New Stan Meyer replication

[jonabel1971]

Money taints

Hey, I already posted my plans and videos for free, to show a different behavior than DC electrolysis - what more do you want? As for Aaron's advice, you will not find any "Nitrogen technology" by Stan Meyer online. If Aaron DOES have some sort of hidden Meyer's technology, then what is he doing here on the discussions? - It looks like twice he had tried to kill discussion of Meyer's Hydrogen technology - by deflecting attention to Nitrogen gas - and then not elaborating on the technology. Aaron is full of crap - he is paid for the lies and abuse he spews. Argon gas was one of the non-combustible gases that Stan spoke of, too - does that mean I should interrupt and discredit OTHER people's attempts at Meyer's technology? Believe who you want, but I don't get a cent for giving away my work. Also, anybody can write a book full of nonsense - its called science fiction. So, I don't try to misinform - just to get a book sold. I'm not doing this for money, so again, who is tainted?

IT is so hard to learn new stuff when you dont know who to believe.
If you do something and it works ,please share ,if it dosen't work..why waste your time ?
Can't the same thing be acheived by, two different methods? Or even several?
We need to use variations ,experimentation,...If you run your set-up through water ,..do you get this vapour , as a free bi-product?
So many things need to be combined together
shylo

[Jeff Pearson]

@ Kenssurplus. Stan gives lots of leeway. He used flat plates also. I guess my sticky point is the flame rate is adjusted for use in existing machinery. He did this many different ways, hence the 50+ patents. Retrofit fuel HHO is not until it is adjusted.

[mikrovolt]

The thread was started by Jon Abel who is working on a specific part of the water fuel system originating from stan meyers. As the discussion goes outside of the res-circuit different opinions are expressed.

A statement that Dry air contains roughly (by volume) 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, for example is not relevant to THE RES_CIRCUIT so preferably it should be placed elsewhere and not be considered intolerable. In that way Jon Abel will not need to address it and has said he prefers not to.

A disclaimer statement about the scope of discussion should be edited into the first post by Jon Abel and he should direct people to read it. In this way an off topic post would eventually be moderated, that a person having intentions of drawing attention away from the interest of the thread to release the information.
Scarecrow could have made the point about the infancy of the project and he encouraged the energetic forum people to give feedback that he mentioned something about people who are too good to talk to you. It is good to know his Press Release can do this. It should be noted that a peer review that happens when a person publishes a paper or came from PESN are suedo-academic in this way.
Stiffler is one example of someone who did PESN and moved around
forum to forum always annoyed at various personalities.

It is sad that people leave for the (heretics)private forums because it is typical of a popular thread to move fast and alot of people will comment. The experienced members are used to this, it is time consuming to keep the discussion on course.

[stevie1001]

I am only interested in results, guys.
If Jon or Alex or Aaron are able to show some results then i am happy

I would be even more happy if they shared the technical details of their results.
Even if i have to donate some money for that.

Good luck everybody!

[Ein~+ein]

I spent the evening looking at the following in order to figure out where both sides are coming from in their debate:

a) Jon's vids including the SmartScarecrow interview,
b) Wikipedia's entry, edit, and talk page for 'S Meyer's water fuel cell'
c) PESN's 'Volunteer Jon Abel banned from NDSU...'
d) http://waterpoweredcar.com/pdf.files..._Full_Data.pdf If you go to the 2nd of 8 hits for Nitrogen, you'll find what Aaron was referring to.

Correct me if I'm wrong but this is what I understand. I hope I don't offend anyone this time--If I've got it wrong, I'll edit accordingly. :

1. Aaron considers a Stan Meyers 'fuel cell' replication to include, not just the production of hydroxy with less energy input than the output provides (free energy), but also the means of combining it with nitrogen to produce a properly combustible equivalent to gasoline.

2. Jon's real and significant achievement (so far) is the efficient production of hydroxy through resonance (exceeding the efficiency of conventional electrolyis).

Forgive me for my techno-naivety but here are my questions?

i) Is Jon the only one claiming to do this?

ii) Has Jon come up with free energy (energy output > energy input) as Stanley Meyer had done? (I'm presuming with S.M., the only limitation was the volume of water, not the battery capacity.)

iii) By only bringing up nitrogen, did Aaron, right from the beginning accept at face value that Jon had indeed been able to exceed conventional electrolysis with resonance? This implies that many others have at least claimed to achieve this, does it not?

iv) Even if Jon hasn't achieved FE (a water-powered car) but merely improved upon electrolysis, could it still be a significant breakthrough for, say hydrogen production? [I]Many of the major automakers are all looking to hydrogen as I mentioned in my previous post.

Jon, you're not the first to get unceremoniously tossed out of a university. Two weeks ago, ReGen-X, BiTT inventor Thane Heins uploaded his own unfortunate experience at Ottawa U.... but just removed it!?!?

[Aaron]

Jon's status

Jon is gone. Having a problem with me is one thing, but lying about me and posting multiple threads and multiple posts throughout many threads saying the same thing over and over is not going to be tolerated.

[Ein~+ein]

...you can split water with big radiant spikes and it will find resonance all by itself without PLL circuits, etc... However, the whole process can be done with capacitor discharge too or even plasma electrolysis ...

Surprisingly, 'resonance' isn't mentioned on either Wikipedia's 'Hydrogen Production' or 'Water Splitting' pages. There's mention of 'plasma reforming' though (same thing as plasma electrolysis?).

My own skepticism of Jon's work is that he never mentions the efficiency in relationship to the many other hydrogen production methods, just the achievement of resonance, but at what cost? As Aaron points out, he and others have done the same thing, (or at least have claimed to) yet no mention on Wikipedia. Time to move the debate to Wikipedia's Talk pages?

BTW: The auto industry's move toward hydrogen would not surprise a conspiracy theorist. According to the Wikipedia's 'Hydrogen Production page, 'Fossil fuels are the dominant source of industrial hydrogen.'

[Jeff Pearson]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater
The end of the hose that fed the gasses from the WFC to the buggy. If nothing else it shows its not about making tons of HHO. You just not gonna get much flow through the quenching circuit

[wings]

plasma chemistry is really fascinating ....this the reason for my post as example see how to produce nitric acid from air and water with Birkeland-Eyde process:
A chemistry from scratch article: | JennTech, Science from Scratch
Birkeland-Eyde process for making nitric acid - YouTube

some informations on combustion chemistry of nitrogen :
http://chemeng.mines.edu/groups/amde...onChapter2.pdf

see strange correspondence between the water resonance signal and mayer input signal

[Aaron]

posts moved

All off topic posts have been moved here: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...off-topic.html and that thread will remain locked.

[RAMSET]

Very good a fresh start

And I see That Jon can Participate again...and that The Nitro theory/info coalesces into a proof of concept test bed??

@Aaron
The link for Your new engine/fuel testbed was here????

Thx
Chet

[mikrovolt]

1986 Stan said the exhaust gas regulator in turn adjusted the "Burn Rate"
Burn Rate

Stanley Meyer and his brother on how the water fuel injection system works. (NEW RELEASED) - YouTube

The exact amount of energy fed into the cell has to do with providing just enough hydrogen. The energy input efficiency refers to the on demand characteristic for
for the needs of the injector system (not that much approx 7 pico Liter per stroke 1600 cc) . The Burn Rate is key to the expansive power, the overunity happens as the pulse is delivered. The clickity sounding pulse train ... is fed to the injector/ plasma unit ( more significant electrical draw) and not to be confused with the precise control of the cell. The cost effectiveness of producing hho has been used to deceive the masses into building efficient cells and distracting away from the expansive power of the right mixture of ionized gases.

[Aaron]

this thread

I cleaned up this thread for reasons that are so common sense, they don't need to be explained.

Anyone coming here to post slander against myself or anyone else and this forum is banned and will have their IP addresses blocked.

This is a FREE forum, that we fund out of our pockets and don't ask for anything in return. If anyone wants to purchase any digital product available, make a donation or anything like that, then fine, but it is NOT required. All the ignorant posts about "for profit" are not only ridiculous, it shows that anyone making such claims have no experience living in the real world.

1. 100% of EVERY non-profit organization MUST MAKE A PROFIT to survive or it will simply cease to exist.

2. Regarding the claims that free energy is supposed to be free - that is 100% ignorance. FREE ENERGY refers to free environmental input that comes in when we leverage it. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with having no costs involved. It is propaganda for the ignorant to believe it should cost nothing and is meant to take away from the real meaning. It is a technological term it is NOT an economic term.

Any further posts by anyone slandering this forum, myself, other members, etc... will be banned immediately without warning and will have their ip addresses blocked. Anyone that posts any more off topic posts in this thread will also be removed.

[5150]

I have to admit I am one of the people who thought free energy was free. That’s why I registered and joined this forum. I guess the thought of free energy and not having to pay a light bill was the reason I joined here. I have never heard of Stan Myer or most of the other smart inventors other than the likes of Michael Angelo who some claim he was gay and even had a boy lover. Why are all the smart rich people gay? But anyway I’m still having a hard time grasping it not being “free” even from an economical standpoint.

I mean I read somewhere that energy can never be created or destroyed but it can be harvested and manipulated. All we have to do is figure out how to do it and then presto we can use that energy free. I assume that type of “free” refers to the economical sense of not costing anything.

As for the costs associated in the manufacturing of the specifics in terms of materials and other related items to harvest or harnessing energy free do cost something but if you get the items to build it free from somewhere then they are free too, right? So using free stuff to make an invention to get energy you don’t have to pay for them and nothing has any costs, so isn’t it all free both in terms of “free” energy and “free” economically?

The thought of an engine running on water is so cool and I’ve herd they made one that worked but they killed the people who made it so the government can keep making taxes on big oil. You know they made a toothbrush that works on sonic water jet type stuff where it cleans your teeth with water instead of having to brush. I think a water motor can work the same way

Then once we find out how to make a free energy motor then we could build robots to mass produce them so we could get free labor out of them and keep the cost down. If they make prisoners build the robots and we do it open source then others can copy it and do it in their free time. Heck that would help give inmates something to do and teach them a trade at the same time. That’s like killing two birds with one stone or slave labor but either way its free labor. Then in the end it will all be free.

Except the taxes we have to pay for using free energy which I am sure the government will mandate

[Mad Scientist]

Ok let’s see if this is bit more on topic. Jon made a noticeable improvement to the original “Dave Lawton Pulse Width Modulator” circuit. Actually anything would have been an improvement to Dave’s original circuit because as I recall the original had some errors in it and probably wouldn’t work. Anyway separating the two 555 timers and running their outputs through a logic gate to combine their outputs is a definite improvement.

However there still is a problem with using the 555 timer, you cannot change the frequency without it also changing the pulse width. The following circuit, using a single LM339, eliminates that problem. Either the frequency or the pulse width can be changed without the other being effected.

The circuit consists of two of the 339’s comparators wired as free running square wave oscillators, one for low frequency the other for high frequency. But I don’t care about the square wave output but rather the triangular wave across the timing capacitors. This is feed down to one input of a comparator the other input is a voltage controlled by a potentiometer. By adjusting this voltage it will produce a variable width pulse on the output which will be at whatever frequency the oscillator is set at. (PWM) Seeing that the output transistors in the 339 are open collector these two circuits can then be gated together, to produce a composite signal, by simply connecting their outputs together and tying them through a pull-up resistor to a plus voltage.
So connect this to a favorite driver circuit of your choice and state making HHO.



Alright so now who is going to be the first to drive their car around the block?