The metal oxide is reduced during combustion operating as an oxidizer.
This allows more fuel charge to be burned per stroke kind of like using
nitrous oxide. Cerium particles come out in the exhaust rather than
the oxide.
Joe
D. Mindock wrote:
Joe,
At
they
discuss using cerium oxide, not aluminum, in diesel fuel.
I do worry
about nano sized particles getting out into the air we breathe. If
cerium
or aluminum are catalysts
that means they are not burnt and come out the exhaust, right?
Any comments.
Peace, D.
Mindock
-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
Wednesday, September 20, 2006 10:31 AM
Subject:
Re: [Biofuel] Science
I meant about colloidal fuels.
J
D. Mindock wrote:
Joe didn't let
the cat out of the bag. It was already out:
We have never
needed peace more than now. Bush's dumb cowboy antics are making the US
a heckava lot unsafer. Rep.
Dennis Kucinich wants to establish a Dept of Peace. It is an idea that
needs
to become a reality
soon. I say take 50% of the military budget and get the DoP going.
Peace,
D. Mindock P.S. >From what I've read, nano sized particles are
dangerous of and in themselves. The body doesn't know what to do with them.
-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
Wednesday, September 20, 2006 9:16 AM
Subject:
Re: [Biofuel] Science
Hey Robert;
That's a fun message but aren't you using fiction to support your
argument? Uhhh fiction you wrote! Kewl. I didn't know one could do
this. I'll remember the technique next time we have our performance
reviews or I get pulled over by the cops for speeding. LOL.
Meanwhile.....in the REAL world......weapons work alarmingly well as
tools of fear and control. ( Let me say I wish everyone was nice enough
that it was uneccesary to resort to imposed control....maybe one day
we'll evolve to that level I hope) A weapon as a deterrent? Of course.
As I have said here before take a round table discussion, out of
control with all the examples of bad behaviour. Now put a loaded .45 in
the hands of EACH person at the table and see how quickly it gets quiet
and downright civilized!
Why do bullies seldom have to actually beat the crap out of someone?
Because one or two examples like that serve to underline the threat and
it is the fear of that implied threat which does the bullies work. Why
does the US so desperately want to keep nukes out of the hands of all
the countries that don't have them? ( even though the US has proven
they aren't responsible enough to have them, having already anihilated
so many human beings with the loathesome device) It is the bullies
tool. See how well it works.
Getting back to the science thread, the US navy is currently working on
bombs using nano aluminum as a high explosive which generate a
shockwave similar to a nuke but without the radiation. A clean nuke so
to speak. Lovely eh? (Don't ask me how I know this.) All the death
and destruction without the poison.( "well we ASSUME so") Kind of the
opposite idea of the neutron bomb which leaves the structure and kills
the life. Duh....I guess they figured out a city that's too hot to
enter isn't much of a prize. But this way it's doublegood. You level
a city, wipe out your foes, and then you reap the profits of rebuilding
everything. Or at least the elite members of your club do.(This is
bitter sarcasm in case you didn't get that) To me this is scarier than
nukes because going back to the round table analogy, you might have
some sick bastard who is twisted enough and thinks he is fast enough to
grab his .45 and blow away everyone else at the table before anyone can
get him. With that type of weapon it is conceivable, and there is no
blowback so to speak. But to make the analogy work better as a model
for nukes you have to replace the .45 with hand grenades. Now nobody
gets out of the room alive. Nano bombs are very likely to be used for
this reason they are like big sicko .45s.
Oh while I'm on the subject of disclosing military nano science
secrets, they are currently also experimenting with colloidal jet
fuels. Adding nano metals to jet fuel gives them something like an
octane boost. But they didn't ask anyone if we mind them seeding the
atmosphere with nano particles. We are all part of the experiment now
like it or not. Nice eh? Oh BTW can anyone out there help me? I'm
wondering what kind of filter I would use to clean 20nm junk out of the
environment. Apparently the scientists who hypothesized what a great
fuel could be also assumed the exhaust doesn't exist. Nobody knows what
this means,.....but we'll assume it is nothing. Did you know the US
military employs ostrich scientists over there? Later that day......."
Uh Houston.....we've got a problem....."
Sheesh what an idiot I am. Now I've let the cat out of the bag. So
much for that step in my biodeiesl process just before dewatering where
I add nano aluminum and make a killing selling superbiofuel to the
local farmers so they can clean up at the tractor pulls. Damn. Perhaps
one day they'll find a cure for that part of my brain that believes in
the precautionary principle.
Joe
robert and benita rabello wrote:
Ken Provost wrote:
After a long life in the sciences and engineering, I've come
to believe that the scientific method has some basic flaws,
two of which are as follows (there are others as well)
I'm composing this message with advance apologies to Bob Allen . .
. : - )
I once wrote a children's story called "The Applied Science of World
Piece", in which Professor Carleton McFoosi--a Nobel Laureate for his
work in the development of enhanced radiation weapons--applies the
principles of the scientific method to achieving world peace. He begins
with a hypothesis that if everyone can destroy one another, no one would
dare to do so. He sets up a "control" group, with "morally laconic,
licentious liberals" and "fifty fanatic fundamentalists", provides them
with nuclear weapons, then records their behavior. Unfortunately, the
"control" group soon LOST control, as they used their nuclear weapons on
one another, the test site was rendered dangerously radioactive for some
time, and the learned professor had to go back and re-evaluate his
hypothesis.
In the next set of experiments, no weapons were provided, but the
two replacement groups fought anyway, using furniture and other
household items as weapons. Professor McFoosi took these away, only to
discover that the test subjects would fight using their feet and fists.
After this, he decided to apply "Occam's Razor" to the process and
began surgically removing hands and feet, then elbows and knees. The
test subjects resorted to screaming insults and biting one another,
until Professor McFoosi removed one more body part (the head), and sure
enough, all violence ceased. This triumph of reason was lauded in the
newspapers and scientific journals, and Professor McFoosi was awarded an
unprecendented SECOND Nobel Prize for his work.
Silly? Completely!
But it DOES illustrate that there are some questions science can't
answer, and some problems science can't solve.
robert luis rabello
"The Edge of Justice"
Adventure for Your Mind
http://www.newadventure.ca
Ranger Supercharger Project Page
http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
|
