I have read Pervez Hoodbhoy's article, "the water car fraud" published in the Express Tribune on 2nd August 2012. I don't see any clear point that rejects the claim which he had demonstrated in front of eye witnesses. This is basic because in pure science we have to test idea directly through experiment.
I am unable to understand why Professor had suggested for a generator instead of Car? Every Car Engine runs with
basic law of motion where petrol or gas used as a force only through carburetor. Except carburetor there is no other substitute to run an Engine with fuel. To me the argument don't carry any weight just by suggesting the Second Law of Thermodynamics without providing any evidence. What is water itself? Water is H2O which mean two parts of Hydrogen and one part of Oxygen that formed water. We also know that Hydrogen burn itself where as Oxygen don't burn but help in burning. We
also know that Hydrogen is already available to be used as fuel but like LPG,
keeping Hydrogen tanks in vehicles, as science journals use to tell us, is
dangerous from safety point of view.
The basic interest in the subject discovery to know is: how he transformed water back into gas? Then we know there is only one way which is to separate Hydrogen from Oxygen. That is what he is telling us that he has done it through a water kit. If he is getting Hydrogen, then it is okay. The Hydrogen is stronger force then even petrol. That is why you can run it without adding petrol into it as seen on TV. The electric cars (my experience) may be not so powerful such as Hydrogen that is why after 40 miles through inbuilt system it shifted over to petrol.
The poor engineer must had repeated the experiments to prove his idea for at least thousands times. In pure science you have to test your idea to prove the law or a new law. The point is that through this process how much Hydrogen he is getting? If there is sufficient Hydrogen which he is transforming from water through by using water kit. Then where is the violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics?
We all know that source of hydrogen is water which he is proving through experiment. Instead of confusing the issue, we need to check if the water kit he has invented is really working and producing hydrogen. If there is hydrogen, certainly it would work as substitute to petrol because it burn itself and produced strong force. Every innovation starts from idea not theory or law. The laws and theories in the field of science is a continue process and always emerge after successful testing of idea through experiment. To believe that a law is absolute is non-scientific attitude.
Instead of going by experiment which is basic requirement of science, polemic on scientific matters reflects unscientific behaviour and bookish culture.
The basic interest in the subject discovery to know is: how he transformed water back into gas? Then we know there is only one way which is to separate Hydrogen from Oxygen. That is what he is telling us that he has done it through a water kit. If he is getting Hydrogen, then it is okay. The Hydrogen is stronger force then even petrol. That is why you can run it without adding petrol into it as seen on TV. The electric cars (my experience) may be not so powerful such as Hydrogen that is why after 40 miles through inbuilt system it shifted over to petrol.
The poor engineer must had repeated the experiments to prove his idea for at least thousands times. In pure science you have to test your idea to prove the law or a new law. The point is that through this process how much Hydrogen he is getting? If there is sufficient Hydrogen which he is transforming from water through by using water kit. Then where is the violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics?
We all know that source of hydrogen is water which he is proving through experiment. Instead of confusing the issue, we need to check if the water kit he has invented is really working and producing hydrogen. If there is hydrogen, certainly it would work as substitute to petrol because it burn itself and produced strong force. Every innovation starts from idea not theory or law. The laws and theories in the field of science is a continue process and always emerge after successful testing of idea through experiment. To believe that a law is absolute is non-scientific attitude.
Instead of going by experiment which is basic requirement of science, polemic on scientific matters reflects unscientific behaviour and bookish culture.
No comments:
Post a Comment