DEV's address is bad.
--------------B19D457E75858CD497785608
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID: <35F464BD.F01916E8@fastlane.net>
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 17:57:01 -0500
From: Norman Wootan <normw@fastlane.net>
Reply-To: normw@fastlane.net
Organization: Flying Disk Publications
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en]C-DIAL (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev <mailhub.icx.net@icx.net>
Subject: Re: Run your car without gasoline
References: <199809072116.RAA27774@icx.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------2EC9284507882326363DB41B"
--------------2EC9284507882326363DB41B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fastlane.net id UAA19963
Brown's Gas only reacts with the material it comes into contact with at
the unique characteristics of that material. True, you can pass your
hand through a true brown's
gas flame and the temperature is about 120F. If a tungston wire is
placed in the flame it will be sublimated away. You can weld aluminum
to steel and steel to fire bricks or glass. Brown's gas is really
weard. It will only work with monatomic oxygen and monatomic hydrogen
in the original 66 2/3 to 33 1/3 ratio as split from water. I know it
sounds far out but it is true. Norm
dev wrote:
> Norm,
>
> (see quote below from your last post to Keelynet)
> About Brown's Gas, since you mentioned it, I just wanted to ask some
> questions of someone, who may Know some answers. About a year ago I
> surfed the Net and came up with one site, (I know not, which one now),
> that was dedicated to research on Brown's Gas. There, they made a
> statement, which I found utterly amazing; about the fact that a person
> could literally place their hand in the "FLAME" produced, and they
> would not get hurt, because there was no "HEAT" generated by it !
>
> YET, they also made the statement, that this "FLAME" was capable of
> cutting metal ! I emailed similar questions to them, that I am asking
> you here now; but, I never recieved a reply!
>
> My question to you is, were they just pulling our leg, or is there
> some FANTASTIC, as yet, unexplained force at work here?
>
> Logically, I could actually see that cutting metal might be possible,
> without having to raise the temperature; as anything, including metal
> will sublimate to a gas, given the right circumstances - pressure
> wise. AND generally, that pressure is accomplished by applying HEAT to
> begin with. At least, that's the way it is with conventional
> oxy/acetylene torches. Of course, in the case of oxy/acetylene
> torches, the bulk of the metal being cut, never even gets hot enough
> to sublimate, before the airpressure, just blows the melted metal out
> of the way.
>
> I personally have witnessed Plain Old Oxygen and Hydrogen combined, to
> make a torch, on a test bench; HOWEVER, there was considerable HEAT
> generated in that flame, and I (for one), would NOT have even thought
> of sticking my hand in it, for any reason! And, if their claim has any
> merit, what-so-ever, then I am curious as to why they would call that
> phenomenon, a "FLAME" to begin with?
>
> Yet, I noticed that in your post today, that you mention Temperature,
> in conjunction with Brown's Gas. So, now I'm all confused!
>
> SO! How is this claim for Brown's Gas even be possible, assuming that
> it is NOT a fabrication?
>
> Stephen Brummitt
> dev@icx.net
> __________________________________________________________________
> At 02:21 PM 9/7/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >Since Garry has had problems with his electrolytic cell generating
> >sludge when he tries to condition the distilled water, I will
> contribute
> >this explanation as to it's source.
>
> >ect.....
>
> > Recombination burn of the monatomic hydrogen and monatomic oxygen
>
> >give the proper heat signatures which enable you to determine whether
>
> >you are generating H2 and O2 gas which is diatomic or the desired
> >monatomic gases. Everyone experimenting with the famous =93brown=92s
> gas=94
> >knows that only monatomic gas will provide the high temperatures
> >necessary to sublimate a tungsten wire.
> >
--------------2EC9284507882326363DB41B
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by fastlane.net id UAA19963
Brown's Gas only reacts with the material it comes into contact with atthe unique characteristics of that material. True, you can pass you=rhand through a true brown's
gas flame and the temperature is about 120F. If a tungston wireis placed in the flame it will be sublimated away. You can weld alu=minumto steel and steel to fire bricks or glass. Brown's gas is reallyweard. It will only work with monatomic oxygen and monatomic hydrog=enin the original 66 2/3 to 33 1/3 ratio as split from water. I knowit sounds far out but it is true. Norm
dev wrote:
Norm,--------------2EC9284507882326363DB41B----------------B19D457E75858CD497785608--(see quote below from your last post to Keelynet)
About Brown's Gas, since you mentioned it, I just wanted to ask somequestions of someone, who may Know some answers. About a year ago I surfe=dthe Net and came up with one site, (I know not, which one now), that wasdedicated to research on Brown's Gas. There, they made a statement, whichI found utterly amazing; about the fact that a person could literally pla=cetheir hand in the "FLAME" produced, and they would not get hurt, becausethere was no "HEAT" generated by it !YET, they also made the statement, that this "FLAME" was capable ofcutting metal ! I emailed similar questions to them, that I am asking youhere now; but, I never recieved a reply!
My question to you is, were they just pulling our leg, or is there som=eFANTASTIC, as yet, unexplained force at work here?
Logically, I could actually see that cutting metal might be possible,without having to raise the temperature; as anything, including metal wil=lsublimate to a gas, given the right circumstances - pressure wise. ANDgenerally, that pressure is accomplished by applying HEAT to begin with.At least, that's the way it is with conventional oxy/acetylene torches.Of course, in the case of oxy/acetylene torches, the bulk of the metalbeing cut, never even gets hot enough to sublimate, before the airpressur=e,just blows the melted metal out of the way.
I personally have witnessed Plain Old Oxygen and Hydrogen combined,to make a torch, on a test bench; HOWEVER, there was considerableHEAT generated in that flame, and I (for one), would NOT have even though=tof sticking my hand in it, for any reason! And, if their claim has anymerit, what-so-ever, then I am curious as to why they would call that phe=nomenon,a "FLAME" to begin with?
Yet, I noticed that in your post today, that you mention Temperature,in conjunction with Brown's Gas. So, now I'm all confused!
SO! How is this claim for Brown's Gas even be possible, assuming thatit is NOT a fabrication?
Stephen Brummitt
dev@icx.net
__________________________________________________________________
At 02:21 PM 9/7/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Since Garry has had problems with his electrolytic cell generating
>sludge when he tries to condition the distilled water, I will contri=bute
>this explanation as to it's source.>ect.....
> Recombination burn of the monatomic hydrogen andmonatomic oxygen
>give the proper heat signatures which enable you to determine whethe=r
>you are generating H2 and O2 gas which is diatomic or the desi=red
>monatomic gases. Everyone experimenting with the famous =93bro=wn=92sgas=94
>knows that only monatomic gas will provide the high temperatures
>necessary to sublimate a tungsten wire.
>