View Full Version : browns gas(hydroxy)?!?
January 13th, 2002, 02:07 AM
Recently i have been browsing some of the web, and have come across a subject that grabbed my attention. Browns gas as it is called is supposedly some special mixture of H2 and O2 from an electrolysis of water that when burned has very interesting characteristics. The flame only has a IR reading of about 270 deg C, however when directed at a material it will transmit enough energy to melt it, cut it or weld whatever you point it at. It can sublimate Tungsten, and melt pure carbon. Supposedly it can join steel to glass, and brick to copper, among other outrageous claims. Some sources even go so far as to say a new form of energy has been discovered – some sort of electrically expanded water[not just H2 and O2- thanks BoB, something like H2O, but not steam, like H2O gas electrified or something, this is one of the things i have trouble swallowing with this "browns gas"], because of a property of it. When a mixture of it is ignited it creates a vacuum simultaneously discharging electricity to surroundings. My stance is that it seems hokey, if it were real that would be really cool, but it seems like an over-unity device to me. I want to know what you all have to think about this technology, whether it is fact or fiction. All you would need to do is a search on google or whatever on browns gas and you will get plenty of hits.
[ January 13, 2002: Message edited by: firebreether ]
[ January 13, 2002: Message edited by: firebreether ]</p>
January 13th, 2002, 05:15 AM
A perfect (for burning) mix of O2, and H2 are formed when ordinary water is electrolised.
"far as to say a new form of energy has been"
New? dude, literally, when DC is passed through water, the gas's produced can burn.
There is even a blowtorch that I saw on the net in '98 that runs only off water, it consisted of a DC converter that converted house current into two long electrodes that extended into a plastic (looked like HDPE ot me) water resevoir, the gas's that formed were collected and fed into a cutting (Oxygen, and Acetylene) torch hose and head.
No wait, that doesnt sound right, the gas's were collected seperatly, and fed into seperate hose's, yeah, mixing the gas's inside the reaction vessel (near electric current) wouldnt be too smart, my bad.
They're have also been mentions of O2 and H2 bombs on this form.
(its 5am, so please excuse spelling errors)
January 13th, 2002, 12:16 PM
Yeah, i know if you mix H2 and O2 it will explode, im not stupid. And your absolutely right about you would collect the gases off seperately, becasue that would be just plain dumb. But if you looked around and did some research you see that browns gas is supposedly not just 2H2 + O2, its supposedly something else which gives it "anamylous" behavior. Also, at <a href="http://www.eagle-research.com/browngas/watergas.html" target="_blank">http://www.eagle-research.com/browngas/watergas.html</a> they state that in their elecrtolizer, not only does H2 and O2 form at the electrodes, like it should. But another gas forms in between the electrodes, i dont know how they do this but this is how they "explain" the strange properties of browns gas.
January 13th, 2002, 02:45 PM
There have been similar experiments with pure water, that is, water whitout any ion in it, thus having ~0 conductivity. If a very high voltage is applied to the electrodes then at a certain point an arc will appear between the electrodes and in the middle of it the water will expand rapidly while emitting bright blue light and then violently imploding again.
They now assume that it's the very rapid atomization of water molecules which after that quickly recombine and release a great deal of energy.
This is theory however.
Edit: you can find more info here: <a href="http://www.powerlabs.org/waterarc.htm" target="_blank">http://www.powerlabs.org/waterarc.htm</a>
[ January 13, 2002: Message edited by: vulture ]</p>
January 14th, 2002, 01:28 AM
I found this on there website;
"This is where we figure the actual Brown's Gas forms (water that has absorbed enough actual electrical energy to become a gas that is not steam).
...My new theory of Brown's gas is 'electrically expanded water.'
...Thus, when the electricity (in the Brown's Gas) is released by the 'flame,' it comes out as electricity and the water 'implodes' to it's original liquid form, with no heat and no expansion first. That's also why the flame is 'cool' yet has high energy effects."
Could'nt it be argued that the cooling effect observed is simply the water molecules formed by the reaction? 2H2(g) + O2(g) --> 2H2O(l)
He also says this later;
"but is instead a special form of WATER; actual water which has had enough electrical energy added to it to form a gas that is NOT
steam (this will make the nay-sayers unhappy again)."
Sounds like water to me.
Did you think I was attacking you earlier?
January 14th, 2002, 05:04 AM
Erm... How can you "add electrical energy to water"? So called electrical energy can only exist in the form of an electrical field (like in a charged capacitor) or magnetical field (like in a superconductive ring), or combinations of both. Pure water is hardly superconductive so you would need a differential of potentials. Does the "Brown's gas" have an anode and a cathode? No. So the only possibility that's left is that it's charged (either positively or negatively) against the surroundings (the bricks that you weld, perhaps?). Then the energy would rather depend on the dielectric used (air), and not the electrode material (Brown's gas). Now everyone go figure how much energy you can "add" to a gallon of water in this way. Perhaps you could fry an ant with that. From the NG's: [quote]
Wiseman himself wrote a while back on a free energy mailing list that a sample of Brown's gas had been run through a mass spectrometer, which showed it to be nothing more than diatomic hydrogen, diatomic oxygen, and water vapor. He then immediately dismissed these results by saying that that sample had not been produced by one of his "high quality" machines, and that his machines produce "real" Brown's gas. ...<hr></blockquote>
January 14th, 2002, 02:48 PM
i think the reason it "implodes" is the way they set it up. In the cylinder there must be a stopper to stop it from exploding, because obviously thats what would happen if you straight ignited H2 and O2, i mean it works well in the shuttle, right? then, the cylinder walls are cold enough for the H2O formed to condense on, thus a great decrease in pressure. So i guess this really is just a sham, thanks guys. I think the bubbles formed in the middle of the electodes was just the water getting so hot from the masive amts of current it was boiling. thats alot of money to pay for a machine that makes hydrogen and oxygen when you could do it yourself in much safer ways
December 22nd, 2002, 10:25 AM
i just found this thread in the forum, while doing some electrolosys research. browns gas sounds like another cold fusion to me.
anyway it prompted me to take a closer look, where i found this site.
<a href="http://www.phact.org/e/bgas.htm" target="_blank">http://www.phact.org/e/bgas.htm</a>
it is basically a series of letters/ reports from pro browners, and people who have proved browns gas is a load of bollocks.
among the more amusing quotes was one from a man who calimed that browns gas really did work and that the reason that these researchers/welders couldn't get browns gas to work was that they were doing it all wrong
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica"> Do not use Sea water. Salt, sodium chloride gas is the result. Very poisonous! </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">now it may jus be me but it sounds like this researcher would know that the gas given off isn't just salt in a gas, its chlorine.
the rest of his letter is complete bullshit (how many l's is that) he mumbles on about biochemical arangements of water and all kinds of crap.
it gets better though, apparently browns gas burns really hot, like a bazillion degrees C
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica"> Provide a hand-held flame with heat release potential 1.5 times that of the surface of the sun </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">lol
anyway further to this one letter from an anonymous researcher (sceptic) who apparently was given a large sum of money by a major corporation to test these claims of browns gas. mentions brown's past, reallife etc
brown was a conman, who spent the 70 and early 80s coaxing money out of little old ladies.
his title of proffesor at the university of life sciences. was real, but the university of life sciences was an establishment created by him and his friend, with them as the only 2 members.
there is much more to this page, and the first letter id definatly worth a read.
as for browns gas, i have a bottle of it sittingo on top of my zero point energy trouser press
December 24th, 2002, 02:08 PM
Wiseman seems to be the most moderate of BG 'researchers', yet give a man enough enough rope and he will hang himself. A website text wise is a lot of rope.
Aside from his laughable 'understanding' of why H2/O2 mixtures expand when combusting, his sloppy measurements of wet gas, his maths being based on 'lift' of a gas, he has the follow statements on his site,
"Also, it's been discovered that when Brown's Gas reforms into water, it is NEW WATER and has some very unique characteristics. It seems that water contains vast amounts of life energy and information, which is erased when it is split apart and re-formed. This new water can be programed to give super-health to those drinking it, plants too. "
On his site at,
<a href="http://www.eagle-research.com/browngas/fabuses/other.html" target="_blank">http://www.eagle-research.com/browngas/fabuses/other.html</a>
This subject has been an amusing read and spotting the mistakes make for good analytical skills.
I'll add only that some very implausable ideas, such as the existance of 2 seperate forms of molecular hydrogen are excepted and understood, and make perfect sense with the physics of molecules. The energy difference between them is very small, and noone will be doing welding with the difference.
I'm off to extract life energy from tapwater to put next to my klein bottle half full of the philosophers stone. zerocrash, I dont suppose youd part with the secret to zero point energy for anything as trivial as money?
December 25th, 2002, 12:15 AM
I was seriously thinking of trying to make a welder with brown's gas, but after reading your responses I'm not so sure.
It's the Eagle research site, I think, that has a video of a brown's gas welder actually working in a lab. The guy was cutting something like 7 inches of steel in a single path and it was a clean cut. Now, I don't know how something like that can be faked.
Come to think of it, I've actually seen this stuff produced, except ours exploded. Anyway, we hooked a whole bunch of powers supplies together and put two big plates of aluminum (I think) in a 5 gallon bucket. I suppose we had about 90 volts DC going into it and a whole lot of current. Well we put a lot of salt into the water to help the conductivity of it. We let it produce the gas for like 4 or 5 hours. Oh yeah there were 2 buckets, one was upside-down on top of the other one and the one on top was probably about half to 3 quarters full with water also. So the top part of the bucket was where the gas could collect. We put a spark plug in the top of the second bucket and used a 10K volt oil burner transformer to light it. This was done in my power tech class so it was indoors. The bucket flew up and hit the ceiling and got blow to pieces and water went everywhere.
I think the gas was probably pressurized at the top of the bucket seeing how it was producing gas for 4 hours and there was no place for the gas to go.
I'm not sure why the mixture didn't implode if that is what it's supposed to do. I don't really understand why the mixture would implode, it seems highly explosive to me.
December 25th, 2002, 05:46 PM
i smell bullshit, and its not me :p
here is my argument against brown gas:
what the fuck? its just this:
2H<sub>2</sub> + O<sub>2</sub> --> 2H<sub>2</sub>O
there is nothing special about it, its simply combustion. the only thing special about browns gas is that it is perfectly balanced. if you had say 6000 more O<sub>2</sub> molecules in 100cc sample of browns gas its not balanced. 6000 molecules is fuck all yet it takes away the only thing unique about the gas. thus it can be concluded as bullshit.
also who says that browns gas is being used in the welder on the video? who's to say its not C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>2</sub> and O<sub>2</sub>?
December 25th, 2002, 08:51 PM
I wish people would stop calling it "Brown's Gas", it just gives credibility to the idiot.
A welder/cutter which burns the stuff is an oxy-hydrogen torch. Come on guys, *everyone* has collected H2 and O2 from electrolised water and burnt it!
vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.