Lots of messages today on belief & skepticism in alternative energy. To be expected: after all, the 'cutting edge' and the 'bleeding edge' are the objective and subjective ways of looking at the same delicate interface. This inherent level of doubt is inevitable in the early stages of any breakthrough field: LENR, hydrinos, ZPE conversion, or ultra-efficient electrolysis - all of which have some level of ingrained truth and some level of self-deception and misdirection attached. And curiously - all of these sub-fields may have an overlap in the plethora of seemingly disparate investigations - particularly 'ultra-efficient electrolysis.' It is 'new physics' plain and simple - and we must abandon not only mainstream guidance, but also the 'one who brung you' so to speak of the crudeness of prior art.
One does not necessarily need to believe in the present objective proof of a crude device like the Joe-Cell to further investigate what is going on. It is called 'suspension of disbelief'. In fact, personally I do not believe that any such Cell has ever powered an ICE without getting most of the energy from a replinished surface layer hydrocarbons, such as crankcase oil. That is the beauty of hydrogen as a fuel - it is so 'mobile' in this kind of high compression combustion situation (ICE) that it allows the very efficient burning of any available hydrocarbon, including lubrication oil. If any crude device can be understood as evidence of ultra-efficient electrolysis (and there is zero real proof of that for now) - then even the secondary ability to produce enough hydrogen to burn-off a layer of surface oil becomes important in a hybrid scheme. The fact that a particular device, like a few of these cells, has gotten that close to a real anomaly - i.e. to some level of success, often indicates that there is much room for improvement over the primitive level of design being used previously... and this fact of much 'room for improvement' is despite the irrelevant fact that some joker has made 80 or 80,000 of them in a certain incorrect way. They might as well be mojo bags, for all that prior art is worth - except for the serendipitous discovery of 'something novel' ... which has been completely overlooked by the practioneers due their lack of knowledge of physics and focus on 'orgone' or related hocus-pocus. Certainly very little science, and much superstition, has been involved in those most (not all) of those past efforts - which nevertheless may yet serve to point the way, serendipitously, but should not be copied as if they were the product of directed R&D, and certainly not considered to be evidence of years of 'trial and error' HA! nor should they be endorsed by anyone who wants to achieve real success - just because they may have pointed the way towards what is 'really' going on. There is the possibility of achieving something valuable and unique here, in this sub-field which can be termed as 'eltra-efficient electrolysis' and it may be drivaive and based roughly on these crude early designs, but the end product will surely be very different from any of them. Jones
