Manufacture torch hydrogen or Brown's Gas

[izentrop]

extract of Brown's gas from the Quanthomme site ...
delirious old women? Unless you have invented from scratch the names, the places, the companies concerned, which must have archives which relate these experiences.

Only elements that are likely to be true, because we can not verify and this site is not scientific but knowledgeable in rumors, conspiracy theories, surunitary tricks and myths of all kinds.

[moinsdewatt]

I still search information on the brown gas; I read one day in a confidential website that the gas would clean brown radio activity; Vacuum?

I once read on a site that cervesia had abused cervoise.

[Janic]

Only things that are likely to be true,

Why? because there are specific names (it could very well have been invented while you were there!)

because we can not verify and this site is not scientific but knowledgeable in rumors, conspiracy theories, surunitary tricks and myths of all kinds.

christophe knows this site better than the two of us and without it, it is very likely that the Pantone / Gillier system would still be in the shade. Finally, he (the site) does not transmit rumors, but information of which he is not the author, but the transmitter. That sources are not reliable, even fanciful, the goal is not to credit them with a kind of imprimatur, it is for the readers to make their choice and to believe, to experiment (when possible ) or not.

[Cervesia]

Janic: the 'old woman' thank you! it makes me a new track of work and research! c 1ère well the time that makes me a constructed response and not necessarily negative!

it reminds me tesla research that supposedly do not work except for American capitalists ....

[Capt_Maloche]

Yes but no
there is in this text no technical information, therefore nothing more admissible than an article taken from a novel.

Besides, on this subject, what is the composition of brown gas?
What I have read on this for a while only presents an electrolyser to dissociate H2 and O2, enough to make a good blowtorch, which I propose to do on this topic this said by the way, with a little security.

[Janic]

there is no technical information in this text, therefore nothing more admissible than a article from a novel.

Our world is made up of heaps of observed things, the explanation of which never arrives or many years later. example gravity, the gyroscope, the northern lights, etc ... moreover, in a novel one does not quote names, institutions, companies which can sue for defamation. Simpler and more effective, discredit the "inventor" by this kind of reflection which refrains from seeking possible credibility. (read the case of Pantone)

Besides, on this subject, what is the composition of brown gas?

Read the whole subject on quanthomme, its anti-irradiation side, or blowtorch (which does not correspond to the thermal behavior of conventional blowtorches) is not the only characteristic, plus its accessible patents.

What I have read on this for a while only presents an electrolyser to dissociate H2 and O2, enough to make a good blowtorch, which I propose to do on this topic this said by the way, with a little security.

That, at least, it is not a priori denigration as underlined above, as well as those in the article and which I underlined.

idea too bizarre to be accepted.
it is almost certain that Brown will have as much difficulty convincing academic pontiffs only when he presented the non-explosive qualities of his gas.
Nevertheless Atomic Energy of Canada Limited which, finding the case of Yull Brown interesting, takes into consideration and included in its environmental work directives, the transmutation of nuclear waste. (announcement effect?)

Elsewhere :
Brown's gas is already used to process radioactive waste, but official science does not want it.
In August 1991, Australia, Brown was successful experiments on samples of 60 Cobalt, Strontium 90 and 241 Americium: radioactivity was reduced to 60 90%.
Taken literally by the Chinese, the director of Baotou introduced Brown in another institute, the 202, specializing in nuclear, who wrote (in Chinese) for Norinco report on these experiences. The report referred to a radioactivity of 70% reduction.
Back in the USA, in June 1992, Brown repeated the same type of experiments in front of Dzaikich, Ennis, and Lee Peterson, reporter for the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. This newspaper published on June 26 an illustrated article titled: "A modern alchemist? A strange science. This inventor says he can reduce radioactivity. Experts disagree".
Peterson wrote: "Brown placed a strip of americium under the flame for two minutes on a brick with small pieces of steel and aluminum. After melting, the metals emitted a flash which caused Brown to say that the radioactivity was destroyed. Before the experiment, americium (which comes from plutonium) emitted 16.000 curies per minute. It emitted only 100 afterwards, which is the value of the radioactivity naturally present in the laboratory before the experiment ".
I doubt you have enough to tinker with these experiences in your garage.

[izentrop]

Hello,

Brown's gas is just a non-stoichiometric H2 + O2 mixture

We say Oxyhydrogen rather, right?
"non-stoichiometric" because depleted in oxygen to avoid the oxidizing flame, right?

I self-respond because the difference just tilted me, it's electrolysis.

In one case, oxygen and hydrogen are separated and purified. The gases are only in contact at the last moment and can be dosed independently to obtain the ideal, non-oxidizing flame. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxyhydrog ... og.C3.A8ne

In the case of Brown's gas, the gases are not separated and it is hyper-dangerous because the slightest petal goes wrong and everything explodes, hence the need to produce it on demand.
Some call it HHO.

Edenguard has not posted this video here, it seems to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eoRzHQb-AI

[Capt_Maloche]

That's it,
when you do an electrolysis, your mixture of H2 and O2 is perfect, the law of perfect gases also applies suddenly to combustion, moreover the flame does not need to fetch oxidizing elements in the environment where it is located. I think we have to stop calling this mixture Brown's gas, it's just the production of an electrolysis of water.

unlike separate bi-gas torches where the whole problem is to ensure the most homogeneous mixture.

On the video, the flow is clearly insufficient to make a solder

AH yes, and it seems to me that it is possible to reduce the radio elements by heating the materials, a bit like magnets when they are heated

Basically, nothing magic in all this seems to me

[izentrop]

it seems to me that it is possible to reduce the radio elements by heating the materials, a bit like the magnets when we heat them

For the permanent magnet, the curie point is the temperature or it loses its magnetization, but for the radioelement, what do you mean by that?

[Janic]

capt maloche hello

On the video, the flow is clearly insufficient to make a solder

This solder does not make up the possibilities of Brown's "real" gas. Take the time to examine the set of documents on this one such as welding a rod on a refractory brick, not possible with oxy-acetylene torches, or passing your hand under the flame without being burned, etc ... more the other properties of this gas.
In addition, there is indeed separation of H and O since it re-mixes them at a critical threshold which avoids the explosion, (which it explains in what you did not give yourself time to read, he seems to)

AH yes, and it seems to me that it is possible to reduce the radio elements by heating the materials, a bit like magnets when they are heated

Even if it was only that, when we see that the so-called competent services prefer to bury rather than neutralize this radioactivity, we are entitled to ask ourselves: why?

Basically, nothing magic in all this seems to me

who talks about magic? It is simply physics whose application had not been made previously, either out of ignorance or because the system is really innovative.