Tweet
Hi Doc
I take it that you weren't particularly impressed by my take on things then.
Joking apart, as I said, my main focus of attention is in the electrolysis of water without applying an external current - and the key to this is (step one) the efficient ionisation of the water. However, the specific COP figure is of little interest to me at this time, because whatever this figure is, I would expect it to be far better than standard electrolysis.
Woopy and JD achieve similar results with there blocking oscillators and JT hybrid ccts at unknown COP (you should probably take a look). And to me it is the fact that you are all getting electrolysis to occur through these little ccts that is of greatest interest. Getting the water to ionise is the key, and you all seem to be achieving this, with single transmission lines or wirelessly.
Once you have induced the water to ionise with the electric field produced by you SEC (blocking osc, JT hybrid or whatever), then no more energy is required for electrolysis to take place. You just need the right components and the right configuration providing somewhere for the resulting ions to exchange charges. Hence, I would not expect to see the SEC supply current change to any great degree once electrolysis is occuring. If you don't provide anywhere for charges to exchange, then they will just continually reform as H2O, then ionise H+, OH-, then reform as H2O, etc, etc. The SEC is continually providing this energy.
The first link on the reply post, 'Simple Electrolysis While Producing Light', is effectively the concept behind my Closed-Loop Electrolyser.
To my way of thinking you are inducing the water to ionise via your SEC. You are also providing a charge exchange bridge in the form of the diodes and LED closed cct.
OH- ions will want to drop the electron, while H+ ions (H3O+) will want to gain an electron in order to form atoms. The diode set-up allows this to happen by only allowing current to flow one way. And of course the current as it flows to and from the water will light up the LEDs as it goes. It's a little current generator.
None of this stuff is in text books, but it all makes sense the more you look into it... and if - contrary to popular science - you accept that water can be ionised without an external current flow.
Have you actually confirmed that it will work with diodes with carbon leads?
I don't think hydrogen output would be any higher, but with inert leads you should get oxygen also instead of SnO, plus there would be less consumables to worry about.
Curious, does this not work with a single diode, with glass body out of the water and leads in? The reaction of the tin coating will confuse the issue, but if the water is being ionised then a single diode with the leads attached to carbon rods or ss wire should also work as this too will provide a charge exchange bridge.
Like Lord Kelvins Water Dropper Experiment, only a very slight difference in charge concentration can produce extremely good results.
It is also interesting to note that tuning is important. If a specific frequency provides the best results in ionising the water, why does the body of water itself affect the result?
I too don't wish to clutter up your thread Doc, as I'm no doubt seeing things from a different point of view to yourself. I just thought another perspective might be helpful. Certainly a lot of research on this forum is on a parallel course and it's only a matter of time before we all meet up.
I take it that you weren't particularly impressed by my take on things then.
Joking apart, as I said, my main focus of attention is in the electrolysis of water without applying an external current - and the key to this is (step one) the efficient ionisation of the water. However, the specific COP figure is of little interest to me at this time, because whatever this figure is, I would expect it to be far better than standard electrolysis.
Woopy and JD achieve similar results with there blocking oscillators and JT hybrid ccts at unknown COP (you should probably take a look). And to me it is the fact that you are all getting electrolysis to occur through these little ccts that is of greatest interest. Getting the water to ionise is the key, and you all seem to be achieving this, with single transmission lines or wirelessly.
Once you have induced the water to ionise with the electric field produced by you SEC (blocking osc, JT hybrid or whatever), then no more energy is required for electrolysis to take place. You just need the right components and the right configuration providing somewhere for the resulting ions to exchange charges. Hence, I would not expect to see the SEC supply current change to any great degree once electrolysis is occuring. If you don't provide anywhere for charges to exchange, then they will just continually reform as H2O, then ionise H+, OH-, then reform as H2O, etc, etc. The SEC is continually providing this energy.
The first link on the reply post, 'Simple Electrolysis While Producing Light', is effectively the concept behind my Closed-Loop Electrolyser.
To my way of thinking you are inducing the water to ionise via your SEC. You are also providing a charge exchange bridge in the form of the diodes and LED closed cct.
OH- ions will want to drop the electron, while H+ ions (H3O+) will want to gain an electron in order to form atoms. The diode set-up allows this to happen by only allowing current to flow one way. And of course the current as it flows to and from the water will light up the LEDs as it goes. It's a little current generator.
None of this stuff is in text books, but it all makes sense the more you look into it... and if - contrary to popular science - you accept that water can be ionised without an external current flow.
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.
I don't think hydrogen output would be any higher, but with inert leads you should get oxygen also instead of SnO, plus there would be less consumables to worry about.
Curious, does this not work with a single diode, with glass body out of the water and leads in? The reaction of the tin coating will confuse the issue, but if the water is being ionised then a single diode with the leads attached to carbon rods or ss wire should also work as this too will provide a charge exchange bridge.
Like Lord Kelvins Water Dropper Experiment, only a very slight difference in charge concentration can produce extremely good results.
It is also interesting to note that tuning is important. If a specific frequency provides the best results in ionising the water, why does the body of water itself affect the result?
I too don't wish to clutter up your thread Doc, as I'm no doubt seeing things from a different point of view to yourself. I just thought another perspective might be helpful. Certainly a lot of research on this forum is on a parallel course and it's only a matter of time before we all meet up.
Here is a way to increase gas output.I have been using Slayers exciter but it should work for Dr Stifflers Sec exciters too.Hope this helps.Jonny.
Comment