Another water-powered engine. Anybody knows Glenn Castillo?

[tinasalazar]

the government (Marcos time pa yun, then later during Cory) did not support the dingle engine for one simple reason: they were not idiots like the people in media who believe anything shoved under their noses. ewan ko lang mga officials na nasa DOST ngayon, puro political appointees yata kaya puro walang alam. imagine, invention of the year ang khaos!

water powered car? yeah right! ever heard of the first law of thermodynamics? this is not a matter of "thinking out of the box". the laws of physics are not called "laws" because they are still theories, they have been proven and never been disproved. you just can't ignore it and not end up being labled a fool!

the first law simply states that energy can never be created nor destroyed. it is finite. any so-called "invention" that tries to violate this law is called a "perpetual motion machine" because those are claimed to produce more energy than they consume, WHICH IS AN IMPOSSIBILITY. 1+1 is always equal to 2, never greater.

you'll have more luck trying to turn lead into gold than trying to do something "out of the box" when it comes to thermodynamics.

Hey mga peeps, please don't shoot the messenger right away.

Glenn Castillo, I believe, is not being endorsed in the story. It must be something she stumbled upon (or "unearthed," so to speak) after roaming around a boring DoST exhibit. Exposing Castillo to the public eye (or scrutiny of experts reading the papers, if there are), I believe, is not something that a writer like her would do to dupe the public/consumers but must be something she would rather do to send signals to experts out there that a freak of nature is in the works.

And if you happen to be an expert browsing the papers, then you should be accessible to the media to put an end to this "perpetual motion machine" and other "quixotic quests."

Since no group of experts or a credible government body in the country is willing to make a stand (give a final statement), and put an end every time a "perpetual motion machine" comes along, the media is left alone to handle this circus. Experts need to go out of the forum and be accessible during times like these.

Shooting the messenger will not help educate the public.

I really think it's unfair to label media as "idiots" willing to tackle any story shoved up their noses.

Remember, it is media where most people get their information from. And sometime last year (or was it early this year?), Yahoo News reported about scientists being able to break the speed limit for the speed of light. They were able to "teleport" sub-atomic particles from one particular spot to another faster than it took for light to reach the same spot.

And the experts insisted that it would be impossible for anything to go faster than light.

Exposing something to public scrutiny (no matter if the tone of the story is positive) is not equal to endorsing something. It could be the other way around: Exposing a hoax without hurting other Filipino readers who have a tendency to become emotional and patriotic about the whole thing.

Doc Eric, thanks for offering to explain the thermodynamics thingie. At least, it only proves the forum is not just exclusive to elites and so-called experts who mistakenly think "thinking out of the box" has its limits.

In my own humble opinion lang po. Peace po.

[mazdamazda]

Exposing something to public scrutiny (no matter if the tone of the story is positive) is not equal to endorsing something. It could be the other way around: Exposing a hoax without hurting other Filipino readers who have a tendency to become emotional and patriotic about the whole thing.

Hmmm... you have a point there but at least it got our attention in the first place. Though the writer should have at least given a hint of doubt to further scrutinize the said invention so as to be fair (much like the recent write-ups of the same writer, Tessa Salazar, about the KSTC).

The problem is that even after "introducing" the said water-to-hydrogen reactor, there is no new development afterwards. Plus he there was no further elaboration on what new technique he used to split water to hydrogen. You couldn't help but think that he just after those multi-million dollar investments.

A more applausable demonstration should only have the hydrogen reactor present to produce hydrogen from water using only 12V of electricity.

In the meantime, other countries / manufacturers have already made leaps in hydrogen-powered engine technology. A hybrid hydrogen-gasoline RX-8 was already introduced by Mazda as a prototype. BMW is also engaging in pure hydrogen-powered engines.

[mbt]

"elites and so-called experts"...

i respect your opinion, but i believe that is a hasty judgment (just commenting okay, not debating or trying to force you to think otherwise). the problem with speaking in an equivocal tone is that people will buy every word of it hook, line, and sinker. i don't think the average reader will be able to easily distinguish a "gentle hoax exposure" from what they may think is a positive endorsement for a certain product. discussions in this community are not intended to be personal attacks against inventors or whoever, but rather, to defend the motoring public's interest. i hardly think that questioning a certain 'breakthrough' product equates to a definitive closed-mindedness. to be sure, accepting every single news of a breakthrough without question is also blatant bound-in-the-box thinking.

Remember, it is media where most people get their information from.

and forums are also an effective form of media. i wouldn't be too dismissive of the information presented in forums, just as i am not hasty in dismissing the information presented in conventional media. most of what you think about media will also probably apply to internet message boards. if you think this forum is nothing but a bunch of intellectual elitists, then i'm sorry to hear that. but at least, in internet message boards, everything is on record, everything is visible, everything can be digged up, everything can be easily discussed, everything can be argued upon, everything can be disagreed with,... unfortunately, i cannot say most of these things about conventional media. readers will be able to judge for themselves whether a member is making valid observations or valid questions in a topic; if the community believes they have an expert in their midst, it will probably be because he/she is one. if someone is forwarding dubious points, it will be very likely that they will be corrected by other members more knowledgeable on the matter. i cannot say that conventional media possesses this degree of self-correction. if a broadsheet or a broadcast station will happen to transmit a vague or misleading message, readers or viewers will not be able to receive 'the other side of the coin', so to speak, so easily, unlike in an internet message board.

you've appealed to members here not to 'shoot the messenger',... i appeal to you not to be so hasty in condemning what you refer to as "elites and so-called experts who mistakenly think 'thinking out of the box' has its limits", as what else are they but mere messengers?

(btw, i am commenting about the points that you have raised, not about the topic of water-powered engines. i am not saying that the skeptics here are correct with regard to the topic hehe)

[mbt]

the media is left alone to handle this circus. Experts need to go out of the forum and be accessible during times like these.

a forum is a public venue. experts are precisely IN the forum during times like these to help shed light on the matter for the public.

Exposing something to public scrutiny (no matter if the tone of the story is positive) is not equal to endorsing something.

perhaps, but if the story concerns a product, the typical reader will most probably take it as an endorsement, never mind if the author did not intend it to be one. a writer in a major daily is in a position of authority for the general readership of that paper, and to present "a positive article" that is nonetheless generally one-sided (especially and particularly if about a commercial product) and knowing the effect it would have on readers (who would of course think that since a journalist in a major broadsheet wrote it, this product must work!) would be, in effect, duping them (whether wittingly or unwittingly, by the author of the article), to put it bluntly.

claiming to "simply present information" seemingly without first scrutinizing and researching on that information and without presenting an unequivocal and balanced summation of the facts occurs to me as a blatant failure of investigative journalism, and is, in fact, irresponsible journalism.

i sincerely hope that these concerns do not apply to the author of the article and i trust that the major dailies are staffed by responsible journalists.

just thinking out loud.

[ghosthunter]

Hey mga peeps, please don't shoot the messenger right away.

as long as the "messenger" can give a balanced report on the topic he is doing, there is no need to shoot the messenger. An example, Cenon Bibe's past articles on the Khaos device are just nothing more than press releases from the Inventionhaus (the company that manufactures & markets KSTC), those articles can be considered as "free" advertisements. Totally one sided articles.

Since no group of experts or a credible government body in the country is willing to make a stand (give a final statement),

given the state of the DOST, I don't even think that government body can be considered a "credible" body to give any sort of final statement (for the topic in question).

... and put an end every time a "perpetual motion machine" comes along, the media is left alone to handle this circus. Experts need to go out of the forum and be accessible during times like these.

You think you (the media) are alone in this "circus". I think that is where you are wrong. The reason why this forum exists is to create a place to discuss & share ideas. Our forums are accessible to everyone who wants it. If you need help, we are here to give it.

I really think it's unfair to label media as "idiots" willing to tackle any story shoved up their noses.

as long as the reporter doing the article is credible and have the correct background to handle the story, why not? But if the reporter isn't prepared or even the least bit knowedgable, that is another thing.

Remember, it is media where most people get their information from. And sometime last year (or was it early this year?), Yahoo News reported about scientists being able to break the speed limit for the speed of light. They were able to "teleport" sub-atomic particles from one particular spot to another faster than it took for light to reach the same spot.

And the experts insisted that it would be impossible for anything to go faster than light.

well, sub-atomic physics is not a precise science just yet. There is a lot of theories why particles do the things they do. And a lot more of those theories are thrown out of the window everytime a new experiment is done and proves otherwise.

Doc Eric, thanks for offering to explain the thermodynamics thingie. At least, it only proves the forum is not just exclusive to elites and so-called experts who mistakenly think "thinking out of the box" has its limits.

some of us aren't limiting outselves to the "box", whatever its limits are.

Example: I'm interested to doing some experiments based on Archie Blue's electrolysis cell design which suppose to be able to produce enough hydrogen & oxygen to fuel an internal combustion engine. This might have been the basis of the "water-powered car" of Daniel Dingle, etc.

http://www.hasslberger.com/tecno/tecno_3.htm

[yebo]

an idiotic reporter, in my vocabulary, is someone who does not verify or research what he/she sees before reporting it. i believe that is a very fundamental requirement of journalism - to verify before printing. the problem with philippine journalism is that it is too free. they have abused their freedom to such a point that they feel they can print anything without verifying the facts and reasons behind their stories. it has become, and this is true even for the broadsheets, just one big tabloid.

if i were a reporter, i would seek first the opinions of people who are learned and knowledgeable on the topic at hand. that is, if i do not want to be labelled an idiot. but i suppose they just don't care, as long as they meet their deadlines.

[yebo]

as with regards to matter travelling faster than light, i believe there is no "thinking out of the box" involved there. albert einstein already said that space can be bent, commonly called the space warp theory. the distance between 2 points in space can be made closer by warping space. in fact the theory says that if the space between those 2 points can be made to zero then instantaneous transfer from one point to another is possible. light on the other hand will still take the same time to travel that distance (since light will follow the curved path of the warped space even if the distance is zero) so it will appear that the object travels at speed faster than the speed of light.

the science already is written, technology only needs to catch up. einstein's brain after all was centuries ahead, even today.

[tinasalazar]

hmm ... lions feasting on their prey. sorry guys, i'm a vegetarian. hehe

[reym]

Have you guys ever tried the feed water directly to a carburated gasoline engine?
It will choke and will run rough. But try retarding the timing and placing the water again, it will not run rough. I think Castillio is not lying, you see there is a work around if you are can't be able to produce enough hydrogen to run an engine: you add steam or water. Water has the ability to return the same amount of force that you have given it. You can clearly see it by looking at the ram pump. The possible problem is rust and the water that might get into your crank case if your ring is not strong enough. I once tried to idle a carbed engine using the h2 + o2 from an electrolysis chamber for a few minutes until the plastic containers (reactors ) melted.
I checked the engine oil afer a month and found out that water escaped through the rings and into the crank case mixing with oil. I stopped experimenting because I don't want my engine to break.

[doc eric]

Water is a byproduct of gasoline combustion...not the other way around....it can't burn.
The ram pump cannot be compared to a combustion engine in this context as one involves chemical transformation ...the other purely mechanical.....