Stan meyer circuit

[octavian]

I've posted this question on a couple of threads allready but i'm afraid there's been almost no response (except from redmeanie).

Is the stan meyer circuit linear or is it something else, if so what?

[Aaron]

linear circuit?

What do you mean by linear? Gas production goes up linearly as the power input climbs...in a linear fashion? Like a straight line going up diagonal at 45 degrees?

If so, considering the effects of ion collision, etc... there is non-linear gas production compared to the power going up. If this is even what you're asking.

[Jan H]

hey I found this PDF a while ago. It contains a pretty clear reproduction of his machine. Along with all the circuits.

http://pesn.com/2007/11/29/9500461_B..._Kelly2006.pdf

What i find peculiar though is that this reproduction is just using 12 Volts. I thought stan was using high voltage for his electrolyser. Can someone enlighten me?

[Redmeanie]

What Aaron said is what I was leading you towards. Through the Conventional Electronics he used, it is a Linear system, by definition. After that it becomes unconventional and unknown, what exactly was going on with the system. That is what everyone is trying to figure out. If it was a solely Linear system it would be real easy to duplicate. Which the initial electronics end in the Meyers circuit is. It is just figuring out the chokes and coils, which are not operating in a "Linear" fashion. No one knows just exactly What is happening there.

The key is trying to crack the code of exactly what he was doing, like everyone experimenting with Meyers cell is. Then you could tell us exactly what is going on there. There are people here who have been trying for years with some success but none have completely gotten the results Meyers did. And if they do Im sure we will know about it.

Why the obsession with Linear or Not?

[octavian]

What Aaron said is what I was leading you towards. Through the Conventional Electronics he used, it is a Linear system, by definition. After that it becomes unconventional and unknown, what exactly was going on with the system. That is what everyone is trying to figure out. If it was a solely Linear system it would be real easy to duplicate. Which the initial electronics end in the Meyers circuit is. It is just figuring out the chokes and coils, which are not operating in a "Linear" fashion. No one knows just exactly What is happening there.

The key is trying to crack the code of exactly what he was doing, like everyone experimenting with Meyers cell is. Then you could tell us exactly what is going on there. There are people here who have been trying for years with some success but none have completely gotten the results Meyers did. And if they do Im sure we will know about it.

Why the obsession with Linear or Not?

hehe, i don't know about obsession but i'm just playing with a couple of ideas... as you probably know (please correct me if i'm wrong) you can add voltages together in a linear circuit: f(ax1 + bx2) = af(x1) + bf(x2).
i'm not sure but i think this may be worth looking into... not sure how though.
yet that is

[Aaron]

just some Meyer comments

Ion collision is one effect that happens in the water bath between a gap and it causes even more freed up gas independent from what the circuit has really contributed in joules of energy.

Robert Flanagan used this concept with his negative ion generators for air purification. He referred to it as an "electron cascade." Electrons emitted from the generators would hit other electrons in the air freeing them and those would hit more and so forth like a chain reaction. So the total freed up electrons to bond onto positive charged dust particles in the vicinity were WAY MORE than what left the generator.

Between two plates or tubes...if there is high enough potential difference at the plates/tubes and enough dielectric keeping it from arcing across...the water in that high voltage electrostatic field is extremely stressed. The oxygen is pulled to the positive plate and the hydrogen is pulled to the negative plate. If the electrostatic potential is high enough, most likely in the range of 10,000 volts to 80,000 volts, that tension is stronger than the covalent bonding strength and the electrostatic bonding strength of the water molecule.

From what I found...about 10% of the bond strength of the h&o in water is covalent and about 90% is electrostatic attraction. True? I have no idea but conceptually, it doesn't matter because it makes enough sense that if the electrostatic field is stronger than the h&o bond that it will pull it apart with zero current passing through the water...pure voltage potential separation. There is still current being used in the power source anyway so yes, there is a loss there but only needs to be enough power used to simply hold the high voltage tension at the plates. If enough dielectric, the water in theory should split all day long without any current ever passing through the water.

I realize there isn't even proof electrons exist so what is water anyway? All we have are ideas/models that seem to make sense for the moment.

With high enough voltage potential, any freed electron from any of the gasp production from this method will speed up exponentially towards the positive plate like the hydrogen and those ridiculously fast flying electrons will knock other electrons out of orbit freeing up more gas up and there was no extra power consumed from the input...it was independent of what is supplied, which is only potential at the plates anyway with no current passing.

Again, even if zero current passes through the cell and if there is gas production happening this way, there is still current in watts consumed in the power supply to get the hv potential at the plates to begin with so it isn't free, there is an input investment necessary. But of course, if gas production happens like this with no current moving through the cell, then the power output from the gas that is possible should be record breaking COP's approaching infinity the longer the system runs as long as no current passes the gap.

Anyway, dielectrics on the plates/tubes to hold back the current seems to be the only way to really get the voltage way up there to cause the effect...and so that it is done so there isn't any short circuits anywhere in the water bath between the plates/tubes...if so, then people will start to measure higher voltages at the cell instead of a couple volts no matter what they throw at it.

I suggested the use of an ignition coil used in series...no neg terminal used, just pos input through coil and hv output towards the cell...inline choke because the ignition coil is already about 10k ohms like what Meyer's used...and one person did it and measured several hundred volts at the water cell. What would it have measured on his cell if he built it like a cap so the tubes or plates weren't short circuited through the water? I don't know for his particular cell but all these things seem to paint a very clear picture of what fundamental concepts might be a good idea to be in place to accomplish this.

Perhaps chokes aren't even necessary. Everything that can be gathered about Meyer seems to show he is doing everything necessary to restrict current. He says in his tech manual right off the bat..."voltage potential." Chokes limit current because of the magnetic field produced in them and NOT because of the high ohms resistance that they are. He says the concept he is using is not a resistive element to limit current...it is the magnetic field the chokes make. Along with the fact that almost nothing Meyer said can be trusted, it makes for a very exciting mystery.

If you had a 1 inch gap and were able to hold back a million volts of tension and the plates were say a foot tall...and you poured water down the gap somehow, I doubt any liquid would hit the bottom.

[rick123]

dielectrics on the plates/tubes to hold back the current seems to be the only way to really get the voltage way up there to cause the effect

Aaron do you mean coating all metal? everything being water tight? no part of the cell/wires being exposed?

I read those sights you posted. Very interesting reading about liberated electrons hitting others and freeing them. The electrons moving at a speed that overpowers the reatraction force. very fun to think about!!

[Aaron]

water capacitor

Right...everything to eliminate any jumping across the plates/tubes.

There is an all or none kind of situation here. With enough dielectric to hold back serious voltage...some good voltage can be put to the cell and there is virtually no gas production. I have seen a handful of attempts at this and the project is abandoned because of lack of virtually any gas production at all. But nobody is really using serious high voltage in this type of water capacitor. Dingel is using hv from an ignition coil supposedly but who knows what he is really doing. Either way, conceptually, there will be pretty much nothing visible happening until for that particular cell, gap, power applied etc... until there is real electrostatic potential there.

I'll post my results failed or not of a project I started end of last year as soon as I can.

[octavian]

Same device?

when scrolling down the WFC manual, there seems to be loads of different variations of the VIC. Is that the case or is he just describing different aspects of the same device?

it's all a bit confusing

[WCastle]

there seems to be loads of different variations of the VIC.

Yes his intensifier seems to have many uses in his several designs, have you noticed the analog nature of his waveforms? and all of the mention of resonance?

The fuel injector/spark plug design is the most interesting aspect of Mr. M's designs I have studied.

Many of the attempts to replicate use purely digital (square wave) shapes
however we live in an analog world, for instance when you ring a bell if you look at the resulting waveform on an Oscope it certainly doesnot contain square waves ! you can approximate the sound and try to filter out the digital aspect
with R/C or L/C however Mr. M used a rotating "transformer" (AC induction)
to get what was as close to nature's resonance of water as he could, while mixing signals with the choke, or better explained, as adding an analog signal on top of the baseline DC.

Just my 2 cents...

[octavian]

Yes his intensifier seems to have many uses in his several designs, have you noticed the analog nature of his waveforms? and all of the mention of resonance?

The fuel injector/spark plug design is the most interesting aspect of Mr. M's designs I have studied.

Many of the attempts to replicate use purely digital (square wave) shapes
however we live in an analog world, for instance when you ring a bell if you look at the resulting waveform on an Oscope it certainly doesnot contain square waves ! you can approximate the sound and try to filter out the digital aspect
with R/C or L/C however Mr. M used a rotating "transformer" (AC induction)
to get what was as close to nature's resonance of water as he could, while mixing signals with the choke, or better explained, as adding an analog signal on top of the baseline DC.

Just my 2 cents...

Yes i have noticed his analog waveforms and all the mention of resonance... but i'm afraid you lost me while explaining the other stuff . I'm pretty new to this subject and have practically no experience with oscopes etc.

[WCastle]

Hopefully these help to visualize the concept, I see you are a fan of N.Hill so you can appreciate visualization

[elcman]

In layman's terms... (Distilling what I'm reading...)

Was Meyer's trying to approach breaking the covalent bond by "shaking them" apart with resonance? And then... trying to strip electro-static bond by shocking them apart?

From what I am getting... something like an high voltage or maybe an EMF pulse shot through water should strip the bond and free the HHO gas? (It seems like it should be a very reactive process, not a little bubbling, but mass amounts of gas if that were the case.)

For most of what I've been seeing on the forums, people are primarily using brute force electrolysis to get the job done. Whereas Stan Meyer's seem to ... almost coax the molecules apart by using their own nature or... by using a "key" of sorts.

My technical understanding being a barrier, but notwithstanding, I can see how these methods would work, now it is how to establish that environment that it happened in?

Just trying to digest and rephrase what I'm hearing.

[WCastle]

Stan Meyer's seem to ... almost coax the molecules apart by using their own nature

Yes, you got it... try this at home.

take a plastic pitcher full of water, then take a small green stick (freshly picked)
so it is springy.

if you tap the side of the pitcher you will see a wave on the surface, it will diminish and stop in a few seconds.

However if you tap the side and hold the stick with just the right amount of force it will vibrate or oscillate, if you can get it to oscillate at the right frequency, you can get the waves to add to each other with every vibration, causing the "amplitude" to increase.

several natural forces are at work here however, just ponder what is going on
and how much work was put into it, with 1 strike vs a strike and hold, what is the difference in output?

Square waves do not do this, yes you can "stack" a square wave onto another, but this natural analog additive effect is beauty in physics.

[octavian]

Hopefully these help to visualize the concept, I see you are a fan of N.Hill so you can appreciate visualization

Thanks that really helped