misinterpret what is really
happening. Just because we commonly see
H and O with their respected electrons present, does not mean that this
is
their state as disassociation of water occurs.
There is still another very small, yet critical detail
overlooked here
as well, which alters the entire understanding of browns gas. It is called ionization potential. This rule explains how easy an atom can lose
or gain electrons. According to these
numbers, it shows that the oxygen in its current state in the molecule
has three
times the power to keep electrons (in its outer shell) than hydrogen
has to
keep its one electron. What does this
mean, and why is this relevant? This
clearly shows that not only the written formula and the electron
configuration
and sharing accurately describe the environment. The
ionization potentials of the elements show that, when the
water molecule breaks apart, the oxygen will keep the electrons that
the
hydrogen was sharing with it. This will
leave the hydrogen with no electron, which is called an ion of
hydrogen, which
is also a single proton (pure energy). With
two extra electrons on the oxygen, it becomes an ion as well
with a full outer shell, no longer likely to bond with anything. Mathematically, the theory of monatomic atoms
forming is indeed possible, and it is verified with the laws of
electrolysis. However, when
incorporating the real world variables into the equation another
picture
emerges, one that accurately describes browns gas.
As ions, the protons will not bond with each other, and neither
will the full oxygen ions bond together.
SECOND NOTE: DISASSOCIATION OF WATER LEAVES IONS OF H AND O, NOT DIATOMIC OR MONATOMIC ATOMS
How does
this fit with our current knowledge of electrolysis and the fact that
we know diatomic
H and O can form? By using the Laws of
electrolysis, we know that the amount of substance created (at the
electrodes)
is directly proportional to the amount of substance that reaches the
electrodes. When these protons
(hydrogen ions) and oxygen ions are allowed to reach the electrodes,
the laws
come into place and H2 and O2 are formed.
This is where the understanding that the process of creating H2
and O2
by means of electrolysis to use as a source of energy becomes
inefficient at
best. This is where the common
chemical equation of electrolysis is relevant.
This is also the point at which the two differing forms of
electrolysis
branch out to form two completely separate products.
The
widely understood type of electrolysis is
calculated as the atoms reach the electrodes, where they gain or lose
electrons, thus creating common hydrogen and oxygen.
Although it has not been noted until now that the ionization
potential affects the primary outcome of the elements, it does not
change the
outcome the laws of electrolysis at the electrodes.
The H and O ions still ionize and become diatomic.
With this
in mind, we pause at the moment of disassociation before the ions are
allowed
to come in contact with the electrodes and reduce the wanted effective
outcome. Here we have protons and oxygen
ions. In the proper type of
electrolysis that
produces true browns gas, the electrical charge that pulls the
molecules apart
ceases to exist for a short time (this is done at a set frequency
usually using
a PWM, or frequency modulator). At
this time, with no excess current drawing the ions towards the
electrodes with
force, they never reach the point of ionization to become diatomic. Instead they are held in close proximity to
one another (considering they are somewhat charged) and will not bond
with
anything until another energy source is present.
A few more
points should be made clear at this moment in the electrolysis, which
will help
us understand the environment of the newly formed ions.
One must understand the electron sharing and
configuration properties of hydrogen and oxygen. We
know that all atoms strive for a full outer electron shell,
just as they will always revert to the simplest stable form with the
amount of
energy present. For this technology we
need only to be aware of the first shell on hydrogen and the second
shell on
the oxygen. The hydrogen wants two to
be full (it naturally has one), and the oxygen wants eight (it
naturally has
six). When we apply the ionization
potential to the process of separating the water molecule we find that
the
oxygen has now all eight and is full while the hydrogen, or more
properly
called a proton, has no electron shell.
How is this important to the theories of browns gas? These
elements are
in the simplest and most stable forms that can occur with the least
amount of
energy applied to them. Without any
excess energy there will be no more bonding and electron sharing. In order to get a different, more complex
form, the ions need to reach the electrodes or there needs to be excess
energy
present to act upon them. Common
electrolysis has this over current, or excess energy, required to
convert the
ions into more complex forms of hydrogen and oxygen.
However, this is what we aim NOT to do when producing browns gas. The excess energy wasted in creating more
complex forms, in addition to the excess energy needed to separate
these
complex forms shortly after in order to release the potential energy
and form
the bi product becomes more trouble than what it is worth.
THIRD NOTE: PRODUCING COMMON HYDROGEN FROM ELECTROLYSIS TO BE USED AS A SOURCE OF ENERGY IS NOT EFFICIENT
Energy from
H2 is not efficient when the hydrogen is produced by the common form of
electrolysis. After understanding what
the atoms look like immediately following disassociation, we see that
more
energy is required to form the diatomic H and O. Then, in order to use
the
potential energy, which results in the reformation of the water
molecule (we
can see this in the chemical formula above), we must separate the
diatomic
forms. Why do they need to be separated
before forming water? Simply put, there
is no diatomic H in water, nor is there diatomic O.
The ‘H2’ in water does not look the same as ‘H2’ in diatomic
hydrogen gas. Diatomic hydrogen is two hydrogen sharing electrons with
each
other and filling their outer shells making them complete.
The same is true with the O2. The
hydrogen and oxygen both must be bonded to
nothing else in order for them to create water. If
we have H2 and O2 we first need to spend energy to separate
these diatomic forms. H2 needs to be
pulled apart into H and H, just as the O2 needs to be separated into
single
O. Only then can two single H bond with
one single O, forming water. This costs
more energy, leaving us with considerably less in the end.
Adding
up all of these key differences we come to a logical understanding. If the electrolysis process is not accurate
and correct, common oxygen and hydrogen WILL be formed. This cost energy
because they were not diatomic when they came
off the water molecule. Next, in
order to spend the diatomic forms’ energy and create the bi product
(water)
they need to be separated first, which of course costs more valuable
energy. These steps will occur in
electrolysis
unless specific steps are taken to ensure the proper form and amount of
energy
is directed to the cell. Doing this
takes more knowledge and attention to detail but ultimately uses less
energy.
Instead, the energy is focused the right way which unlocks the water
molecule
like a combination does to a safe. Common
electrolysis is like taking a hammer and a torch to open the safe,
which wastes
time and energy as well as running the risk of burning some of the
money in the
process.
FOURTH NOTE: BROWNS GAS ELECTROLYSIS IS NOT THE SAME AS COMMON ELECTROLYSIS. IT REQUIRES MORE DETAIL AND LESS ENERGY. IF YOU USE LARGE AMOUNTS OF ENERGY AND THE RESULT IS HYDROGEN THEN THE PROCESS IS WRONG
If it
works, then why aren’t we using it?
There are endless questions
regarding any alternative energy source, and many of them are
legitimate
inquiries. Questions from ‘how does it
work’, to ‘what does it save me’. The
biggest question with browns gas is ‘If it works then why isn’t
everyone using
it?’ If someone advertises a new way to save money on fuel, the
first
natural question is the ‘how’. If this
one critical question is not answered correctly or effectively then
there is no
chance the idea will ever take off.
If the person who claims the process to work cannot get the
understanding of society in harmony with what they already know,
nothing will
happen. Here lies the biggest problem
with browns gas. Many scientists know
about browns gas and work with it and study it on a daily basis. Many
industries have equipment that use browns gas and its unique properties. The people who know of its existence cannot,
unfortunately, come up with a logical enough reason as to why it works. Many theories are not in line with the
normal understanding of chemistry and science.
Many people
who know a great deal about these things take a look at the ‘science’
claims
behind browns gas and laugh. If it
works the way they claim it does, then the entire process is useless
and
inefficient. When the normal science
community looks at these naďve and contradictory findings, they have no
choice
but to dismiss it as a gimmick. This leaves all the people who know it
works
with dead end designs and the rest of the world clueless about an
exciting new
source of energy.
Until
the
proton theory, and the ultimate consideration of ALL the varying
factors that
take place in the production of browns gas, there has not been enough
logical,
scientific, concrete explanations as to ‘how’ it works and ‘why’ is it
different. Every detail in this theory
has been thoroughly researched and tested, and so far none have found a
more
concise description that includes all aspects.
It is now the duty of all alternative energy researchers and users to
become educated so that when questioned they can answer with certainty,
and
when more come to learn they can be taught in a proper, professional
manner. Browns gas is one of greatest
scientific finds of the century, but without an equally important
understanding
of it, it faces disaster before its debut.