<p>This 'hydrogen engine' is absolutely worthless.</p>
<p>He's saying it works on water...you need to take up so much energy to split up the water that it makes more sense to just use gas.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I agree with the above. An engine that burns or otherwise harnesses molecular hydrogen would be mildly interested. But if you claim you can get energy from water you are either an idiot or a liar.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ever heard of hydroelectric power? ;)</p>
<p>^^^ I don't think hydroelectric power actually utilizes the energy from water molecules, but rather harnesses kinetic energy from moving bodies of water such as rivers...</p>
<p>I read an article somewhere that scientists found a way to use computers on energy from water, but the process was ridiculously slow and caused supercomputers to run at a snail's pace.</p>
<p>Yeah, I was just making a point. His statement was kind of vague, so I was just poking a bit of fun :).</p>
<p>oops my bad :(</p>
<p>Binder: LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL</p>
<p>I really don't get what this guy is trying to do.
It's obvious he's bsing..... read the whole thread from beggining to end.</p>
<p>Either he's an actually idiot who's now trying to defend himself and prove himself right, or he's a jokester.</p>
<p>In either case, he's wasting everyone's time, and his own.</p>
<p>"Lisa, in this house we obey the Laws of Thermodynamics!"</p>
<p>Lol.....................</p>
<p>"1950 is a very low score and you're GPA isn't that good either."
1950 is a very low score FOR MIT.
You guys should watch what u say :O</p>
<p>the nat. average is like 1500</p>
<p>this kid hasnt taken physics yet, cause if he has there would be no way he actually believes the BS hes saying here. Lol listen man, if you have created a machine that has a larger NRG output then input, then places like MIT would have been throwin hookers thru ur window a long time ago, that plus ud be all over the news. Got any other inventions that would rival the works of Einstein and Newton?</p>
<p>yeah, totally agree with that atomicfusion, unless... he took energy in the air, which isn't really energy that cost anything.... i.e. he used O2 or something from the air...
but good job, i am so jealous...</p>
<p>Yeah I know 1950 is a good score, I meant it's low in MIT terms though. I should have specified oops.</p>
<p>why does this guy have an SAT score of 1950 but he can revolutionize the scientific world?</p>
<p>who knows, maybe he just can't write? He may very well have gotten 800 on Math...not that that has anything to do with over-unity devices, but...</p>