High Voltage from Thin Air?

[DrStiffler]

@Dr. Stiffler--- I ran the experiment again using four diodes this time and it worked like you said it would with no additional draw but more gas production. This time I did take a look at the frequency and I am at 8.33 mhz--not exactlly where I should be. I could not get my crude setup to resonate at the frequency you indicated. My L3 may not be right. It did work enough to show the effect however and I consider it a success.

Here is the video of the experiment:

YouTube - SEC four diode electrolysis experiment.ASF

Lidmotor

@lidmotor
Another great job with the replication.
I totally blew past me that you were using the 15-3 design. You might want to connect your 18-1e and see what takes place withe the frequency. Connect L3 via the load adjustment capacitor on the 18-1e.

For all that are not clear on electrolysis, a good place to start is here Electrolysis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia all is important so study it all, yet the water section is at the bottom of the page. One can move on from here and search for other methods.Be sure one understands that this is not the typical sledge hammer on a thumb tack approach to electrolysis, its more like tickling mother nature with a feather.

[DrStiffler]

Before we went home

Dr. Conrad gave me permission to tell the story of the day.

While taking stills of various SGGS setups Conrad went pale. He looked over at the cell I had just photographed and ask if it was new. I told him it was one he had not yet seen. He looked closer, then closer and jumped to his feet an ran from the lab, shouting out equations, '1+1=3 4/2=5, 10+10=21' and on and on as his voice trailed off with his exit.

He is home and recovering nicely, all will be well in magic city.

If you go to the Stiffler Scientific web site a on the home page move to the bottom to see the picture I refer to. This picture will be added to the document so look there if it is no longer on the home page.

[redrichie]

Can anyone please enlighten me as to what the Plumes/clouds of "stuff" are in the bottom most picture @stiffler scientific? Very interesting.

[ashtweth]

@lidmotor
Another great job with the replication.
I totally blew past me that you were using the 15-3 design. You might want to connect your 18-1e and see what takes place withe the frequency. Connect L3 via the load adjustment capacitor on the 18-1e.

For all that are not clear on electrolysis, a good place to start is here Electrolysis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia all is important so study it all, yet the water section is at the bottom of the page. One can move on from here and search for other methods.Be sure one understands that this is not the typical sledge hammer on a thumb tack approach to electrolysis, its more like tickling mother nature with a feather.

Great demonstration of the capacity we have in the open source community, as soon as the video went up, Lid jumped over the fence and posted it to back up encase they tried to remove the Doc's. Well done Lid and its personally great for me to see the Doc back. These vids will be great to show the scientific community that they dont know every thing about electrolysis, in fact it fits perfect on the new steorn production we are doing, gonna pay our dues and try this and post soon too guys.
Thanks Doc/Lid and ALL.

Ash

[marxist]

your photo of two diodes in series

Hello Dr. Stiffler,
thank you for continuing to openly publish your work.

Regarding the photograph of the two diodes in series:
It seems that with two diodes in series you get more than double the gas?

Would it then make sense to try and connect diodes in a tree structure?
Kind of "replicating a tree" - after all what is a tree, if not a structure of connected diodes, located in an electro-magnetic field?

Just got that idea while looking at your photo. Thanks again.

[rave154]

Dr stiffler & Lidmotor, fascinating stuff guys.... can eaither or both of you confirm that when moving from using only 1 diode to 4 diodes that there is noi increase in current drawn that the exciter is pulling from the battery?

[oldie]

On the bench

Welcome again Dr. Stiffler,
And hello to all members

I'm a little away from most of replicators as I have not been able to access or work on this until few weeks ago, and wanted to read and understand as much as possible (maybe not too much ;-) this took me some time.

I already replicated some of your work (Easy as I have 18 x board) and will try to follow your latest experiments, I hope it translates you the interest many of us have in your knowledge, not only in your country but as far (in many senses) as the (today)crazy Spain

I'll try to send photos, (have no video now) I understand that replications helps you.
Thank you from a curious mind
Ricardo

@all, please excuse my English, I know it's far from perfect

[DrStiffler]

Can anyone please enlighten me as to what the Plumes/clouds of "stuff" are in the bottom most picture @stiffler scientific? Very interesting.

@redrichie
It's metal from diode lead. Please read back a few posts, it is discussed.

[DrStiffler]

Dr stiffler & Lidmotor, fascinating stuff guys.... can eaither or both of you confirm that when moving from using only 1 diode to 4 diodes that there is noi increase in current drawn that the exciter is pulling from the battery?

@rave154
The current does not increase. The current may increase. Now are you confused enough?

Think of the container as containing a finite amount of energy being excited by the coupling band. So long as you do not disturb the resonate properties to the extent that you shift the frequency of L3, you can utilize all available within the container without effect back into the exciter.

Is there gain involved? Well to evolve 18ml of water into gas with less than 2.7W input to the exciter would show that, would it not?

Remember this is not a direct charge transfer circuit of electrons from the power source (exciter+battery) to the cell. We have help from the water medium itself.

[DrStiffler]

Hello Dr. Stiffler,
thank you for continuing to openly publish your work.

Regarding the photograph of the two diodes in series:
It seems that with two diodes in series you get more than double the gas?

Would it then make sense to try and connect diodes in a tree structure?
Kind of "replicating a tree" - after all what is a tree, if not a structure of connected diodes, located in an electro-magnetic field?

Just got that idea while looking at your photo. Thanks again.

@marxist
I'll tray to answer all in a single combined response.

You increase gas production by adding single diodes (like lidmotor did with the four). Of course as more are added be sure that tuning is checked and adjusted as required because the loading shifts the frequency of L3.

Adding diodes in series does not increase gas production. The reason I showed this is to show something totally different. Study the polarities of the diodes and the gas release points. Think to yourself how one end of the connecting wire between the diodes is (-) and the other end is (+) to the extend that we can obtain what is shown. Granted this makes total sense for the two leads of a diode that is rectifying RF AC, where each end will present its respective polarity. What makes no sense is that this is maintained by a single wire as displayed. I was hoping by showing this that some of the lurkers would stick their necks out and makes some bold meaningless conventional remarks.

[rave154]

Dr,

thanks for the reply, interesting.

as the gas produce increases and therefore the water level goes down.....from a given set amount of water....... does this change in anyway the "settings" needed for optimum H production?

even if it does....it wouldnt be too difficult a job to keep the water level to a set level...using a sensor to switch extra water into the chamber as it gets depleted.

In your opinion, is this whole thing looking promising in terms of wattage IN....compared to "eventual" wattage out via burning the gas?

thanks

[Farrah Day]

Hi Doc

Some good stuff going on here.

If I can be so bold and... stick my neck out...

I've followed your research with fascination for some time now, but as electrolysis has always been my first and main area of interest, I've never really applied myself fully to your SEC ccts. However, it seems now that our respective research is heading in a similar direction, and I see a good possibility that we will at some point converge.

For a long time I've always suspected that we do not require an external current flow to achieve electrolysis of water, and indeed that we can break the electrolysis of water down into three distinct steps:

Ionisation of the water molecule
Separation of the ionic species
Evolution of hydrogen and oxygen via a charge exchange medium

Woopy on the Joule Thief and Variants, thread appears to be achieving something similar to your electrolysis via a single transmission line finishing in an AV plug.

What I feel is happening is that you are encouraging the water to ionise by the energy of the pulsing electric field, just like Woopy with his JT variant. However, you are both dipping diodes in the water, which unlike the relatively inert stainless steel that electrolyser builders tend to use as electrodes, your tinned leads will react directly with the hydronium (H3O+).

Hydronium is quite acidic and will readily attack the tin coating on the diode leads.

Normally there would not be enough ionic species in the water to react with the leads, but if you are inducing greater ionisation then reactions will occur.

Ultimately I suspect the following to be taking place:

Sn + H2O → SnO + 2 H

Though you are effectively consuming the tin in your application, from my point of view your results add much credence to the idea that we can in fact cause water to ionise without the need for drawing a heavy external current through it.

[DrStiffler]

Dr,

thanks for the reply, interesting.

as the gas produce increases and therefore the water level goes down.....from a given set amount of water....... does this change in anyway the "settings" needed for optimum H production?

even if it does....it wouldnt be too difficult a job to keep the water level to a set level...using a sensor to switch extra water into the chamber as it gets depleted.

In your opinion, is this whole thing looking promising in terms of wattage IN....compared to "eventual" wattage out via burning the gas?

thanks

@rave154

as the gas produce increases and therefore the water level goes down.....from a given set amount of water....... does this change in anyway the "settings" needed for optimum H production?

Of course it does. Take any standard configuration and drop the water level and expose less of the plate surfaces to the process and your production and loading will change. This process is no different. You will have to maintain a water level as is (or should be) with conventional processes.

Remember the electrostatic field is affected by the size of the excitation ring, the container, the water and the diodes. In fact if you use tap water the loading is changed as the crud is precipitated out. One the correct conditions are established you want to maintain them.

In your opinion, is this whole thing looking promising in terms of wattage IN....compared to "eventual" wattage out via burning the gas?

Except of two other processes I know of by other researchers and still not accepted by current science, Hydrogen is considered to be a storage media for energy, produced at a loss. You can approach 100% with the conventional direction, yet not totally (IMO).

The other two processes I mentioned are at low voltage and below the thermal neutral point, although to the best of my knowledge from the material I have seen they do not ramp up well at all and still remain in development to get to a useful point.

Don't miss the very important point of SGGS, it is wireless, this alone reduces loss via resistance in wire connections and heating of the batteries, wires and electrolyte (even though in conventional electrolysis a certain amount of heat aids the process).

Is SGGS able to produce more energy via H2 than is used by the Exciters? Well the Exciters have a CEC>1 when properly tuned.

[DrStiffler]

Hi Doc

Some good stuff going on here.

If I can be so bold and... stick my neck out...

I've followed your research with fascination for some time now, but as electrolysis has always been my first and main area of interest, I've never really applied myself fully to your SEC ccts. However, it seems now that our respective research is heading in a similar direction, and I see a good possibility that we will at some point converge.

For a long time I've always suspected that we do not require an external current flow to achieve electrolysis of water, and indeed that we can break the electrolysis of water down into three distinct steps:

Ionisation of the water molecule
Separation of the ionic species
Evolution of hydrogen and oxygen via a charge exchange medium

Woopy on the Joule Thief and Variants, thread appears to be achieving something similar to your electrolysis via a single transmission line finishing in an AV plug.

What I feel is happening is that you are encouraging the water to ionise by the energy of the pulsing electric field, just like Woopy with his JT variant. However, you are both dipping diodes in the water, which unlike the relatively inert stainless steel that electrolyser builders tend to use as electrodes, your tinned leads will react directly with the hydronium (H3O+).

Hydronium is quite acidic and will readily attack the tin coating on the diode leads.

Normally there would not be enough ionic species in the water to react with the leads, but if you are inducing greater ionisation then reactions will occur.

Ultimately I suspect the following to be taking place:

Sn + H2O → SnO + 2 H

Though you are effectively consuming the tin in your application, from my point of view your results add much credence to the idea that we can in fact cause water to ionise without the need for drawing a heavy external current through it.

@Farrah Day

Woopy on the Joule Thief and Variants, thread appears to be achieving something similar to your electrolysis via a single transmission line finishing in an AV plug.

Maybe (Woopy) should look at the three following videos so time is not spent duplicating work.
YouTube - A Simple Electrolysis Cell While Producing Light
YouTube - Worlds FIRST Wireless Electrolyzer #2
YouTube - Spatial Energy Coherence - Electrolysis #1
I do not follow the JT work as I (at this time) do not believe it can produce a CEC>1 and I base this on no evidence that the UWB spectrum is present.

FYI the reduction of the metal transfer if corrected by utilization of carbon leads exiting the diodes and being bonded by the glass itself. The is then no interaction with the metals and the process is much more efficient. Of course these diodes are not available on the market and will have to be developed, although for our research and that of others that wish to look into it for the sake of the ultimate outcome can fashion with care such test devices with for example pencil leads.

[jonnydavro]

Hi Dr Stiffler and all I tried this with Slayers exciter and it works too.Also with a wireless reciever.
I posted a vid here if your interested as i dont want to clutter your thread .
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...riants-22.html
Thanks for sharing your experiment Dr Stiffler and it is good to see you posting again.jonny