<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Intel Might Be Fined By EU On Wednesday</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.friedpost.com/sciencetech/intel-might-be-fined-by-eu-on-wednesday-665.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.friedpost.com/sciencetech/intel-might-be-fined-by-eu-on-wednesday-665.html</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 09:39:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pam</title>
		<link>http://www.friedpost.com/sciencetech/intel-might-be-fined-by-eu-on-wednesday-665.html#comment-3360</link>
		<dc:creator>Pam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 01:02:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.friedpost.com/?p=665#comment-3360</guid>
		<description>Hi Fried Post staff,

I just read your article about water fueled cars. Who was your author or researcher for this.....? Goodness sakes!  Like you, I&#039;m no scientist, but in the past research I have done so far, there are a few questions I&#039;d like you to answer here ...like,  why do you think they are perpetual motion? They are not.
You say: 
Water-fueled cars are perpetual motion machines that violate the first law of thermodynamics which says that “the increase in the internal energy of a system is equal to the amount of energy added by heating the system, minus the amount lost as a result of the work done by the system on its surroundings” which means that the energy output from an engine can’t exceed the energy input. 

 So? The cars aren&#039;t perpetual motion vehicles. The laws are mute. 

In the second law of thermodynamics, a brilliant guy called Kelvin said that “it is impossible to convert heat completely into work” which means that an engine or a process cannot have an efficiency of 100% therefore it cannot convert all its energy into work

 Who said they were doing that 100%, anyway?  No one. 

 therefore a perpetual motion machine is impossible to exist.  I’m no genius, but I understand the laws of thermodynamics and probably the inventors and scientists know more about it than me, then why are they trying to build water-fueled cars?   Well, maybe because they are trying to change something in this world by designing new and cleaner technologies to power our cars. 

 You may have answered your own question here.  

In order to develop engines that run on water, scientists tried to improve the electrolysis of water which is a process that splits water in hydrogen and oxygen using electricity. The problem is that you cannot do electrolysis 

(oh, really? Says, who? They do it in beauty salons.)

 and to have enough energy to power the car and then to do more electrolysis as it violates the rules of thermodynamics. 

What are you talking about?  Do you work for the oil co&#039;s?
Why don&#039;t you get this done to your car and then write an article about it?  Wouldn&#039;t it be cool if you were wrong and got more gas mileage?   Your insinuations and scientific jargon are .....just that... blah, blah, laws of thermodynamics, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Instead of scientific comparisons that don&#039;t apply, why don&#039;t you get real scientific proof?  I&#039;d really like to know.

There is an old saying: The one who says it cannot be done, should not interrupt the one doing it.  

I&#039;m glad you are at least tracking Mr. Klein and others in progress, rather than saying they can&#039;t do it.   Thank you.  We used to think the old cartoon of Dick Tracy with his watch communicator was impossible.  I guess it was, then!  ha!  Time will tell. 
      Keep researching dear one.....Nonny (grandmother) Pam</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Fried Post staff,</p>
<p>I just read your article about water fueled cars. Who was your author or researcher for this&#8230;..? Goodness sakes!  Like you, I&#8217;m no scientist, but in the past research I have done so far, there are a few questions I&#8217;d like you to answer here &#8230;like,  why do you think they are perpetual motion? They are not.<br />
You say:<br />
Water-fueled cars are perpetual motion machines that violate the first law of thermodynamics which says that “the increase in the internal energy of a system is equal to the amount of energy added by heating the system, minus the amount lost as a result of the work done by the system on its surroundings” which means that the energy output from an engine can’t exceed the energy input. </p>
<p> So? The cars aren&#8217;t perpetual motion vehicles. The laws are mute. </p>
<p>In the second law of thermodynamics, a brilliant guy called Kelvin said that “it is impossible to convert heat completely into work” which means that an engine or a process cannot have an efficiency of 100% therefore it cannot convert all its energy into work</p>
<p> Who said they were doing that 100%, anyway?  No one. </p>
<p> therefore a perpetual motion machine is impossible to exist.  I’m no genius, but I understand the laws of thermodynamics and probably the inventors and scientists know more about it than me, then why are they trying to build water-fueled cars?   Well, maybe because they are trying to change something in this world by designing new and cleaner technologies to power our cars. </p>
<p> You may have answered your own question here.  </p>
<p>In order to develop engines that run on water, scientists tried to improve the electrolysis of water which is a process that splits water in hydrogen and oxygen using electricity. The problem is that you cannot do electrolysis </p>
<p>(oh, really? Says, who? They do it in beauty salons.)</p>
<p> and to have enough energy to power the car and then to do more electrolysis as it violates the rules of thermodynamics. </p>
<p>What are you talking about?  Do you work for the oil co&#8217;s?<br />
Why don&#8217;t you get this done to your car and then write an article about it?  Wouldn&#8217;t it be cool if you were wrong and got more gas mileage?   Your insinuations and scientific jargon are &#8230;..just that&#8230; blah, blah, laws of thermodynamics, blah, blah, blah, blah.</p>
<p>Instead of scientific comparisons that don&#8217;t apply, why don&#8217;t you get real scientific proof?  I&#8217;d really like to know.</p>
<p>There is an old saying: The one who says it cannot be done, should not interrupt the one doing it.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;m glad you are at least tracking Mr. Klein and others in progress, rather than saying they can&#8217;t do it.   Thank you.  We used to think the old cartoon of Dick Tracy with his watch communicator was impossible.  I guess it was, then!  ha!  Time will tell.<br />
      Keep researching dear one&#8230;..Nonny (grandmother) Pam</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

