Stanley Meyer Explained

[h20power]

What are you a lawyer or a politician? Lol.

Yes you are correct. Afterall, you can't prove a negative.

Stans patent doesn't show that he uses baking soda either but it doesn't mean it isn't there, right? (no offense, I'm just making a light hearted stab ) We all know Nitrogen will be there somewhere, it's just how important of a role it plays, correct?

Seriously though, how about we all agree to disagree.

H2O and his band can build their engines on the principles laid out early on in this thread. The Nitrogen guys can carry on in their own thread and build their engines.

Hey here's an idea.
H20 has a deadline of 24 months from now to have his engine working.
How about we all agree on a date and place 24 months from now. We can get together and celebrate our successes and have a friendly competition to see who's engine works the best. The winner gets a bottle of Evian as a trophy. The wooden spoon trophy can be a bottle of used engine oil.

Seriously, wouldn't that be a great? Image if we had so many, using the two different principles that we couldn't find a winner?

Count me in Farside, but we have only 21 months now and the clock is ticking. That is not my times table it is the times table that was give to us by the Ruling Class as to the pace of their complete take over of the USA, Mexico, and Canada to transform them into the North American Union.


h2opower.

[Aaron]

people with baseless arguments attack the person

Aaron your book is in the burn pile so I can at least get some free BTU's from it for that is all it is worth as there is no science in it from you for you don't know any.

If you disagree with me, you can do that but don't attack me personally.
When a self-proclaimed "religious man" does that, it is called hypocrisy.
And this is coming from someone that has never posted a single experiment
demonstrating anything to anyone - I have posted many things you
don't even understand.

[h20power]

Hi Everyone,
Sorry about the two fully incompatible theories on Stanley Meyers' work took up so much of your time and space on a already long thread.

But now that that is over where were we? I think we were talking about the other patent that uses a different form of gas processor that Chasson321 originally showed us. I think it is referred to in Meyer patent references, though I haven't found it yet, but clearly it is a different design of the gas processor without an electron extraction circuit. So if anyone is thinking of designing one like it just add in an electron extraction circuit to the end and all should be fine, I mean make an electrical connection the way Meyer's did. But it look like a winner to me and should cost less than mine did to have fabricated, Oh and you are going to have to find a way to mix in the LEDs light energy in with it also. The design looks like one could create a vortex flow of air through it if redesigned to do so.

I like the words of the patent in showing the need to ionized things, like charges repel and unlike charges attract and all of that. Plus the talks of fluid mediums. All in all I think it is a good patent to aid in our understanding of Stanley Meyers work and why things where done the way they where.

Let the questions keep flowing in, and I will do my best to answer them, and as shown if I can't answer them someone else that also understands Meyers work can. I call that a win win situation


h2opower.

[chasson321]

Patent 5293857

Column 6
Line 61

In the preferred embodiment of the invention a hy-
drogen fuel gas mixture is generated by the method of
my aforesaid U.S. Pat. No. 4,936,961. That gas com-
prises a mixture of hydrogen, oxygen and other former-
ly-entrapped gases dissolved in water. It is the purpose
of this invention, beginning with the hydrogen compo-
nent of a fuel gas, to adapt hydrogen gas to the approxi-
mate burn rate of a fossil fuel for use in an internal

Column 7

combustion engine and to maintain the ratio of hydro-
gen to oxygen in the mixture at the most efficient 2:1
ratio. The system of the invention modulates the hydro-
gen component of the overall gas mixture such that the
burn rate of the hydrogen-containing fuel mixture ap-
proximates that of a fossil fuel as illustrated in FIG. 1

[h20power]

If you disagree with me, you can do that but don't attack me personally.
When a self-proclaimed "religious man" does that, it is called hypocrisy.
And this is coming from someone that has never posted a single experiment
demonstrating anything to anyone - I have posted many things you
don't even understand.

Aaron,

The book was mine to do with what I wanted to do with it, and if I saw fit to burn it and tell everyone I did so, that is my business.

Now on the question of the nitrogen flowing through the gas processor of the Hydrogen Gas Gun you only have .03-.01 grams of Nitrogen to make NOH with, is that going to be enough to make gnt will that small amount? As you can see the question still stands since the chemical make up is 33% of each atom. So now what? You don't have enough nitrogen to make any useful amount of NOH with in a 1000ml of water. What does this say for the theory of NOH? The way I see it the theory once again falls apart. But since you haven't even took the time to read my thread how can you tell me what I have said or didn't say as per how Stanley Meyer technology really works?

I rest my case,

h2opower.

[Aaron]

misc...

The book was mine to do with what I wanted to do with it, and if I saw fit to burn it and tell everyone I did so, that is my business.

"there is no science in it from you for you don't know any. "

When you speak like this, you have made it my business. You are directly
attacking me. No science in the book and I don't know any? And all the
time I actually thought people followed up on references and footnotes.

I'm arguing your points and not attacking you and as I said, 3rd time now,
you have no foundation for your argument and usually people in that
position start attacking the person instead of what they're saying.
Don't flatter yourself with the book burning, it has no power over me.

I think everyone here has to ask themselves one thing. What kind of motive
would someone have by discounting the entire nitrogen connection when
Meyer spells it out in MULTIPLE patents showing ducting ambient air into
his burners, wfc output tubes, etc.. .and spells out that it is part of the
crucial mix and that the nitrogen is needed to have a CONTROLLED burn
with true thermal explosive energy??? Why in the world would anyone that
has ever read or reread the patents direct people's attention away from
these absolute facts that I have PROVEN with Meyer's own patents.
What is the motive behind detracting from such an overwhelming obvious
connection. I'm honestly limited to a few blatant possibilities of what
would motivate someone to do this and I don't like any of them in the
least bit. None of them are any good.

When a man has truth in his heart, he will recognize it when he sees it.

I have already posted multiple other patents showing Meyer's method
with diagrams from his patents and text in his own words and he is ducting
ambient air from the outside of the system into the hydrogen/oxygen
contents. You don't want anyone to see any of that. You are FIXATED
on a natural amount of nitrogen to base your argument on that there isn't
a significant amount of nitrogen.

You are self-destructing your own argument. You finally admit, yes there
is nitrogen now...and your story has shifted from there being zero nitrogen
to a small amount. So now your new argument is that there isn't enough to
be significant.

Therefore, you discount Meyer as being a lunatic obviously for the fact
that he is telling you that the AMBIENT AIR in that gas gun system is
part of the combustible mix and is necessary to get a controlled burn. That
is Meyer personally saying that whatever amount of nitrogen happens to
be there HAS A SIGNIFICANT FUNCTION IN THE OPERATION OF THE
SYSTEM and obviously there is no controlled burn without it.

Your argument from no nitrogen to too little nitrogen BOTH contradict
Meyer and claiming there is an insignificant amount is not science, it isn't
evidenced by anything in the patent, it is solely based on your own
opinion and nothing more.

Personally, I think he was bubbling exhaust right back to the water cell
and that there is a LOT of nitrogen coming up in that gas gun, but that
too is of course my opinion.

What is the objective/scientific way of looking at it? VOLUME of nitrogen
is NOT the argument, having a SIGNIFICANCE is and Meyer's spells out the
significance.

Whether it is a significant amount or not must
be based on whether or not there is a functional use for it and OBVIOUSLY
there is. Part of the combustible mix for one and necessary for controlled
burn. Now since there are very specific functional uses for this AMBIENT
AIR that Meyer establishes in his own words as I showed in his very own
patents, that means there must be a significant amount of AMBIENT AIR
in his gas gun system. Significant amount meaning enough to do a specific
job - do not attach significance to volume when it is meaningless in
proper context.

And since there is a task the nitrogen performs, WHAT IS THAT TASK?

For you to say it is insignificant is only relevant to
your desired frame of reference for the system in which in your mind, "there
must be no use for it because there is too little." But obviously Meyer
thought there is enough significance to ambient air to clearly include this
fact in all his patents.

You can say I don't know any science that is fine - I have never sought
out your approval on the matter. But if you want to act like you have
an exclusive on Meyer's or any water fuel technology, it doesn't matter
how many joules are needed for x/mol of any gas to free it up, etc...
Memorizing facts or looking them up and calculating them is meaningless
unless THINKING is involved to be able to cohesively assemble them into
a model that actually works and it takes both scientific thinking and
intuition to do that. And emotional attachment to a preconceived viewpoint
that prevents one from objectively looking at something is self-sabotage.

You pretend to put Meyer on a pedestal, chastise me for "calling Meyer
a liar", which is YOUR words... the context of deceiving someone through
a patent is a whole different story.... and while doing all this, you are
at the very moment discounting the very facts that Meyer is telling you
and showing you.

You say I am calling Meyer a liar? lol If anything, by me stating that
Meyer is deceiving people through his patent is the mark of an intelligent
inventor that knows how to protect his claims while hiding them at the
same time - that is a compliment.

You have a different purpose here and it isn't about helping others as
evidenced by your personal attack on me. All the time I supported and
promoted your thread and this is how you respond because I strongly
disagree with your assessment about the nitrogen subject...

You have certainly revealed a very telling secret in this thread but unfortunately
it doesn't have anything to do with the topic of this thread.

[sucahyo]

Would someone like to circle number 1 for him showing the water inlet. The gases that are called "ambient air gases" are gases that are dissolved in water at the time when the water is being broken down and are nothing more than trace gases and can be ignored. Did you look up the solubility table of gases in water Aaron as I requested you to do? Sure doesn't look like you did when you see the real numbers you are saying are vital to producing thermo explosive energy.

In case you miss my post at other thread:
Ammonia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Haber process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Melting point: −77.73 °C (195.42 K)
Boiling point: −33.34 °C (239.81 K)
Solubility in water: 1176 g/100 mL (0 °C); 702 g/100 mL (20 °C); 88 g/100 mL (100 °C)
Flash point: flammable gas
Autoignition temperature: 651 °C
Explosive limits: 15–28%

Ammonia does not burn readily or sustain combustion, except under narrow fuel-to-air mixtures of 15-25% air. When mixed with oxygen, it burns with a pale yellowish-green flame. At high temperature and in the presence of a suitable catalyst, ammonia is decomposed into its constituent elements. Ignition occurs when chlorine is passed into ammonia, forming nitrogen and hydrogen chloride; if ammonia is present in excess, then the highly explosive nitrogen trichloride (NCl3) is also formed.

The ammonia molecule readily undergoes nitrogen inversion at room temperature; a useful analogy is an umbrella turning itself inside out in a strong wind. The energy barrier to this inversion is 24.7 kJ/mol, and the resonance frequency is 23.79 GHz, corresponding to microwave radiation of a wavelength of 1.260 cm (0 in). The absorption at this frequency was the first microwave spectrum to be observed.[17]

Combustion
The combustion of ammonia to nitrogen and water is exothermic:
4 NH3 + 3 O2 → 2 N2 + 6 H2O (g) (ΔHºr = –1267.20 kJ/mol)

The standard enthalpy change of combustion, ΔHºc, expressed per mole of ammonia and with condensation of the water formed, is –382.81 kJ/mol. Dinitrogen is the thermodynamic product of combustion: all nitrogen oxides are unstable with respect to nitrogen and oxygen, which is the principle behind the catalytic converter. However, nitrogen oxides can be formed as kinetic products in the presence of appropriate catalysts, a reaction of great industrial importance in the production of nitric acid:
4 NH3 + 5 O2 → 4 NO + 6 H2O

The combustion of ammonia in air is very difficult in the absence of a catalyst (such as platinum gauze), as the temperature of the flame is usually lower than the ignition temperature of the ammonia-air mixture. The flammable range of ammonia in air is 16–25%.[19]

As a fuel
Ammonia was used during World War II to power buses in Belgium, and in engine and solar energy applications prior to 1900. Liquid ammonia was used as the fuel of the rocket airplane, the X-15. Although not as powerful as other fuels, it left no soot in the reusable rocket engine and its density approximately matches the density of the oxidizer, liquid oxygen, which simplified the aircraft's design.

Before the start of World War I, most ammonia was obtained by the dry distillation[14] of nitrogenous vegetable and animal waste products, including camel dung, where it was distilled by the reduction of nitrous acid and nitrites with hydrogen; in addition, it was produced by the distillation of coal, and also by the decomposition of ammonium salts by alkaline hydroxides[15] such as quicklime, the salt most generally used being the chloride (sal-ammoniac)

Ammonia was first manufactured using the Haber process on an industrial scale in 1913 in BASF's Oppau plant in Germany. During World War I, production was shifted from fertilizer to explosives, particularly through the conversion of ammonia into a synthetic form of Chile saltpeter, which could then be changed into other substances for the production of gunpowder and high explosives (the Allies had access to large amounts of saltpeter from natural guano deposits in Chile that belonged almost totally to British industrials; Germany had to produce its own). It has been suggested that without this process, Germany would not have fought in the war,[6] or would have had to surrender years earlier.

As a vehicle fuel
Ammonia has been proposed as a practical alternative to fossil fuel for internal combustion engines.[41] The calorific value of ammonia is 22.5 MJ/kg (9690 BTU/lb) which is about half that of diesel. In a normal engine, in which the water vapour is not condensed, the calorific value of ammonia will be about 21% less than this figure. It can be used in existing engines with only minor modifications to carburettors/injectors.

To meet these demands, significant capital would be required to increase present production levels. Although the second most produced chemical, the scale of ammonia production is a small fraction of world petroleum usage. It could be manufactured from renewable energy sources, as well as coal or nuclear power. It is however significantly less efficient than batteries. The 60 MW Rjukan dam in Telemark, Norway produced ammonia via electrolysis of water for many years from 1913 producing fertilizer for much of Europe. If produced from coal, the CO2 can be readily sequestrated.[41][42] (the combustion products are nitrogen and water). In 1981 a Canadian company converted a 1981 Chevrolet Impala to operate using ammonia as fuel.[43][44]


Prior to the advent of cheap natural gas, hydrogen as a precursor to ammonia production was produced via the electrolysis of water or using the chloralkali process. The Vemork 60 MW hydroelectric plant in Norway, constructed in 1911, was used purely for plants using the Birkeland-Eyde process.

Despite the fact that 78.1% of the air we breathe is nitrogen, the gas is relatively unreactive because nitrogen molecules are held together by strong triple bonds. It was not until the early 20th century that this method was developed to harness the atmospheric abundance of nitrogen to create ammonia, which can then be oxidized to make the nitrates and nitrites essential for the production of nitrate fertilizer and explosives.

The first Haber–Bosch reaction chambers used osmium and uranium as catalysts. However, under Bosch's direction in 1909, the BASF researcher Alwin Mittasch discovered a much less expensive iron-based catalyst that is still used today.

In industrial practice, the iron catalyst is prepared by exposing a mass of magnetite, an iron oxide, to the hot hydrogen feedstock. This reduces some of the magnetite to metallic iron, removing oxygen in the process. However, the catalyst maintains most of its bulk volume during the reduction, and so the result is a highly porous material whose large surface area aids its effectiveness as a catalyst. Other minor components of the catalyst include calcium and aluminium oxides, which support the porous iron catalyst and help it maintain its surface area over time, and potassium, which increases the electron density of the catalyst and so improves its activity.

I guess we going back to centuries old technology .

[Farside]

Aaron, this thread is getting quite long.
It's now over 50 pages and it is quite a mission to read it end to end. I bring this up because to understand what H2OPower and the guys are doing, a full read is absolutely required.

They have already put some people on ignore in an attempt to keep the thread as clean and cohesive as possible (I guess the administration hasn't granted the thread owner permissions to remove posts in this community - which this platform supports btw).

It is obvious that you are passionate about your arguments and have a driving need to get your ideas across.

Please respect the thread owners requests to take these to a thread of your own where the entire community can benefit from them. As it stands, everything you have posted here is buried under 50 pages of existing writing which is not directly related to your topic. When you do eventually move on it will disappear under unother 50 pages and will never see the light of day again - nobody will ever find it.

This forum platform supports the ability to migrate posts to another thread. If you contact administration, I'm sure they could help you remove your informative posts from here and put them in your new thread so the information remains accessable to everyone for longer than a few weeks.

[TRON]

You guys are not seeing the forest, only the trees...

you want me to calculate all of the other gases also dissolved in 1 kg of water so you could get a clear picture of just what gases are flowing through the gas processor of the Hydrogen Gas Gun.
h2opower.

Please consider in the diagram that "Water Inlet" below the resonating chambers actually means the output of an electrolyzer...not pure water... i think there is some ambient air getting in at some point, stan never drew a complete system, only parts... we cant be sure that "water inlet" actually means water only!

also the GP had an ambient air intake at the top and a discharge hose at the bottom...our environment is around 70% nitrogen,17% oxygen, and other gases? right? i know that CO2 is only 500 Parts per million...

@H20Power:
can the gas processors be stacked?

i will be constructing a test unit out of clear 3" I.D. pvc tube 12 inches long

it will have clear plastic discs inside with holes drilled to cause air turbulence as the air enters the bottom of the tube and exits the top having passed thru 6 chambers

each chamber will have its own rings of stainless steel + and -, and a separate chamber with an EEC grid, all are sequentially stacked.

each chamber will have multiple colors of LED light as well

each chamber will have a coil of wire outside of the tube that acts as a magnetic accelerator to push the free electrons on to the next chamber quickly, still haven't decided on where to center the magnetic field... over the voltage zones and LED's or over the Extraction grids...???

so in effect, 6 Gas Processors in series
any ideas on what the output will be?

using ambient air input ( with whatever gases are available in the air, nitrogen, oxygen, etc)

if this output is mixed with fine fog of water and

[h20power]

Please consider in the diagram that "Water Inlet" below the resonating chambers actually means the output of an electrolyzer...not pure water... i think there is some ambient air getting in at some point, stan never drew a complete system, only parts... we cant be sure that "water inlet" actually means water only!

also the GP had an ambient air intake at the top and a discharge hose at the bottom...our environment is around 70% nitrogen,17% oxygen, and other gases? right? i know that CO2 is only 500 Parts per million...

@H20Power:
can the gas processors be stacked?

i will be constructing a test unit out of clear 3" I.D. pvc tube 12 inches long

it will have clear plastic discs inside with holes drilled to cause air turbulence as the air enters the bottom of the tube and exits the top having passed thru 6 chambers

each chamber will have its own rings of stainless steel + and -, and a separate chamber with an EEC grid, all are sequentially stacked.

each chamber will have multiple colors of LED light as well

each chamber will have a coil of wire outside of the tube that acts as a magnetic accelerator to push the free electrons on to the next chamber quickly, still haven't decided on where to center the magnetic field... over the voltage zones and LED's or over the Extraction grids...???

so in effect, 6 Gas Processors in series
any ideas on what the output will be?

using ambient air input ( with whatever gases are available in the air, nitrogen, oxygen, etc)

if this output is mixed with fine fog of water and

Hi Tron,

No assumptions okay? The water inlet means water only, this is no time to be second guessing what is shown when it can again be seen in the news letter #4. Because if you let air pass through it could push the water into the Gas Processor as the space between the voltage zones is very small. The device is shown in the news letter #4 completely assembled. And the GP has no holes in it that let in any out side air to be processed by the gas processor. The only gases flowing through the gas processor of the Hydrogen Gas Gun are coming from the stacked resonant cavities. It is this device that blows their theory out of the water, and there are many other reasons I have given that also do the same thing in putting that theory to rest. I really don't wish to talk about this here in my Stanley Meyer explanation thread for I have a working theory that stands up to just about all lines of questioning. I made a new thread so the theory I proposed can be debated here: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...urce-fuel.html and I welcome all takers to blow the theories back to God as it is he that has helped me to see Stanley Meyer's work clearly.

Yes, the WFC tubes can be stacked, each tube set has it's very own VIC transformer and circuitry to go along with it. That way each tube is being controlled by the circuitry independently of the other tubes and the differences in capacitances of all the tubes will not be a problem as each will have it's very own control circuitry.

Now I don't know about putting Gas Processors back to back but the idea sounds sound to me, just could get costly. But I do know that Stanley Meyer made another type of Gas Processor to take the place of the catalytic converter. Now the extraction grid has a positive voltage going to it so it can't come into contact with the negative of the Gas Processor or be placed too close to the voltage zone or arcs will take place as the air breakdown voltages are reached. You have to put some thought into building the gas processor and Stanley Meyer seems to have made some that are designed to withstand heat of 3000 degrees F, thoughts I have never seen yet. But the one on the car is made of primarily delrin so that is a low temperature unit design as any temperatures around 3000 degrees F would melt the device. Also note that the gas processor is a lot smaller than the one seen on the Hydrogen Gas Gun, you can count LEDs to gage a sense of how big the units are as the LEDs are 5mm in size I believe.

Hope that helps,

h2opower.

[psm1963]

Farside is new member since Jan 28. My opinion
Farside is H20Power's disinfo double and phony supporter. Looks to me like the disinfo crowd is getting scared. Good work Aaron and Tutanka they must be real nervous that poeple are not following them down their phony rabbit hole.

[h20power]

Farside is new member since Jan 28. My opinion
Farside is H20Power's disinfo double and phony supporter. Looks to me like the disinfo crowd is getting scared. Good work Aaron and Tutanka they must be real nervous that poeple are not following them down their phony rabbit hole.

I don't have any Non Discloser Agreements, for I am not that stupid, they do. So choose to follow them at your own risk, for that path will only lead you to a place where you can purchase a unit if you can afford it that is. And if you can't afford it then tough luck buddy your on your own.

Further more if it wasn't for me and my research they wouldn't even be where they are today talking about ionized anything. I am the only one in the whole world that ever thought to take a look at the Gas Processor and see what it was doing to the system as a whole. And if you would take the time to read the thread you would find out I am the one that started this whole new look at Stanley Meyer's work in the first place. I was the first to look at something different than just the VIC transformer and Water Fuel Capacitor something those two hero's of yours would be still doing today if it wasn't for my research. One misunderstanding after another is all they have ever done, oh and I forget playing the role of an entertainer one of them. Pity I can't put him on the ignore list for if I could I would as he has lost all credibility with me as a man of science.

h2opower.

[h20power]

Now to get back to work.

Has anyone ever looked at the original WFC tube and wondered why are there slots cut into the sides of the outer tubes? YouTube - Stanley Meyer - It Runs On Water

Well being as I am I figured out a plausible reason of the true purpose of those slots. In this video you can see that the slots are of different lengths in each of the tubes and some don't seem to be cut at all: YouTube - Stan Meyers Estate Water Fuel Cell #3

Now the reason for the slots is not for some sort of vibrational resonance but to match up the capacitances of the tubes in the same manor that an racing engine's connecting rods, pistons, and other various things are balanced. To ensure that all tubes hit resonance at the same time each tube set had to be cut to match the lowest capacitance tube sets capacitance. That is the only way you would get all the tubes resonating at the same time.

But Meyer found out that if the unit is out in the sun, the part where the suns light hits the tubes and light energy is absorbed the tubes would fall out of resonance due to heat changes in the tubes caused by the sun. For the ones absorbing the suns light energy would heat up and change capacitance as they did so. The solution to this problem was to create a individual controlling circuit for each tube set complete with it's very own VIC transformer. And that can be seen in this video when he shows the WFC for the car and just one of the 11 units pulled out that control only one of the tube sets of the WFC. YouTube - Stan Meyers Estate Water Fuel Cell #1

So now you know what the slots are meant for. So if you have been trying to replicate Stanley Meyer's alternator tubes set up now you know what has to be done to get each and every individual tube set of the whole WFC to hit resonance at the same time. Enjoy!


h2opower.

[Farside]

Farside is new member since Jan 28. My opinion
Farside is H20Power's disinfo double and phony supporter. Looks to me like the disinfo crowd is getting scared. Good work Aaron and Tutanka they must be real nervous that poeple are not following them down their phony rabbit hole.

Oh yeah. You got me.

I might as well confess that I'm a G-man paid by big oil to discredit H2Opower and his crew so that the technology will remain forever supressed.

Well, actually I'm a 14 year old boy who is too lazy to read and LEARN what H2Opower is doing and are really here to stroke my pitiful self image by pretending to be someone I am not because I'm too scared to talk to girls.

Seriously though, your input can be taken both ways. Either you're bringing this up because you are legitimately defending H2Opower, which is great, or you are trying to derail this thread now that we have regained focus, which is pretty sad and desperate.

Yes, I am a new member. I am also committed to other things at the moment so I will not be building one of these engines right now. I told H2Opower this right from the start and he seems happy with me contributing as I can with the limited time I have.

If I can run interference for these guys then I'm more than happy to do so.
If I can raise funds through my personal network for these guys then I will certainly try. A team has many roles to fill afterall.

If I become unpopular or ruffle some feathers in the process, well so be it. Just remember that offense can only be taken, it can not be imposed on another because the only person who has control of your attitude is you.

How about giving me a bit more time than 7 days before deciding if I'm a black suit, a sad sack or the genuine article?

[Farside]

Now to get back to work.

Has anyone ever looked at the original WFC tube and wondered why are there slots cut into the sides of the outer tubes? YouTube - Stanley Meyer - It Runs On Water

Well being as I am I figured out a plausible reason of the true purpose of those slots. In this video you can see that the slots are of different lengths in each of the tubes and some don't seem to be cut at all: YouTube - Stan Meyers Estate Water Fuel Cell #3

Now the reason for the slots is not for some sort of vibrational resonance but to match up the capacitances of the tubes in the same manor that an racing engine's connecting rods, pistons, and other various things are balanced. To ensure that all tubes hit resonance at the same time each tube set had to be cut to match the lowest capacitance tube sets capacitance. That is the only way you would get all the tubes resonating at the same time.

But Meyer found out that if the unit is out in the sun, the part where the suns light hits the tubes and light energy is absorbed the tubes would fall out of resonance due to heat changes in the tubes caused by the sun. For the ones absorbing the suns light energy would heat up and change capacitance as they did so. The solution to this problem was to create a individual controlling circuit for each tube set complete with it's very own VIC transformer. And that can be seen in this video when he shows the WFC for the car and just one of the 11 units pulled out that control only one of the tube sets of the WFC. YouTube - Stan Meyers Estate Water Fuel Cell #1

So now you know what the slots are meant for. So if you have been trying to replicate Stanley Meyer's alternator tubes set up now you know what has to be done to get each and every individual tube set of the whole WFC to hit resonance at the same time. Enjoy!


h2opower.

I have been searching but I haven't found anyone capable of stabilizing the WFC yet. Do you think that the WFC, being an earlier technology of Stans, was actually dropped due to this problem?

It seems to me that as Stans research evolved, so the size of his devices shrunk. This might be important and I believe you have brought this up before. The less water in the system at any point in time the better? It means better control of the process, a less complex control system and also an easier interface to existing technologies.

Are Stans patents an evolutionary history where one incarnation actually superseeds the previous one in an attempt to overcome certain technical hurdles?