Hydroxy, Oxyhydrogen, Rhode’s Gas, Brown’s Gas, HHO…?

[vrand]

Even though I disagree at this point with Eckman's claims, I do find his results rather interesting. I did a little searching and found an article by Wiseman that somewhat supports Eckman's theory.

Eagle-Research:

Let's hope Eckman is not met with the typical oppression and is let to publish his works freely. Ash, will Eckman's articles be put in the panacea archives?

Thanks again Mike for bringing this to our attention.

Hi Hairbear,
Thank you for your kind words. Sharing info is the key to "spreading the news" of new discoveries happening daily and it is made possible to do this with these great internet forums. Thank you Aaron

Lets all hope that Chris Eckman will continue his great work in researching Brown's Gas properties, that we are only scratching at the surface right now in fueling engines for gas savings.

Yes, Eckman is at the university in Idaho which is near George Wiseman's company that is building the 15-20 LPM Brown's Gas welder units. I would therefore believe that he is using the Wiseman welder unit for testing the HHO gas.

Regards, Mike R.

[vrand]

Mike we need to get you on the pay roll LOL thanks brother

We are all traveling on this beautiful ship called Planet Earth

Keep up the good work Ash, the Panacea University is spreading the news of free energy, Brown's Gas, HHO, Bob Boyce's hydroxy research worldwide

Regards, Mike R.

[Jules Tresor]

About Rhodes

You can read more on Rhodes here:
Superhot Atomic Oxy-Hydrogen Flame by Dr. William A. Rhodes - KeelyNet 03/18/00
Common Duct Electrolytic Oxy-Hydrogen -- Paper by William A. Rhodes
HISTORY PATENTS Electrolysis - WATER as FUEL - review of available technologies - MDG 2006-2007

Get his patent 3,262,872 here: PAT2PDF - Free PDF copies of patents: Download and print!
and patent 3,310,483


Personal experience with HHO.
- Electric steam theory: Once, in Thailand, we tried an HHO cell on a fishing boat, and the small pipe bringing the gas to the air intake of the diesel engine was very long.
After stopping the cell we could see a large amount a water condensing along the 6 feet length of the pipe. There was definitely a lot of steam in this gas ... Then the cell's casing broke down, you need very heavy duty material for sea boats

- We ran a 70 cc motorbike with a basic HHO cell, on a fix stand. We couldn't adjust much the throttle, it was like at full RPM all the time. The power to the cell was around 1/2 HP. We had to start on gasoline before shifting to HHO, it wouldn't start on HHO only ...
It was a crude experiment, but it convinced me that running on HHO only was possible.

Now I regret because at that time I didn't investigate further these experiments
Hope this helps.

[Farrah Day]

Hi Mike

The 2nd link posted above by Jules details William Rhodes research, sorry I did not get chance to provide it earlier.

This link also makes for interesting reading:

Difference between Rhodes gas & Browns gas - KeelyNet 04/11/02

Personally I think the paper, Plasma Orbital Expansion of the Electrons in Water is well worth the read and well worth bearing in mind. Too little thorough scientific study has been done on common duct electrolyser gases.

It seems to me that William Rhodes found similar anomalies, but used a different method in discovering them.

Whatever the true explanation is, it seems very clear that the resulting gases are not simply H2 and O2, and indeed that there is more potential energy in the resulting gases than hardened scientists would predict.

Furthermore, Bob Potchen's results showing the increase in mpg for vehicles using his 'Cell' would seem to support this.

We all know that most scientists would categorically state that no net gain in energy should be possible due to the extra load on the alternator, but in practice this does not appear to be the case.

Quite simply, something occurs withing a common duct electrolyser that is not being taken into account or considered.

AC

Contrary to popular opinion, Science-(The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena) is not always correct nor the truth. The fact that science is always changing and evolving is proof of this, so what exactly are you referring to when stating "scientific fact"?. You are referring to little more than the popular opinion of groups of individuals(the scientific community), each having their own opinions. As well you will notice that by definition science is a theoretical explanation, not a fact nor the truth, because a fact or truth cannot change it is universal yet science does which is odd is it not? Please do not treat nor refer to "science" as some kind of self-reinforcing religion beyond reproach as it is a disservice to every person involved in the process of scientific discovery.
Regards
AC
05-06-2010 08:27 AM

Hi AC

While I can see your point, I don't feel that I'm doing anyone a disservice by putting my faith in generally reliable science. In fact, I feel that not to put our faith in any science at all would leave us standing on very dodgy ground. If we have no perceived solid foundation from which to work, where does that leave us? At some point we have to assume a solid foundation from which to work - if it later proves to be a less than solid foundation, then so be it. It's not the same as religion or magic whereby anything that can be imagined can happen.

If we dismiss our current understanding of science out-of-hand, we have no basis from which to move forward. As long as we maintain an open mind and accept that there may be times when science seems to have a hidden agenda, then all well and good.

I totally accept that not all science is 100% proven or 100% fact, but there are too many people that will readily dismiss science on a whim, without due consideration or for no apparent rational reason.

Ohm's Law is a good example of a 'Law', that only holds true under most everyday conditions, but fails miserably if pushed to extremes. However, there are rules and laws that have stood solid for centuries and show no sign of faltering.

Obviously there are areas of science that are more ambiguous than others, but usually we are made aware of this uncertainty.

I just worry that you if you leave the door even just slightly ajar on these forums, you provide an opening for all manner of uneducated wannabes to continually spout nonsense for ever and a day.

Incidentally, contrary to what some people say, I'm yet to see any proof that Faraday's Laws of Electrolysis are invalid.

Thanks for your post, I for one value your thoughtful input.

With respect
Farrah

[Bob Boyce]

Furthermore, Bob Potchen's results showing the increase in mpg for vehicles using his 'Cell' would seem to support this.

And which results would this be Farrah? The testing done before Potchen screwed up my cell design, or after? I know we have had issues in the past, but even you should be able to see through his marketing hype.

We are still waiting for the test results from the November 2009 testing session at an EPA/CARB certified engine and emissions testing lab operated by West Virginia University to be released for public disclosure. The US DOD paid for that testing, so the test results belong to them and the EPA. We have the raw data, but the lab must have permission from the DOD to release graphs compiled from that data.

That week of testing in November 2009 had indicated that the predominantly parahydrogen isomer ratio of gas produced by the later Potchen cell units was not effective in increasing combustion efficiency or reducing emissions in a late model US Army HumVee. Contamination from the double-sided foam tape that Potchen had used in the construction of his cells was causing rapid failure of the cells during testing, requiring testing to be stopped repeatedly for flushing out the contamination and replacing the electrolyte. This was all documented.

An earlier testing session using earlier cell units of my design installed into a semi tractor hauling a calibrated weighted trailer trailer over a test course had resulted in measurable combustion efficiency gains, but no emissions testing had been done during that testing session.

I have statements from prior sales associates of Potchen that claimed that he altered the real dyno test data prior to publishing the results. I was shown printouts that showed the real numbers, and they are not what Potchen has published. This can be verified by contacting the companies involved and asking them directly. Unless he threatens them with legal action, like he has done to so many others, they will tell the truth. Also, contact every one of those trucking companies that Potchen has posted results from and ask them yourself what the results are. They will tell you, and some will tell you what damage the Potchen units have done to their trucks.

But enough of beating that dead horse, he will eventually either succeed or fail based on the products he sells. I really do hope that he will sell a good product and succeed, as the world really needs it. It does not affect me directly either way. I have made it very public that I am not associated with him anymore. I just hope that the damage done to this industry is repairable.

What this all boils down to is what I have been saying for a very long time. There are many possible blends of hydrogen/oxygen gases that can be generated by a common ducted series cell system, way more complex than just "simple" H2 and O2. There are variations in isotopic content within each gas, variations in isomer ratio within each gas, and variations in ionic state ratio within each gas. These variations will affect how the gases react in any given application.

We used a GC-MS to analyze the gases and was able to alter variations in the gas blend via the application of energy to the cells. So besides materials, construction methods, and operational parameters, there are other factors that can affect gas quality.

As far as independent proof of resonance, just ask the same fellow in south africa that used my toroidal system to charge the batteries... he also verified the resonance reaction using my toroidal system with his 100 cell box. He can tell you the gas production obtained and the power required to produce it. If I remember right, he had it running in resonance for 10 minutes before he shut it off. Personally, I have had run times of 3 1/2 hours with my 100 cell box. My new design is much more stable than my units of yesteryear, but I still recommend that people aim for easier goals, such as my catalytic series cell designs.

Bob Boyce

PS By the way, I was only struck by lightning once, not three times. Whomever started that rumor is full of it. The prior cancer I had was prostate/bladder cancer, was never claimed to be terminal, and I beat it very quickly thanks to alternative medicine. The current cancer I have, desmoplastic malignant melanoma, IS a terminal cancer. It formed around the VeriChips in my shoulder. I was not injected twice, I was double-injected, 2 Verichips through the same needle, one deep and one shallow. The biopsy removed the shallow one, but not the deep one. The pre-op x-ray of my shoulder showed that it was still in there. Too much disinformation is being passed around as gospel. My current cancer had been in remission for months due to an alternative medicine that seemed to work for a while. It is no longer in remission because I had travelled to a location where I was unable to get the alternative medicine, but I am trying to get it to go back into remission again. There is no conventional cure for it, only surgery to remove any operable tumors that may form. So far I have not had any surgeries other than the initial biopsy that discovered the first VeriChip and the cancer around it.

[Farrah Day]

Bob

Yes, we've had issues and neither of us are each others greatest fans, but you have never exactly made it easy for me or anyone else, other than your loyal fan club, to take you seriously.

In the past whenever I've asked legitimate questions you've rather conveniently thrown a huff and disappeared.

If the gases evolved in your WFCs do not conform to Faraday's laws, what takes Faraday's place? What are the equations and chemical reactions that are taking place in your WFC to evolve the gases? Are charges still exchanging, if so how and where... and what is resonance?

Here's a very simply question: Why is it so hard for you or anyone else to replicate the over-Faraday results that you initially discovered from a faulty.. what was it alternator voltage stabiliser, in a model speedboat?

Why is it seemingly so over-complicated now? Why not simply reproduce the original conditions?

I've followed your posts and antics for years, wondering where you were going with all this. I remember when you stated you were warned off from running a car solely on HHO by the MIB, but you were allowed to develop hydroboosters. What!! I remember smelling a rat way back then.

Whether you like it or not, your past reads like an X-file and everything I've stated I can provide links to - most of which seems to have come directly from the horses mouth.

And I mean, why would Potchen microchip you? Why?

Too many things surrounding you make no sense whatsoever and the only thing I can put it down to is, an attention seeking affliction.

I don't know Bob Potchen very well, but he comes across as being a damn sight more sincere than you ever have.

Farrah

[Bob Boyce]

I no longer post most of the information you request. I am tired of greedy SOBs taking what I have worked so hard to develop, and running to the patent office. I refuse to feed them any more tidbits, let them do their own research at their own expense. If I survive long enough to decide to develop anything from now on, I will apply for patents and only go public after they are granted. No more open source information from me, the Potchen experience taught me to NEVER trust anyone, ever again. So don't ask, I will not answer. Please don't take it personal Farrah, it applies to everyone.

The "original conditions" occured when running an engine at a particular RPM and load. It was a fleeting anomoly that was short-lived each time it occured. Changes to the RPM or parameters of the cell or electrical system immediately caused it to drop back into brute force production. The complexity was required in my attempts to get stable operating conditions and parameters. Again, I will not delve into the details anymore. What has already been published will have to suffice.

I hope that you enjoy your newfound friend Potchen. He'll be glad to pick your brain and patent anything he feels he can use for profit. Personally, I don't care if you, or anyone else for that matter, finds anything that I say to be more or less credible, than anyone else. I'm certainly not concerned with being in a popularity contest here.

Bob Boyce

[Farrah Day]

Fair enough, though I don't follow your logic or pretend to understand your views.

If you open source then no one can claim patent rights as it's already in the public domain. That's why I decided to stay open source. If people then go on to profit from anything I disclose, they can do so - I can't stop them - but anyone is at liberty to reproduce it as it is no longer patentable.

If it comes down to personal rewards and/or greed at the expense of a suffering planet, I know which one I'll opt for... at least I'd be able to sleep at night.

Farrah

[Bob Boyce]

The plate electrode core of my series cell design already being published online in 2002, and again in 2005, certainly did not stop Potchen from filing this international patent application in 2009...

(WO/2009/151685) ELECTROLYTIC CELL AND RELATED METHODS OF MAKING AND USE

Despite the prior art status that exists on the cell core itself, he still applied for this patent on an "electrolytic cell" in his application, without disclosing the fact that it is covered by prior art. If he had filed a patent application for just his manufacturing methods and procedures, I would not have a problem with it. But the very title of his patent application includes the words "electrolytic cell", which defines that his application is inclusive of the prior art cell core itself AND the manufacturing methods/procedures of the case.

Bob Boyce

[Farrah Day]

Interesting.

You would think that by now with the multitude of open source electrolyser designs that are in the public domain, that it would be very hard to patent an electrolyser unless it was very unique or a new concept altogether.

I take it, it is what is commonly termed as a 'dry cell' electrolyser.

What I fail to understand here is surely one would only have to point the patent office to similar electrolyser designs already in the public domain, to make such a patent null and void. If you have an issue with this, why do you not contact the patent office with your grievances?

Not really sure what to make of this.

Farrah

[sucahyo]

Thank for pouring us with more information Bob Boyce. I hope there is someone that able to replicate Royal Rife impulse virus neutralizer and able to operate it. He say that cancer virus would not become disease if the people condition is in balance. radiation may activate them, impulse may kill them. A hydrogen filled xray tube exited with impulse controller at Rife frequency, sound similar to a HHO booster with hex controller. Maybe your own cell help you withstand the cancer. I wish you luck.

[aljhoa]

What posted in scientis literature is h2 energy. Is there comparison data between H2 vs hho?

See Figure 24
http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/...eport-1383.pdf

Al

[vrand]

See Figure 24
http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/...eport-1383.pdf

Al

An interesting 1957 report of mixing stored H2 & O2 gases, before Dr. Rhodes 1961 "common duct" electrolyzer patent and the 1970's Yull Brown patents that both created HHO gas.

HHO gas is different from mixed H2 & O2 gases. Here is a Power Point Presentation from Chris Eckman characterizing Brown's Gas.

http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/...laTech2009.ppt

Regards, Mike R.

[vrand]

You can read more on Rhodes here:
Superhot Atomic Oxy-Hydrogen Flame by Dr. William A. Rhodes - KeelyNet 03/18/00
Common Duct Electrolytic Oxy-Hydrogen -- Paper by William A. Rhodes
HISTORY PATENTS Electrolysis - WATER as FUEL - review of available technologies - MDG 2006-2007

Get his patent 3,262,872 here: PAT2PDF - Free PDF copies of patents: Download and print!
and patent 3,310,483


Personal experience with HHO.
- Electric steam theory: Once, in Thailand, we tried an HHO cell on a fishing boat, and the small pipe bringing the gas to the air intake of the diesel engine was very long.
After stopping the cell we could see a large amount a water condensing along the 6 feet length of the pipe. There was definitely a lot of steam in this gas ... Then the cell's casing broke down, you need very heavy duty material for sea boats

- We ran a 70 cc motorbike with a basic HHO cell, on a fix stand. We couldn't adjust much the throttle, it was like at full RPM all the time. The power to the cell was around 1/2 HP. We had to start on gasoline before shifting to HHO, it wouldn't start on HHO only ...
It was a crude experiment, but it convinced me that running on HHO only was possible.

Now I regret because at that time I didn't investigate further these experiments
Hope this helps.

Thank you Jules for your post

There is something very special with "Brown's Gas" that scientists have not studied over the last 50 years, thinking and assuming that its the same as mixing H2 & O2 gases.

Dr. Rhodes and Professor Brown never had the opportunity or equipment to analyze their HHO gases like Christopher Eckman currently has access to. This field is still wide open for further research.

Theoretical Possiblities and Future Projects
- Use in space
- New breakthroughs in chemistry
- Cheaper and easier welding
- No flux required when welding
- New alloys
- New energy storage or battery types
- Potential fuel
- Breakthroughs in plasma physics
- Comparison of metals or non-metals when using the torch on them
- The burning rate of Browns Gas (Possibilities of proving it is not just diatomic hydrogen and oxygen)
- More research needed in the claims of nuclear radioactivity neutralization
- More research in general, who knows what more could be found!

Regards, Mike R.

[sucahyo]

See Figure 24
http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/...eport-1383.pdfAl

The document many information usefull for anyone wish to use hydrogen for fuel . Unfortunately I have to agree to that it do not contain comparison of H&O vs HHO