Treehugger - Latest Comments in The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Carre` Little — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 03:19:26 -0000

I don't know if you are still honoring the claim made in this post, it being over three years ago, however i do have a scientific background and am very interested in alternative power sources becoming the norm. I appreciate the idiom nothing ventured is nothing gained. Please reply.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Pete — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 09:10:41 -0000

> turning lead into gold

Been done:
http://chemistry.about.com/...

Just because something is preposterous doesn't mean it's impossible.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Tini Maya — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 08:59:26 -0000

"A Joe Cell is an electrolytic capacitor", absolutely wrong!
The Joe Cell is a kind of magnifying lens that focus surrounding energy and transmits it to the combustion chamber, where by the ignition spark a implosion of the air is triggered. This is a different kind of alternative science and free energy technology as the Stanley Meyer Cell.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

papa_joe — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 14:32:04 -0000

If it works it is not actually perpetual motion or but it my well be free energy. We know now that the planet earth actually is a giant power generator. As such, it should be possible to develop a way to tap into all that power. All the physics books are being re-written to reflect the new discoveries involving light transmission; maybe a few other "Laws of Physics will soon be proven to be in error?

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Kevin — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 01:29:10 -0000

Maybe it's possible to make a silk purse from a sow's ear after all!!! LOL

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

White Hawk — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 07:15:46 -0000

Absolute rubbish!

What makes it all the more insulting (and it is wholly and unashamedly insulting to anyone with an ounce of intelligence) is the sheer amount of erroneous detail surrounding so-called 'successful applications' of the device.

Not only does the proposed function of the device disobey a fundamental law of physics, but several of the observations made by proponents are so obviously fictitious.

I can't quite figure out who's being duped, or where the scam is. Perhaps this is an experiment to see just how dumbfoundingly stupid the average internet user is - a practical measure of global gullibility.

I would put this device in the same column as colloidal silver, Scientology, turning lead into gold, and Santa, then file it away with all the other preposterous things that any intelligent adult would be daft to entertain.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

matt — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:20:00 -0000

this 'joe cell' topic is interesting, the laws of science and every other law that humanity has invented tells us that extracting energy from magnetic waves flowing through sub-space is impossible. i have my doubts about this device too, and isnt it convenient that no one has actual proof that the device works, the person was either killed, gone missing, or the unit died. and the online stores that sell the product to consumers have NO return policy, so that the oil companies cant find them, also how convenient that if the product doesnt work, you just lost 500 dollars! www.joecellenergy.com is the online store.

i also have an open mind, and at the moment my mind is saying to me, 'well it could work, but then again it couldnt.' exactly what they want you to think. but, who is to say that humans have explored and designed all of the laws of physics, motion and science. i still believe that there is a lot we still need to learn, and only believing what science is allowing us to beleive is one reason why we arent developing to a great extent, and why the planet is dying, and why we, as a dominant species, are stagnant.

i havn't tried making this device yet, but i will, and when i do make it i will tell people if it worked or not, none of the garbage that you see on the web.

thats my opinion, there has to be more laws out there that we havent discovered, and then maybe everything doesnt have to relate to science and physics.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Thinker Hardyg — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 09:09:15 -0000

Steve Duvall says:

"... and 100,000 snake oil men/ women. ..."

Bit off topic, but ... Another irony that teaches us a lot about how humans think: While it is well possible that this saying came into being because of businessmen trying to sell crap using the name "snake oil" (following a kind of new-age trend), snake oil is a perfectly normal, long-known substance in Chinese medicine. It contains healthy substances in high concentration and is used to treat arthritis.

It's the same with "vandalism". Some church guy coined that word without thinking and publicly regretted it later, because the vandals were quite civilized and humane in contrast to other 'conquerer-types'.

To not fall for this misconceptions requires research, not thinking "vandals are mentioned in that word "vandalism", you know, so they must have been very violent."

Be sceptical, be open-minded (no contradiction, you know!), do your own research, honor truth! Distancing from truth creates false realities that lead to a waste of effort/energy/lives.

PS: I hate the words from X-Files "I want to believe!". It has a weird notion. Either you believe something or you don't, but not believing but wanting to, that's like a deep unfulfilled desire for religious guidance. Better alternative: "I want to know!". Even better: "I want to understand!". Experienced with many comments here: "I believe whatever I want to believe!"

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Phil Bailey — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 07:26:11 -0000

Although not a scientist, I've tried to read some of the scientific studies that the Joe Cell sites link out to in an effort to explain the phenomena and have more questions about stuff that I am led to believe are already known. Like how a state of ionization can be transmitted through solid matter, causing other atoms to ionize in a like manner. Or, why the reconstitution of hydroxyl and hydronium ions (back into water) by an electrical stream (ignition at 70 degrees before top dead center? -or perhaps a discharge between the ions themselves, like cloud lightning?) causes a vacuum. Or where the energy comes from in cavitation that damages the low pressure side of ship propellers and impeller blades and why it can be picked up on sonar. Or why a charge can be measured from water vapor surrounding a water fall (I read about this in connection with unexplained tanker explosions when tanks were being steam cleaned). If these things are true, as absolutely weird as they seem to me, then I don't see how the Joe Cell 'phenomena' can be dismissed. Some of the above are regarded as nuisances and the reason for them is ignored unless they're a problem. So was oil when it was first discovered. It was polluting farmers' water wells in PA. For any of you that have read any of the Joe Cell stuff, recall that Joe had originally thought it was the hydrogen gas that was being burned from the electrolysis process. He stumbled upon the the purported magnetic (?) effects by accident - he plugged it into the manifold pre-heater port, not a vacuum port.

It is an imperative of the human brain to cut out stuff that doesn't seem important in an effort to make sense of it's surroundings. All the scientists I've heard about I think are human. We may be throwing the baby out with the bath water in our assumptions about our fuel sources.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Anonymous — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 22:10:27 -0000

I built one and am testing it.

Measuring input.

Measuring and calculating output.

Reading everything in sight.

My friends also built units and are testing theirs.

3rd and 4th generations already.

In awhile we'll know if it is worth the time and investment.

Will you?

JR

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

CompressionIgnitionAddict — Thu, 29 May 2008 14:27:40 -0000

The reason you cant buy this in the states I'm told is it's illegal. Any major country that stands to make tons of money from oil, has made this product illegal. I've also been told that Canda mandates this on most Tractors used for transporting goods... dont know if the latter is true or not. I dont know if this idea will work or not, but me and a buddy are giving it a shot. For under$100 to try it out, it's worth it. Heck $100 wont fill my tank anyways. I'm willing to try it out. Might need a large unit to feed 365 C.I. with a turbocharger, but I'll try...

I would like to hear from people who have actually tried it. Most people claiming they know it wont work, are probably completely clueless on how a motor works anyways. I dont care about physics. I've been told a lot of things that I couldn't do, I enjoy proving people wrong.

If you want to see someone bend the rules of physics and most important gravity... google search some videos of James "bubba" stewart and watch that kid ride his dirtbike.... tell me how he does it, because I dont understand...

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Herman — Thu, 29 May 2008 13:13:20 -0000

Flying Machines? Call the mental hospital.

Voices Thru The Air? Call the mental hospital.

Atom Bombs? Call the mental hospital.

Electricity? Call the mental hospital.

Ships that travel underwater? Call the mental hospital.

The theme is ALWAYS the same.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Wise Guy — Wed, 28 May 2008 22:16:21 -0000

Most of these responses remind me of that commercial where someone dressed as an aristocrat from Columbus' era states

"The world is definitely flat".

We all (well most of us) know how that turned out.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

bob anderson — Fri, 23 May 2008 14:12:38 -0000

tell him to put up or shut up.

8 billion people

2 billion use FF transportation. ( those 2 mil are in trouble , no?)

and 100,000 snake oil men/ women.

no time to review them all , just tell them send it to me and shut up until i test it.

see?

if they can't produce a sample then it is not real.

next, only 99,000 left to go.

RIP.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Steve Duvall — Wed, 21 May 2008 01:15:30 -0000

Ok try to think outside the box people, I well versed in the laws of physics but the point you are all missing is the energy stored in one atom of hydrogen when released is greater than that is used to separate it from oxygen.

We are talking 3 times more energy it is the in efficiency of how we exploit the energy of hydrogen, and the fact that keeping the hydrogen separated from the oxygen molecules that keeps you inside the BOX!

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

officialtester08 — Sun, 18 May 2008 10:21:12 -0000

Unlike the rest of you, I am actually going to try the experiment BEFORE I denounce the results. BTW, did you know, the world is flat.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Dell — Fri, 16 May 2008 11:00:24 -0000

you don't have to believe if you want to warren mclaren people with such narrow minds are hopeless or just jealous what other did

Why is it that the "widest minds" have the "narrowest grasp" of how express themselves?

Remember- If it's written on the internet, it MUST be true.

"Mythbusters is bullshit. The truth is coming out." YIKES! What a nit wit...

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

rommel — Mon, 12 May 2008 08:58:04 -0000

you don't have to believe if you want to warren mclaren people with such narrow minds are hopeless or just jealous what other did

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

John Melville — Mon, 05 May 2008 21:09:53 -0000

I would like to paraphrase Dr. Stephen Barrett, operator of www.quackwatch.com.

Lets presume that the inventors of this machine are right. It produces an unending supply of energy from a previously unknown source. Its clean, its green, and it will power the word for as long as we need it to.

The inventor has two options.

1. Patent the thing and then perform a controlled study or demonstration, in public and refereed by reputable scientists. (Probably have to do this a few times because the referees you really want won't come to the first demonstration.) Following this route leads to international acclaim, ulbelievable wealth (through patent licensing), and at least the nobel prize in physics but maybe peace too depending on how liberal your licensing is.

2. Sell plans of this invention on the internet for $50 a copy. This gets you $50 for every succer that believes in your idea, not counting the ones who pirate it off their friends.

One would have to believe that anyone smart enough to really invent the thing is smart enough to pick option one over option two. Unless, of course the invention doesn't work -- in which case option two is the only choice. Apparently option two isn't that bad either.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Joe Green — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:48:56 -0000

All the markings of a scam, and we saw this sort of thing back in 1981 when gas prices were high as well.

They aren't selling cars, or even a generator for the gas. They are selling PLANS on how to make one. Since most people can't even screw in a light bulb without professional help, they can count on selling lots of PLANS and never having to worry about people actually building one and finding it out doesn't work as advertised.

Does the concept "work"? Theoretically, you can separate hydrogen and oxygen through electrolysis. Storing them together as a combined gas is very dangerous, as it is basically an explosive at this point. One spark and it will make the Hindenberg look like a campfire (because most of the flame on the Hindenberg was the covering, not the hydrogen - without a lot of oxygen, it is hard to combust.

So, assuming you can use this gas and burn it without blowing yourself up. Then why not? Well, because the cost of making hydrogen through electrolysis is far more than $4 a galllon we presently pay fo gasoline. In addition, storing gases is not easy. You'd have to compress it (explosion hazard again) and build a high pressure storage cell (heavy) and even then, your range might be 5 miles or so.

All the "free energy" scan artists have several things in common: They are looknig for "investors" or selling "plans" rather than sellnig product. They claim the "big oil companies and the government" are trying to suppress them. They never come to market with a product, although they promise one "any day now".

Search on compressed air automobiles - that was the last one of these deals.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Dane — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:22:52 -0000

Why is nobody saying the obvious? Just show us proof! I don't care what laws it defies...just drive your "Joe car" over to my house, honk the horn, and I'll come out and go for a ride with you. But until that happens, none of us should be so foolish as to take a $50 "instruction guide" ride.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Dane — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:22:06 -0000

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

Jilliaan Wesley — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 22:07:23 -0000

I read this with excitment as they were doing experiments with this type of technology at my former university in Belgium.

I must ask if anyone here who was so quick to call 'hoax' made any attempt to explore this themselves?

I know that it is much more simple to say something is a hoax than to explore it. These devices can be created for very little cost and with very little knowledge. It does require patience to get them to work but I have a lawn mower and small tractor running on this technology. I have also been able to get a truck working using something very similar to this Joe Cell yet do not keep it connected due to local laws.

If anyone out there with a scientific background would like to explore this please contact me. It is so sad to see so many people call something a hoax without exploring it themselves. I would be happy to donate a test unit and/or the money required to make one to anyone with a serious interest in exploring alternative energies.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

mike — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:05:28 -0000

There once was a thing called a Null hypothesis

it had a friend called the Alternate Hypothesis

if the null hypothesis was rejected you had an opinion, if it was accepted you had an opinion, but these were not a truth, statistical is all......... All science is based on these friends. Once upon a time there were only white swans, but one day someone saw a black one, did that mean it was new to existence?.... Maybe, or maybe it just had never been discovered/reported/noticed/affected or conceived before.

A scientist rejects nothing except to their peril. Even Einstein fudged results to save himself ignominy from the scientific community about one of his ideas, Stephen Hawking made reparation to create the proof so killing steady state theory for universe against nothing before allowing POSSIBILITY of DOG! Dodge that possibility doubters...lol.... a zeroith god... hmmmm This is great debate, test and discover,do it for yourselves, that is what makes scientists and humans.

Re: The Joe Cell — A Fuel-less Energy Source?

mike — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:01:17 -0000

There once was a thing called a Null hypothesis

it had a friend called the Alternate Hypothesis